rosencrantz

Next thing you'll know is that libertarians and anarchists praise the demonstrators and domestic terrorists as being virtuous for fighting against the oppressive state

There are 2 explanations. Jews are gifted and earn the success or it is because of nepotism and in group preference. The latter is true, because there are way more white people than Jews who have a high verbal IQ and similar abilities. The average IQ of White People is lower, but they make up for that with a larger number. You forgot to include anthropology and psychology as fields in which Jews were the leaders for long time. They led because they copied the way they ruled over those fields from Judaistic sects. One rabbi heads over his students, if you disagree you are not only wrong but you are also a bad person. This cohesion explains the uniformity of those fields and that it was possible to keep the same message for a long time. The structure of those circles is very similar, be it Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud or Alissa Rosenbaum.

Yes, here is why. Max Planck discovered that black bodies radiate heat in a different way than was thought before. There is a minimum to what can be transmitted (a quantum). This was different from classical physics who assumed that it was continuous. That has been replicated over and over again and explains the phenomena. The next mile stone was to explain spectral lines that were put under a magnetic field (Zeeman effect). Another experiment that can be done by anybody with a bit of preperation. The problem was that the spectral lines multiplied. There were more of them than was expected. It was pretty obvious that this had something to do with the electrons. Before, it was assumed that electorns move around the nucleus like moons around a planet (Bohr's model). But that old model wasn't compatible with the observed Zeeman effect. A young student called Heisenberg had hayfever and slept poorly. So he kept on working on physics. He soon realized that physics was begging the question. To explain the Zeeman effect (and the atomic model) it was assumed that electrons were like moons, only smaller and that the nucleus was like a planet, also smaller. The mistake, he eventually figured out, was that the parts that constitute matter, like electrons and nuclei were supposed to be no different than macroscopic phenomena. If you disassemble a car you have different parts, like tires, a windshield, brakes, an engine and so on. None of these parts look like a mini car. Only put together these parts make up a car. Classical physics assumed that electrons were essentially mini versions of macro phenomena, while in fact they were completely different. So he formulated the findings of the Zeeman effect in terms of quantum units that Planck had discovered and formulated them in such a way, that the formula gives you a probality field of the position of an electron and not the exact location like in classical physics. This helped explain the Zeeman effect and was later confirmed by experiments that dealt with other problems. Anybody can check with experiments if the data that Planck and Zeeman got were correct. Anybody with some knowledge of maths can come up with different explanations for the observed phenomena. If Harriman had such a theory he would have presented it. If it's valid this would be the biggest surprise in physics for a long time. As long as he doesn't do that he can talk all day long about the corruption of physics. But until he comes up with a better model he is a crank. [Edited for clarity ]

So hundreds of physicists and chemists in different cultures, different times fell trap to solipsism and came up with hypotheses that a) are mathematically sound and b) explain the experimental findings and they are all completely wrong? German romanticism was an Anti-Kantian movement that came to different answers for the justification of ethics. Schiller wrote 'On Grace and Dignity' in a response to Kant's differentiation of duty and inclination. Schiller wanted to combine those two in a synthesis. If anything, the German romanticists were critical on Kant. I fail to see how Kant's metaphysics is solipsistic. He showed that you can have two modes of knowledge. A rationalistic one (maths, philosophy) and an empirical one (the sciences). In addition, he postulated that we aren't born with a blank slate (which has since been confirmed by neurology) and that knowledge about the real world has to come from the senses. How is that solipsistic? I don't know what any of that means. It's neither Kantian nor a tenef of physics. So far, QM is based on experiments and it explains the observed phenomena. If you can explain counter intuitive phenomena like entanglement in a more Randian way, go ahead. And good luck. I did. It was a nice non factual story of physics from a Randian perspective.

No physicist does that and what lay people think doesn't matter, frankly. Electrons are part of a field (Psi), that is agitated and localized. You are 70 years late. Feynman explains the process for lay people in his lectures on QED.

Of course they do. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effectfor details.

How exactly did Kant infect relativity and quantum theory?

It it comes to philosophy / economy it's helpful to play a game. You have truly understood a position if you can recap the position of your opponent and your opponent agrees on your summary of his position. Can you do that or do you think that there is no merit at all to arguments for Trump and hence you can't summarize them?

How do you know?

How is that censorship?

Because of Chinese money laundering, a major housing crash in Australia seems very imminent.Also, household incomes in Australia haven't increased in a few years.

There is no need to speculate, we have access to an archive that documents disinformation attempts by the USSR. These include popular conspiracy theories, like the moonlanding theory, the JFK assasination and a bunch of lunacies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_measures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitrokhin_Archive

Liberty and anarchy are exclusively western tribal traditions. Once whites are in a minority they are gone forever.

