The 4 Freedoms Library

It takes a nation to protect the nation

Fightback by Ideology, Dialogue & Constitution

Information

Fightback by Ideology, Dialogue & Constitution

Deals with ideological threats to our freedom and society.  

Analyses argument and rhetoric in all its forms: media interview, debate, and oratory.

Also considers fight back by fixing the 4 constitutional vulnerabilities as identified in the principles of 4F.

Members: 42
Latest Activity: Jun 8

Key Info

Religious arguments go in the Theology Room, so all the rest (i.e. secular ones) come into this room. One-on-one arguments are treated in the same way as combat skills are treated in the UFC, as a pure skill, unrelated to the truth or falsehood (whatever that is) of the underlying message.

The CODA glossary is here:
http://4freedoms.com/group/argumentation/forum/topics/dialogue-analysis-glossary


Find more photos like this on The 4 Freedoms Library

  • "The strictly leveled playing field is not a level playing field  (it advantages thugs)" - Alan Lake
  • "Let me now state what seems to me the decisive objection to any conservatism which deserves to be called such. It is that by its very nature it cannot offer an alternative to the direction in which we are moving. It may succeed by its resistance to current tendencies in slowing down undesirable developments, but, since it does not indicate another direction, it cannot prevent their continuance. It has, for this reason, invariably been the fate of conservatism to be dragged along a path not of its own choosing. The tug of war between conservatives and progressives can only affect the speed, not the direction, of contemporary developments." - Hayek, 1961

Related Sites:
http://www.ethicalsoc.org.uk
http://www.humanism.org.uk
http://www.iransecularsociety.com
http://www.secularism.org.uk

Discussion Forum

The Power Elite

Started by Alan Lake. Last reply by Antony Jun 8. 628 Replies

We Have Met the Enemy - by Tal Bachman

Started by Alan Lake. Last reply by Alan Lake May 23. 3 Replies

The Death of Democracy - collected articles

Started by Alan Lake. Last reply by Philip Smeeton Apr 19. 31 Replies

Terminal Societal Sickness

Started by Alan Lake. Last reply by Alan Lake Jan 29. 35 Replies

The US constitution

Started by Alan Lake. Last reply by Alan Lake Dec 3, 2020. 2 Replies

How to Respond to Abuse from SJW & Leftists

Started by Alan Lake. Last reply by Alan Lake Oct 18, 2020. 2 Replies

Fascism, Nazism and Socialism - collected articles

Started by Paul Austin Murphy. Last reply by Alan Lake Sep 20, 2020. 81 Replies

Failed Heroes of the Left: Keir Starmer

Started by Alan Lake. Last reply by Alan Lake Jul 3, 2020. 7 Replies

Good Words for Key Concepts

Started by Alan Lake Oct 17, 2019. 0 Replies

Failed Heroes of the Left: Jacqui Smith

Started by Alan Lake. Last reply by Alan Lake Jul 22, 2019. 6 Replies

Comment Wall

Add a Comment

You need to be a member of Fightback by Ideology, Dialogue & Constitution to add comments!

Comment by Philip Smeeton on May 9, 2021 at 16:18

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9557977/SARAH-VINE-want-...
SARAH VINE: If you want to meet a real bigot, try talking to a liberal
"These types approach their mission with an evangelism that stems not so much from a desire to improve the world around them but from the absolute certainty of the superiority of their convictions and the unshakeable belief that anyone who dares to question them is an inferior human being. That their opponents are not just wrong, but also wicked and must be destroyed."

Comment by Philip Smeeton on March 22, 2021 at 8:26

I think you are talking about wisdom Alan.

My take is that in politics policy must correspond with reality. If it causes harm then stop doing it.

But then the discussion would be what "harm" to choose. What rights are and who gets them. Putting the rights of the discriminated minority before the wellbeing of the majority seems to be the better moral choice. After all the minority is suffering and the majority is not. But that policy ends up harming the majority because the moral-mind will constantly discover new minorities to protect. Ending in insane policies.

Which is where we are now in the West.

Comment by Philip Smeeton on March 22, 2021 at 8:13

Me-
There are some truths/facts that are unknown, and some that will never be known.
The truths/facts that are known and verifiable are all that we have. All else is speculation or false or to be verified or unverifiable.
Truth must be factual. Otherwise it is fantasy, delusion and wishful thinking.
Knowable truth.

