A friend who correctly called fake news on Jack Maxey of the false Hunter Biden laptop leak also offered me his take on Elon Musk and his recent actions, including the acquisition of Twitter.
Musk is a premier mechanism by which a certain faction of USG routes around the scleroticism of fedgov.
Most obviously with SpaceX contra United Launch Alliance, but also Tesla to counter Chinese electrotech dominance, Boring Company for post-drone swarm underground warfare, Neuralink for 1) controlling said drone swarms 2) AGI via human brain activity cloning.
His entire portfolio of companies is dual use for military purposes. Twitter is the public infowar arena for the Deep State.
Now Musk and by extension this faction own it.
Difficult to tell if this faction is friendly, neutral or hostile. They appear to me to be at the least not obviously friendly. This will be a public, reasonably sensitive test as to whether they are useful, depending on how they handle banned anti-prog accounts and ongoing anti-prog (note the distinction from rightist) speech.
Considering that Ivan Throne has already managed to get himself banned from the New and Improved Twitter (Musk edition), I am confident that all of Musk’s blatherings about FREE SPEECH are nothing more than empty rhetoric and advertising to bring all the basic conservatives and their gatekeepers back into the conservative sheepfold.
As far as I’m concerned, literally nothing has changed.
Furthermore, I note that the Enlightenment value of consequence-free freedoms of speech and expression is neither a Christian moral value nor a societal virtue. Societal virtue is determined by qualititative measures, not quantitative ones.
A society or an institution that permits everything is better described as licentious, not free, while a society or an institution that bans blasphemy, obscenity, and vulgarity is fundamentally different than one that bans the existence of opinions about historical events, sexual behaviors, and certain nations.
Musk’s faction is almost certainly more libertarian and licentious than the social justice faction, but it’s entirely possible that, given his predilection for dabbling with women enamored of spiritual darkness, that it is even more deeply wicked.
RHETORIC by Aristlotle is now available from Castalia Library in both Castalia Library and Libraria Castalia editions. It’s one of our fastest-selling books, as we’d already be sold out if we hadn’t boosted the print run to 850. There are currently just 937953 30 copies left in stock. In addition to featuring our most Franklinesque spine – which you can see above in between SUMMA ELVETICA and HEIDI on the left – it also features a preface by yours truly.
Preface to Rhetoric
Aristotle’s Rhetoric is one of the most useful and important analyses of human communication ever written. It is also one of the great philosopher’s least appreciated works, as it is easily mistaken for a mere technical breakdown of the various forms of persuasion rather than what it truly is, a brilliant conceptual guide to understanding and anticipating human behavior.
While a considerable portion of the text is devoted to the mechanics of the syllogism and the enthymeme, as well as the presentation of the inevitable lists which Aristotle characteristically constructs, by far the most important element of this little book is the philosopher’s division of humanity into two fundamental classes: those who are capable of learning through information and those who are not.
This is such an important distinction that it is remarkable for its complete absence from the schools and universities today. The distinction calls into question everything from modern pedagogical systems to personal conversations while simultaneously explaining the mystery that has confounded every intelligent individual who has ever tried, and failed, to explain the obvious to another person.
Indeed, it is comforting to have one’s long-held suspicions about the intrinsic limitations of one’s fellow man confirmed so comprehensively. More importantly, Aristotle’s rhetorical framework provides those who understand and apply it the ability to effectively communicate to the full spectrum of humanity, in effect permitting the reader to transcend his natural psycho-linguistic instincts and attain true intellectual polylingualism.
It must be admitted that Rhetoric would be considerably more accessible if the terminology utilized was a little more expansive and a little less imitated. Even though his definition makes sense when the relevant terms are analyzed in detail, it is not exactly conducive to comprehension for Aristotle to define the two subsets of rhetoric to be dialectic and rhetoric, therein requiring a casual distinction between rhetoric and rhetoric-rhetoric, or capital-R Rhetoric and lowercase-r rhetoric. Adding to the confusion is the fact that both Hegel and Marx subsequently attempted to redefine the term dialectic, although there is precious little in common between Aristotelian dialectic, Hegelian dialectic, Marxian dialectic, and the current dictionary term.
However, once the reader grasps that in this context, Rhetoric simply means persuasion, which is divided into a) fact-and-reason based persuasion, or dialectic, and b) emotion-based persuasion, or rhetoric, the basic framework becomes clear. The philosopher explains that while some people can be persuaded by information and logical demonstrations, people are most readily persuaded by emotional manipulation. Moreover, some people can only be persuaded by emotional manipulation, as Aristotle observes in what may be the most important sentence in the book.
