AddSection Realism A school of thought in liberal democracy based on the rational actor theory

[CookingWithCale]

A

Problem

The problem there is nothing on Realism right now.

Solution

The solution is:

Hardly anyone knows what progressivism means. They think it means you're making progress. There are three camps in liberal democracies: classical liberals who believe in negative rights like free speech, free press, free religion, etc. Negative rights are things the State isn't allowed to do Progressives believe in positive rights which is where the State can compel you to do something, like redistribution of wealth or legally prohibiting misgendering. Then there are realists who base policies based upon the rational actor theory.

A rational actor is someone who will self-optimize, often with detrimental consequences. What happens when you give up your free speech by banning misgendering? Those you can't criticize control you: the angry trans activists will take over and get rid of the so-called transphobic patriarchy. To them that's rational, to you the Patriarchy is your dad so to you, it would not be rational unless the LGBTQ is your ingroup and your family is the outgroup. To the people falsely accused of being transphobes, they think the other side is being very irrational to enforce gender pronouns because it harms their group and them.

Likewise with race, if you're mandated to hire non-whites, i.e. Positive Employment Rights for 'diverse' people, then you'll get an anti-white racist HR department that fires the old white guys to replace them with Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion hires. At that point, the old white guys are forced to not hire non-white, women, or LGBTQ people because diversity means non-white and not a creepy old dude. Where do the old white guys go where they won't be fired for being an old white guy? Nowhere. To the White guys the non-whites, women, and LGBTQ are the anti-white racist misandrist ageist radical Leftist extremists. To the non-whites, feminists, and LGBTQ, AKA the 'diverse people', then white guys are far-right white supremacist extremists. The 'diverse' group is self-optimizing for 'diverse' (i.e. non-white or white feminist) people, and the old white guys are just trying to keep their job. It becomes an asymmetrical attack where the 'diverse' people are allowed to attack the 'non-diverse' people but not the other way around, which is destined to suck bad.

A Realist puts the moral pillar of self-protection above the moral pillar of fairness (Search for "Steven Pinker Moral Instinct research paper"). A progressive puts the moral pillar of fairness above self-protection, cleanliness, authority, and group loyalty. In fact, the entire reason why moral pillars even evolved is because of groups of people self-optimizing.

Jews said eating pork was a sin because it had worms and it would mess you up. The longer you live, the more chance your group has to dominate other groups. Humans' psychology evolved (i.e. evolutionary psychology) to be cooperative with their ingroup and cooperative and to dominate other groups because if they did not other groups would cooperate and invade their village and murder the men and children and rape the women and take them as sex slaves.

The problem with Progressives is in order to give positive rights you must take from people who are very powerful to give to stupid poor people who will squander the resources. When you talk about really corrupt and brutal governments, you're talking about poor people who are stupid and who squander resources. Corrupt brutal countries are poor because of stupid violent people, just like poor people in the US. When you give handouts to loser poor people in the US or corrupt countries like Afganastan, you prop up corruption.
People need to work for their money and defend their own Country. They will not work, take advantage of you, do a shit job, and in the end, their life will collapse. If they had worked for everything themselves and built the system themselves, they knew how to maintain the system and it would not have collapsed, but they were too lazy and stupid so it collapse. You can't just give homeless people multi-million dollar apartment complexes, they will destroy them, you'll kick them out, and they'll never get off dope or the streets.

You can push gender and inclusion programs in Afghanistan and bribe people to participate, but it will become corrupt and the Taliban will come back and force the women to wear burkhas at gunpoint. Once you run out of other people's money to spend, YOU'RE DONE!!! Your influence is over. You can call the Taliban irrational all you want, but they're still there in control. To them, you're irrational and the burka is the rational thing to control society. To you, the rational way to control society is with feminism. The problem with this system is that people don't comply with the system voluntarily, so you have to force them, which turns the white feminists into riotous authoritarian radical Leftists. To the white feminist, they're the rational ones and the Imaginary Misogynistic Pig (IMP) Boogieman from MSDNC is the extremist. To everyone else, they see a huge riot, cancel culture, constant fights, violence, non-stop fake news, and corruption. TO the Centrist, BOTH the Left AND the Right are BOTH irrational. Rational is all a matter of perspective, worldview, rhetoric, and alternative facts. They're all rational, they're self-optimizing, only for one to self-optimize another must lose.

Then there is Russia. Will Russia nuke us knowing that they will certainly all die? No. They are a rational actor. This means you can stand up to them.

When you open up the borders and tell everyone in Latin America that they're going to get positive rights, you'll have a flood of millions of illegal immigrants being human smuggled by cartels and the cartels will take over and you will no longer have a liberal democracy. Russia invaded Crimea by funding their citizens to illegally immigrate there until their population was large enough that they could stage a coup. If Ukraine can't everHardly anyone knows what progressivism means. There are three camps in liberal democracies: classical liberals who believe in negative rights like free speech, free press, free religion, etc. Negative rights are things the State isn't allowed to do Progressives believe in positive rights which is where the State can compel you to do something, like redistribution of wealth or legally prohibiting misgendering. Then there are realists who base policies based upon the rational actor theory.