Comment by Alan Lake on March 21, 2021 at 19:23

Interesting, but also disappointing.

I don't think you can start by just discovering truth. I think you first define perception and assertion to get knowledge. Then you do the 4-way divide into known knowns, known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns.

Then within those categories you define what truth means. It could be correspondence to fact where 'fact' is mutual observation. Admittedly that's what they are getting at with their multiple viewpoint model. But I think there are other varieties of truth like logically necessary truth, statistically likely truth, and peer-reviewed acceptable truth.

They've put the cart before the horse by positing truth then trying to discover its properties. Instead we need to first discover the properties of knowledge, and then try find what is true knowledge.

Comment by Philip Smeeton on March 20, 2021 at 22:23

Necessary/contingent truths
A necessary truth is one that could not have been otherwise. It would have been true under all circumstances. A contingent truth is one that is true, but could have been false. A necessary truth is one that must be true; a contingent truth is one that is true as it happens, or as things are, but that did not have to be true. In Leibniz's phrase, a necessary truth is true in all possible worlds. If these are all the worlds that accord with the principles of logic, however different they may be otherwise, then the truth is a logically necessary truth. If they cover all the worlds whose metaphysics is possible, then the proposition is metaphysically necessary. If a proposition is only true in all the worlds that are physically possible, then the proposition is true of physical necessity.

A permanent philosophical urge is to diagnose contingency as disguised necessity (Leibniz, Spinoza), although especially in the 20th century there have been equally powerful movements, especially associated with Quine, denying that there are substantive necessary truths, instead regarding necessity as disguised contingency.

Comment by Philip Smeeton on March 20, 2021 at 22:22

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00763509
Actual truth, possible knowledge
The well-known argument of Frederick Fitch, purporting to show that verificationism (= “Truth implies knowability”) entails the absurd conclusion that all the truths are known, has been disarmed by Dorothy Edgington's suggestion that the proper formulation of verificationism presupposes that we make use of anactuality operator along with the standardly invoked epistemic and modal operators. According to her interpretation of verificationism, the actual truth of a proposition implies that it could be known in some possible situation that the proposition holds in theactual situation. Thus, suppose that our object language contains the operatorA — “it is actually the case that ...” — with the following truth condition: ⊢ vA ⌽ iff ⊢w0⌽, wherew 0 stands for the designated world of the model — the actual world. Then we can formalize the verificationist claim as follows:
However, while Edgington's introduction of the actuality operator dissolves Fitch's paradox, our troubles are not yet over. When we combine the truth-condition for the actuality operator with the standard truth-clauses for necessity and knowledge, formulated in terms of appropriate accessibility relations between worlds, it turns out that we once again have to accept the absurd claim: all actual truths must be known! Thus, the standard truth-conditions for the actuality operator and for the epistemic operator do not mix: when we try to combine them, they yield absurdities. To get a proper mix, we need a new semantics for actuality and knowledge.
What is distinctive for our semantic proposal is that we give up the idea of afixed actual world (the designated point) and replace it with avariable perspective. The latter is contrasted with areference-world, which is being referred to, or described. We get what is sometimes called a two-dimensional semantics, in which a formula is being evaluated not just at one point (⊢ v ⌽) but at a pair of points (w⊢v⌽, wherew is a point of perspective, whilev is a point of reference). Intuitively, a formula says somethingabout the reference-world, butwhat it says is partially determined by the world of perspective. In particular, a formula such asA⌽ is true from a perspectivew at any reference-worldv iff it is true fromw's perspective atw itself. It turns out that, in a two-dimensional semantics, it is possible to formulate verificationism in a non-paradoxical way, provided we treat knowledge as a “variable-perspective” operator. The truth-condition of such an operator does not keep the perspective-world fixed. It does not involve an accessibility relation between worlds, but rather a relation between pairs of worlds:w⊢vK ⌽ iffw′⊢ν′⌽ everyw′ andν′ such that 〈w,ν〉E 〈w′, ν′〉. The relationE is meant to model epistemic uncertainty that originates from two different sources: The knower's information about the reference world may be more or less limited, and the same applies to his knowledge about the world that constitutes the point of perspective.