Before some audiences not even the possession of the exactest knowledge will make it easy for what we say to produce conviction. For argument based on knowledge implies instruction, and there are people whom one cannot instruct.
What Aristotle is observing is that some of those who are limited to rhetoric are immune to dialectic. Such individuals cannot be swayed by facts or reason, no matter how exact the knowledge provided, no matter how impeccable the logic presented. Those who are immune to dialectic can only be reached through rhetoric, which is to say by manipulation that plays upon their emotions more effectively than whatever feelings inspired them to be convicted of their current beliefs.
While this manipulation may strike some readers as unethical, it is justified by necessity, as the duty of rhetoric requires addressing those “who cannot take in at a glance a complicated argument, or follow a long chain of reasoning.” While the enthymeme resembles the logical syllogism, it is not, in fact, logic, and the truths that it proves are only apparent truths.
Which, of course, is another way of saying that they are literal untruths.
This is why people whose natural preferences incline toward dialectic have a strong tendency to regard rhetoric as being fundamentally dishonest, and to consider the emotional manipulation involved in utilizing rhetoric to be intrinsically wrong. This distaste for rhetoric among those capable of utilizing dialectic is common, but it is nevertheless false. First, because even the most logically correct dialectic can be entirely false if the premises upon which the syllogisms are constructed are false. Second, because the more that the rhetoric incorporates and points toward the truth, the more effective it tends to be.
Neither dialectic nor rhetoric are inherently true or false; the very attempt to distinguish them in this manner is to make a category error. It might help to think of them as languages; just as one could not reasonably describe English as honest while insisting that German is deceptive and morally wrong, one should not assign morality to either of the two subsets of Rhetoric.
It is more correct, more practical, and more effective to apply the principle of utilizing the form of communication best understood by the listener. Just as one would not speak Chinese to an individual who only understands English, one should not rely upon rhetoric when speaking to a dialectic-speaker, or expect a rhetoric-speaker to be persuaded by dialectical arguments.
Aristotle himself believed it was vital for a man to be able to employ both arts, not so much for the purposes of persuasion, but rather, to avoid being deceived.
We must be able to employ persuasion, just as strict reasoning can be employed, on opposite sides of a question, not in order that we may in practice employ it in both ways (for we must not make people believe what is wrong), but in order that we may see clearly what the facts are, and that, if another man argues unfairly, we on our part may be able to confute him. No other of the arts draws opposite conclusions: dialectic and rhetoric alone do this. Both these arts draw opposite conclusions impartially. Nevertheless, the underlying facts do not lend themselves equally well to the contrary views. No; things that are true and things that are better are, by their nature, practically always easier to prove and easier to believe in.
Aristotle’s Rhetoric is every bit as useful and valid today as it was when it was first written more than 2,300 years ago. It is less a work of philosophy than a treasure chest of practical information for the individual who seeks to pursue the Good, the Beautiful, and the True.
The forced vaccination of airline pilots hasn’t caused any crashes of passenger airliners yet, but on April 9th, an American Airlines plane flying into Dallas was just six minutes away from crashing when its vaccinated pilot had a heart attack:
“My name is Bob Snow. I am an American Airlines Captain and have been a Captain for a number of years. My total service with the company is over 31 years. On Nov. 7, I was mandated to receive a vaccine. Quite literally, I was told if I did not receive the vaccination, I would be fired. This order was from our director of flight. So, under duress, I received the vaccine.
“Now just a few days ago, after landing in Dallas, six minutes after we landed, I passed out. I coded. I required three shocks. I had to be intubated. I’m now in ICU in Dallas. This is what the vaccine has done for me. I will probably never fly again, based upon the criteria the FAA establishes for pilots. I was hoping to teach my daughter to fly; she wants to be a pilot. Now that will probably never happen, all courtesy of the vaccine. This is unacceptable, and I’m one of the victims.
“You can see that this is an actual result of the vaccine for some of us. Mandatory, no questions asked, get the shot, or you’re fired. This is not the American way.”
Perhaps the most tragic thing is that when Captain Snow sues American Airlines, he will probably be informed that it was his choice to be vaccinated and that no one actually forced him to submit to genetic therapy. Therefore, the consequences are all on him.
He was merely coerced, threatened, browbeaten, and ordered to submit to it.
