Van Harvey

@theRTcafe @CourtenayTurner @thepalmerworm @corTheory ". . . And there folks, is the cleaving asunder of what neither Aquinas, Madison, Wilson, or Reid would condone...." Yep, equivocation being used to slash the reader's understanding open wide.

One of the most dangerous statements in fauxYuri's original post is, "Aquinas therefore distinguishes the moral order from the prudential measures required to sustain order in political life." He then goes on to say that Madison, Wilson, and Reid recognized this as well, and then goes on to imply that they would be in favor of, "institutions" as "auxiliary precautions, not the source of the good itself." . . . And there folks, is the cleaving asunder of what neither Aquinas, Madison, Wilson, or Reid would condone. What fauxYuri essentially does is to say that since Aquinas distinguishes between "moral order" and "prudential measures required to sustain order" therefore Aquinas would support constructivist models. But this is a non sequitur. Aquinas clearly stated that human law should be based on natural law (realist metaphysics). Aquinas explicitly states, "...every human law has just so much of the nature of law, as it is derived from the law of nature. But if in any point it deflects from the law of nature, it is no longer a law but a perversion of law." Summa Theologia (ST I-II, Q. 95, A. 2) "The purpose of human law is to lead men to virtue, not suddenly, but gradually. Wherefore it does not lay upon the multitude of imperfect men the burdens of those who are already virtuous... Otherwise these imperfect ones, being unable to bear such precepts, would break out into yet greater evils." Summa Theologiae (ST I-II, Q. 96, A. 2, ad 2) In other words, the purpose of human law is to awaken the conscience of man (the natural law God lays in the hearts of all men), so that imperfect men can move toward virtue, ever increasing their compliance with divine law (as revealed in Scripture) and participation in God's eternal law. As Aquinas said, human law binds in conscience only when it is just, which requires alignment with the natural law. Summa Theologiae (ST I-II, Q. 96, A. 4).

Shall we play a game? Should we? To what ends should we combine Game Theory with the Rule of Law? That's another strange game, in which the only winning move is not to play. But many 'defenders of liberty' are urging us all to play along...🧵

@Van_Blogodidact @CourtenayTurner @thepalmerworm @corTheory This was my comment in a private chat recently regarding the account to which you refer...

@theRTcafe @CourtenayTurner @thepalmerworm @corTheory 💯

@CourtenayTurner @thepalmerworm I’m not an academic but learned what sophistry was here on X on my 1st, now banned x acct. Learned who @S_Coughlin_DC was then, watched “The Wizard’s Grimoire” and the whole series. Learned who Josef Pieper was, life has been less “sophisty” since. 😄 ia800603.us.archive.org/34/items/abuse…

*not consequences* -> not causes 😑

Don't 'Should' all over yourself. The consequences of the Rule of Law whose purpose is to uphold and defend individual rights, was an explosion in productivity, wealth, and prosperity to an extent that no one had ever dreamed of. But those welcome consequence of upholding first principles, are effects, not consequences, or justifications for why you should uphold Natural Liberty.

courtenayturner.substack.com/p/the-technocr… This. Is. 🔥 @Van_Blogodidact just nailed it. Game Theory isn’t ‘neutral’ or ‘compatible’ with moral realism—it’s the metaphysical Trojan horse that lets technocrats redesign reality itself so their models don’t have to deal with pesky things like free will, teleology, or the imago Dei. They need to hollow out the foundation first. That’s not prudence—that’s constructivism dressed up as ‘Economic Thinking.’ And it all feeds straight into the Santa Fe Institute grift—the complexity theory hub (Epstein/Maxwell were very interested) that spawned Game B and ‘minimum viable metaphysics.’ See my piece on Jim Rutt’s technocratic philosophy paving the road to posthuman control. This is how they build the new financial system: tokenized everything creating a literal cybernetic organism for a gamified society. Blockchain as the nervous system, tokens as behavioral hormones, DAOs as the decision cortex—programmable nudges turning humans into nodes in their feedback-loop machine. (Full breakdown in my ‘Tokenization of Everything’ Substack + Microsoft 666 patent thread.) Shoutout for quoting the real Bezmenov warning vs. the faux-Yuri lure. Defenders of liberty: stop playing their game. The only winning move is to reject the board entirely and defend metaphysical realism, natural law, and human sovereignty. open.substack.com/pub/courtenayt… courtenayturner.substack.com/p/the-proof-of…

@CourtenayTurner @thepalmerworm @corTheory Gaming the Game Theory Games, and other shades of 'Economic Thinking' blogodidact.blogspot.com/2026/03/gaming…

The purpose of Game Theory, as is the case with 'Economic Thinking', is to model (meaning to substitute theory for reality) how best to escape from the 'restrictions' of respecting your individual rights, so as to manage society through ever more efficient calculations of every move that you 'should' be made to make. And that is not compatible with metaphysical & moral realism

Game Theory and 'Economic Thinking' are attempts to reverse that process of causality, as their projected results are their justifications for implementing their strategies, and their systems are reflexively used to transform them into its own causes.

@BuzzPatterson Yet.

You’re not France.

🤣

@DSPetolicchio Was... Hillary... not available?

Nancy pelosi, obviously

@DSPetolicchio Miyamoto Musashi.

Tokugawa

NnnnooOooo f'ing waAayyyy!!!😱

@thepalmerworm I'm pretty sure that you'd have a very difficult time explaining to any of those of our Founders' generation, how a sound education could fail to transmit a solid understanding of the traditions of The West.

💯

🤣

@RealDeanCain Looks like evil pollen.

Bad policy = run away!!