A rational actor is someone who will self-optimize, often with detrimental consequences. What happens when you give up your free speech by banning misgendering? Those you can't criticize control you: the angry trans activists will take over and get rid of the so-called transphobic patriarchy. To them that's rational, to you the Patriarchy is your dad so to you, it would not be rational unless the LGBTQ is your ingroup and your family is the outgroup. To the people falsely accused of being transphobes, they think the other side is being very irrational to enforce gender pronouns because it harms their group and them.

Likewise with race, if you're mandated to hire non-whites, i.e. Positive Employment Rights for 'diverse' people, then you'll get an anti-white racist HR department that fires the old white guys to replace them with Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion hires. At that point, the old white guys are forced to not hire non-white, women, or LGBTQ people because diversity means non-white and not a creepy old dude. Where do the old white guys go where they won't be fired for being an old white guy? Nowhere. To the White guys the non-whites, women, and LGBTQ are the anti-white racist misandrist ageist radical Leftist extremists. To the non-whites, women, and LGBTQ, AKA the 'diverse people', then white guys are far-right white supremacist extremists. The 'diverse' group is self-optimizing for 'diverse' (i.e. non-white or white feminist) people, and the old white guys are just trying to keep their job. It becomes an asymmetrical attack where the 'diverse' people are allowed to attack the 'non-diverse' people but not the other way around, which is destined to suck bad.

A Realist puts the moral pillar of self-protection above the moral pillar of fairness (Search for "Steven Pinker Moral Instinct research paper"). A progressive puts the moral pillar of fairness above self-protection, cleanliness, authority, and group loyalty, but the only way to get people to comply is with authority, so Progressives inevitably turn into authoritarians when people don't voluntarily comply. In fact, the entire reason why moral pillars even evolved is because of groups of people self-optimizing.

Jews said eating pork was a sin because it had worms and it would mess you up. The longer you live, the more chance your group has to dominate other groups. Humans' psychology evolved (i.e. evolutionary psychology) to be cooperative with their ingroup and cooperative and to dominate other groups because if they did not other groups would cooperate and invade their village and murder the men and children and rape the women and take them as sex slaves.

The problem with Progressives is in order to give positive rights you must take from people who are very powerful to give to stupid poor people who will squander the resources. When you talk about really corrupt and brutal governments, you're talking about poor people who are stupid and who squander resources. Corrupt brutal countries are poor because of stupid violent people, just like poor people in the US. When you give handouts to loser poor people in the US or corrupt countries like Afganastan, you prop up corruption.
People need to work for their money and defend their own Country. They will not work, take advantage of you, do a shit job, and in the end, their life will collapse. If they had worked for everything themselves and built the system themselves, they knew how to maintain the system and it would not have collapsed, but they were too lazy and stupid so it collapse. You can't just give homeless people multi-million dollar apartment complexes, they will destroy them, you'll kick them out, and they'll never get off dope or the streets.

You can push gender and inclusion programs in Afghanistan and bribe people to participate, but it will become corrupt and the Taliban will come back and force the women to wear burkhas at gunpoint. Once you run out of other people's money to spend, YOU'RE DONE!!! Your influence is over. You can call the Taliban irrational all you want, but they're still there in control. To them, you're irrational and the burka is the rational thing to control society. To you, the rational way to control society is with feminism. The problem with this system is that people don't comply with the system voluntarily, so you have to force them, which turns the white feminists into riotous authoritarian radical Leftists. To the white feminist, they're the rational ones and the Imaginary Misogynistic Pig (IMP) Boogieman from MSDNC is the extremist. To everyone else, they see a huge riot, cancel culture, constant fights, violence, non-stop fake news, and corruption. TO the Centrist, BOTH the Left AND the Right are BOTH irrational. Rational is all a matter of perspective, worldview, rhetoric, and alternative facts. They're all rational, they're self-optimizing, only for one to self-optimize another must lose.

Then there is Russia. Will Russia nuke us knowing that they will certainly all die? No. They are a rational actor. This means you can stand up to them.

When you open up the borders and tell everyone in Latin America that they're going to get positive rights, you'll have a flood of millions of illegal immigrants being human smuggled by cartels and the cartels will take over and you will no longer have a liberal democracy. Russia invaded Crimea by funding their citizens to illegally immigrate there until their population was large enough that they could stage a coup. If Ukraine can't even trust Russia, who is a Rational actor who are the same race and speak the same language, then why on Earth would we want to trust Mexico and the Cartels? Mexico is in the middle of a narco war, the Government is controlled by the Cartel. That's irrational, but to their ingroup it's the rational choice.

File Affected

1. *.*

Hierarchy

• This #1

Tags

Mission

Sessions

• Session.Next.Monday CookingWithCale/.github#1

License

Copyright 2022 © Freedom Government; most rights reserved, Third-party commercialization prohibited, mandatory improvement donations, licensed under the Kabuki Strong Source-available License that YOU MUST CONSENT TO at https://github.com/FreedomGovernment.