Remember this – REMEMBER THIS – the next time someone is attempting to “force” you into something. Evil always seeks your deceived consent.
The Foreign Minister of Russia points out the obvious by stating that NATO is already at war with Russia in Ukraine and correctly warns the member states that supplying weapons to Ukraine makes them belligerent parties and legitimate military targets:
Russia’s top diplomat has warned that NATO is now fighting a proxy war with Russia in Ukraine and there is a ‘very serious’ risk the conflict could turn nuclear.
Sergei Lavrov, speaking on Russian state TV last night, accused western leaders of risking a third world war by supplying Ukraine with weapons with the goal of ‘wearing down the Russian army’ – an aim he described as an ‘illusion’.
Accusing NATO and its allies of attempting to bully Russia on the international stage, Lavrov warned that tensions between east and west are now worse than during the Cuban missile crisis at the height of the Cold War.
Unfortunately, the Western leaders and diplomats appear to believe that Russia’s warnings are as baseless and irrelevant as their own rhetorical posturing as they dutifully demonstrate their suicidal, and literally proverbial, stupidity.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin travelled to Kyiv on Sunday for a face-to-face meeting with President Zelensky to discuss supplies, before pledging another multi-million dollar shipment.
Austin will also chair a meeting of more than 40 defence ministers at Ramstein air base in Germany today, aimed at securing additional supplies and coordinating efforts between allies to ensure Ukraine has everything it needs.
Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said on Monday night that he regards Russia’s scaremongering as a sign of weakness.
Russia had lost its ‘last hope to scare the world off supporting Ukraine,’ Kuleba wrote on Twitter after Lavrov’s interview. ‘This only means Moscow senses defeat.’
British armed forces minister James Heappey agreed with that assessment today, saying he does not see an imminent threat of escalation in Ukraine and dismissing Lavrov’s comments as ‘bravado’.
‘Lavrov’s trademark over the course of 15 years or so that he has been the Russian foreign secretary has been that sort of bravado. I don’t think that right now there is an imminent threat of escalation,’ Heappey told BBC Television.
‘What the West is doing to support its allies in Ukraine is very well calibrated … Everything we do is calibrated to avoid direct confrontation with Russia.’
Thinking that playing cute and coy with your public statements is somehow going to permit you to simultaneously engage in clear acts of war while avoiding being targeted by a hypersonic missile barrage is the sort of thing that only fat, soft and very stupid people can believe. Unfortunately, the last two years of The War on Covid have proven that most people across the so-called Democratic West are fat, soft, and very, very stupid.
Elon Musk has seized control of Twitter for $44 billion as weeks of rollercoaster negotiations finally came to a close Monday afternoon.
The billionaire agreed to pay shareholders $54.20 in cash for each share of common stock before the bombshell deal was struck.
The move shifts control of the social media platform populated by millions of users and global leaders to the world’s richest person.
Musk vowed to protect free speech on Twitter, ‘defeat the spam bots’ and ‘authenticate all humans’ as he welcomed the acquisition.
He also revealed he planned to ‘enhance the product with new features’ and ‘make the algorithms open source to increase trust’.
Elon Musk is not “the world’s richest person” because he’s a good guy or because he is dedicated to the Good, the Beautiful, and the True. Whatever god he serves is not God the Father of Jesus Christ. This is just the exchange of one set of gatekeepers for another.
May well see their political careers ended by the party. The British media is preparing the public for Boris Johnson’s long-overdue resignation:
Sue Gray’s long-awaited Partygate report will be so damning that Boris Johnson will have no choice but to resign as Prime Minister, a source has claimed.
A dossier of more than 300 images and 500 pages of information was handed to Scotland Yard by the senior civil servant, who led a Cabinet Office probe into the matter.
She was forced to delay the publication of her investigation into alleged parties held in Downing Street and Whitehall during England’s coronavirus lockdowns due to the Metropolitan Police commencing their own inquiry.
A total of 12 events are being investigated by the police, which include a ‘bring-your-own-booze’ garden party, a gathering in the Cabinet Office to mark Mr Johnson’s 56th birthday and a series of leaving dos.
In an interim report published in January, the Cabinet Office official said there had been ‘failures of leadership and judgment’ in No 10 over the so-called partygate saga.
The Times, citing an official it described as being familiar with the contents of the complete report, said Ms Gray’s full findings were even more personally critical of the Prime Minister and could end his premiership.