There are two different types of questions here that confuse people when they are put together as one. The first one is functional and etymological: What role does make up play in a social setting and what are the origins. The answer to that are purely descriptive. The other one is aesthetical. Do you fake to be somebody else when you put on make up and how should I relate to somebody wearing make up? Since wearing make up is not a violation of the NAP (unlike wearing obnoxious perfume) the answer to that is personal. If you like make up, fine if not that's fine as well.

Make up makes sense from an evolutionary psychological perspective. Using make up the right away means that women amplify desirable features (clear skin, stress contours, focus on the lips and the eyes) which increases their status and the possibility for procreation and the chance of their offsprings survival. And like in most attributes that have to deal with status, there is an arms race going on. What is normal now would have been regarded as extravagant 20 years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Queen_hypothesis

You can still add votes. If you live in a contested area, there may be say 500 J. Smiths. There is nothign wrong with the traditional system of voting, that is counting votes on paper supervised by a six eye system and watched over by volunteers.

No. Feelings and ideas / beliefs are connected. Here is why, in very broad strokes. During the evolution, the brain grew in size from the inside to the outside. Reptiles don't have feelings. You can't annoy a snake, no matter how hard you try. Mammals have feelings that are connected to their survival. When a mouse hears a falcon cry, the mouse's fight / flight mechanism is activated. The mouse gets an energy boost, by amping up metabolism (heartrate goes up, digestion is stopped) to escape or to fight. Primates as social beings in a group have to calculate their standing in a group and they try to improve it to spread their genes. Humans are a form of primate that have enhanced cognitive possibilities. There is a problem though. Your conscious mind is pretty small compared to your unconscious mind. You can only have 6 to 8 ideas at the same time and be also aware of them. Compare that to the many thoughts you aren't aware of and you have the problem of filtering those ideas that make it to your conscious mind. To do that, our mind uses emotions that are connected to ideas. The ideas that are connected to strong emotions make it through, the rest remains in your unconscious (Think of the following example. You are in a car and suddenly you have the idea "Oh fuck, did I leave the stove turned on?" or "Did I lock the door properly?") This mechanism is useful when it comes to survival, because ideas that are connected to sex and food are often those that have the strongest connection with powerful emotions. However, it makes Cognitive Therapy very hard. If you only fight irrational ideas without disrupting the connection to strong negative feelings, the irrational ideas will always come back. It's both liberating and frightening. On one hand you see why you do stupid actions all the time. On the other hand it's frustrating becasue knowing you are being irrational doesn't mean you will act smarter in the future. Unless you replace the irrational core ideas with more functional ones you are fighting a losing battle. However, third generation cognitive approaches like Acceptance and Commitment therapy, mindfulness CBT or Coherence Therapy allow you to make progress.

I don't think you know what the Alt-Right is. Most Alt-Righters are former libertarians who realized that libertarianism cannot work in a diverse society. The few that are still libertarians are of the Hoppean neo-reactionary brand. If you can't discriminate as a business owner you are not under the rule of law. That's a stupid argument. First of all, by denying a service to somebody because you don't like his or her nose is not fraud. If there is no business contract, you can't defraud. Somebody who uses AirBnB has no property rights to your appartment. Also, if there is no contract there cannot possibly be property rights violation. There is no such thing as structural freedom.

If you think you are K-selected, find a hobby that requires agency and intelligence. There the likelihood of finding like minded individuals is higher than usual.

Irrational ideas are connected to strong emotions that are seen as negative. Few people reflect on what they believe and why they believe it. Using introspection, going down the rabbithole and trying to find the core irrational belief that underlies a bunch of symptomatic dysfunctional creeds we may have. Why not? Our brain didn't evolve to be contradiction free, rather to notice patterns.

The Great Depression was before the Glass-Steagall act. How are wars influences by a law regulating investment banking? You forgot the failure of Pepsi, the Red Sox not winning the World Series and so on. Glass-Steagall seperated commercial from investment banking. If your investment bank collapsed, tough luck. The government didn't back you up. Combining those two made the investments banks do crazy and crazier bets over time, until the CDO were 50 times the amount of credit issued because they speculated that the government would bail them out.

That's where the problem starts. There are two sorts of people, roughly. Those who have one big idea and who apply to everything. This approach is misled by confirmation bias, double think and what have you. The other group of people don't have a big idea and they come up with different explanations for different phenomena.

Time preference is used the same way as r/K theory. You can find a lot about deferred gratification and stress tolerance in literature about Cognitive Behavioural Therapy. https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Time_preference

No recommendation per se, but educating yourself on financial matters is just as important. I liked reading about the permanent portfolio that was developed by Harry Browne.