After leading the remnants of the British empire out of the European Union, Johnson could have been the Churchillian figure he dreamed of becoming. But unfortunately, he swallowed the Covid Kool-Aid, lurched from one media-driven crisis to the next, and arrogantly refused to follow the very rules he was imposing on the British people. His failure is entirely self-inflicted, and if Dominick Cummings is to be believed, was almost certainly inevitable due to his narcissistic character.
After being caught lying to Parliament; by centuries-old tradition, he should have resigned already.
I do not believe for a second that, should Elon succeed, he will publish who decided what and on what basis; not algorithmically nor on a personal basis along with naming each and every person with a finger on the button. That data, by the way, I’m very certain Twitter has stored in their systems since every firm and organization that touches anything related to a customer always has an audit trail on it so you can fix errors — legitimate errors. In addition said audit trail is necessary for accountability because rogue employees do exist and its not at all uncommon to have to find out who did a given thing and take care of said person’s insolence.
Plenty of people point to Section 230 in this regard, but that’s not really the issue at all. Section 230 only addresses liability, not activity. I warned back when it was debated (and I was an Internet CEO at the time, thus knew damn well how this all intermeshed) that Section 230 was extraordinarily-poor in its crafting and would be abused for that reason. Bad laws are always abused. It was simply a matter of how, not what.
The real argument, as I pointed out back in the 1990s and have maintained (including in my filings to the FCC on net neutrality and in this column) is that there are multiple types of Internet services and they are not the same. We used to look at the character of services provided to determine if there was a common public interest in some sort of regulation. That all went down the toilet with the post-2000 craze of “social media”, along with the abuse of Section 230 which was in fact used to shield bad actors doing things that were blatantly illegal (such as promoting sex trafficking.)
The problem we have today is a function of the evolution of abuse enabled by that bad law. It is no longer possible to set up anything other than your own infrastructure to create a potential Twitter competitor, for example, because the existing firms control the infrastructure and will ban you. AWS and other “cloud” providers have proved this repeatedly.
Then, and this is the kicker, having spent money to build it you have to fund its operation somehow. Twitter, Facesucker, Google and similar do not set their policies in a vacuum; they set them based on how they fund their business. You can spend billions building infrastructure but if you can’t come up with a funding model that works you’re ultimately headed for bankruptcy. The real problem lies there and I’m reasonably certain Musk knows it.
I, too, am aware of this being the primary issue, which is why UATV, Castalia, and Arktoons are all built around a subscription model that relies upon their subscribers and prioritizes the interests of those subscribers over everything else. In a world that is fake, stupid, and gay, in which centralized financial giants propped up by governments and central banks determine the winners and the losers, going direct to the clients/customers/users and providing them with the goods and services they actually want is the only viable path for business anymore.
The contract economy is done. The advertising economy is done. The corpocracy cannot be trusted to live up to even the simplest and most basic of its obligations. Go local and/or go direct, or go under.
Not only is it impossible to verify Ukraine’s claims of Russian losses in the Special Military Operation, it is impossible to take them seriously on a statistical basis.
The scale of Russian troop losses in Ukraine has tipped 21,000 as Putin’s war rumbles into its third month today.
The latest statistics, published by the Ukrainian Land Forces this morning, suggest 21,800 Russian fighters have been killed amid bitter resistance from Ukraine’s armed forces and territorial defence units – though this figure could not be verified.
Meanwhile, the land forces claim to have dealt massive damage to Russia’s military equipment and machinery.
A total of 873 tanks are said to have been destroyed, along with 2238 armoured vehicles, 179 planes, 154 helicopters and 408 artillery systems.
According to the same article, “On February 24, Russia’s land army consisted of 280,000 full-time active soldiers compared with Ukraine’s 125,600.”
Now, the number of casualties in war is always a multiple of the number of fatalities. For example, the USA lost 407,316 KIA during WWII and 671,846 WIA out of 16.4 million troops, for a Cas/Fat ratio of 1.65. As medical science improved, this ratio increased over time, to 2.6 for Vietnam, 7.2 for Iraq, and 8.6 for Afghanistan.
So, if the most recent US war is a reasonable comparative, the Ukrainian claims would indicate an additional 180,600 wounded Russians for a total of 201,600 Russian casualties, which would mean that the Russian casualty rate of 72 percent exceeds that of the German, Japanese, and Soviet militaries during the entirety of World War II. And at 7.5 percent, the fatality rate is three times the US WWII fatality rate of 2.5 percent in just two months.
In other words, we can state with certainty that these reports are highly improbable, and logically conclude that they are false.