Comment by Alan Lake on March 13, 2021 at 20:55
Is democracy worth the price we pay. Liberalism leads finally to loss of liberty, not to freedom, and ends up as woke totalitarianism. Only a nationalistic democracy can function but it is bound to liberalize with time and thus decline. Only unity and strength can preserve the nation, blood and iron, and the nation is the largest unit of humanity that is capable of functioning efficiently.
The United States of America will decline and break apart as it attempts to become the United Cultures of America. Something which by its very nature is impossible to achieve.

I totally agree with both these points - about the inexorable liberalisation of democracy leading to its self-destruction, and about it happening fairly soon to the US.

I have this concept now of a 'nastiness gradient'. So the high nasty end of somewhere like Stalin's USSR, was a place where you could so easily be crushed by the state - but you could be confident it would stop the panzer divisions of Hitler's blitzkrieg. 

Then the low end of the nasty scale is like the US now, where as a decent, law abiding, hard working citizen, the state will not even protect you from BLM thugs torching your business or harassing you in a restaurant, and will allow MS13 gang bangers and other lethal thugs to cross a non-policed border with Mexico. 

In other words, both ends of the scale are bad; you have to find somewhere in the middle. And that means that you have to accept that a certain amount of nastiness is good. People used to understand this, and understood that the nastiness of hanging is a necessary response to, and restraint, on the nastiness of criminal thugs - but alas, they understand it no longer. Now hanging is just seen as something nasty and immoral all in itself, and the nastiness and immorality of allowing women to be raped and innocent citizens to be murdered is just scrubbed over and ignored. The anti-nasty dreamers are too busy polishing their halos and flattering themselves on their moral superiority, to pay any attention to the latter. 

Comment by Philip Smeeton on March 13, 2021 at 16:42

Bismarck on the unification of Germany.
"Not through speeches and majority decisions will the great questions of the day be decided—.....—but by iron and blood.”
“The position of Prussia in Germany will not be determined by its liberalism but by its power [...] Prussia must concentrate its strength and hold it for the favourable moment, which has already come and gone several times. Since the treaties of Vienna, our frontiers have been ill-designed for a healthy body politic. Not through speeches and majority decisions will the great questions of the day be decided—that was the great mistake of 1848 and 1849—but by iron and blood (Eisen und Blut).”
?- Is democracy worth the price we pay. Liberalism leads finally to loss of liberty, not to freedom, and ends up as woke totalitarianism. Only a nationalistic democracy can function but it is bound to liberalize with time and thus decline. Only unity and strength can preserve the nation, blood and iron, and the nation is the largest unit of humanity that is capable of functioning efficiently.
The United States of America will decline and break apart as it attempts to become the United Cultures of America. Something which by its very nature is impossible to achieve. Ethnic conflict is the natural order.

Comment by Antony on March 7, 2021 at 10:16

The Rainbow Curtain - Insights From The Gulag Archipelago ; https://www.bitchute.com/video/Q8BXtRradePR/

Comment by Philip Smeeton on February 19, 2021 at 17:01
The willing suspension of disbelief is necessary in order to support all religions and other forms of false belief.
 

Members (42)

 
 
 

Page Monitor

Just fill in the box below on any 4F page to be notified when it changes.

Privacy & Unsubscribe respected

Muslim Terrorism Count

Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Mission Overview

Most Western societies are based on Secular Democracy, which itself is based on the concept that the open marketplace of ideas leads to the optimum government. Whilst that model has been very successful, it has defects. The 4 Freedoms address 4 of the principal vulnerabilities, and gives corrections to them. 

At the moment, one of the main actors exploiting these defects, is Islam, so this site pays particular attention to that threat.

Islam, operating at the micro and macro levels, is unstoppable by individuals, hence: "It takes a nation to protect the nation". There is not enough time to fight all its attacks, nor to read them nor even to record them. So the members of 4F try to curate a representative subset of these events.

We need to capture this information before it is removed.  The site already contains sufficient information to cover most issues, but our members add further updates when possible.

We hope that free nations will wake up to stop the threat, and force the separation of (Islamic) Church and State. This will also allow moderate Muslims to escape from their totalitarian political system.

The 4 Freedoms

These 4 freedoms are designed to close 4 vulnerabilities in Secular Democracy, by making them SP or Self-Protecting (see Hobbes's first law of nature). But Democracy also requires - in addition to the standard divisions of Executive, Legislature & Judiciary - a fourth body, Protector of the Open Society (POS), to monitor all its vulnerabilities (see also Popper). 
1. SP Freedom of Speech
Any speech is allowed - except that advocating the end of these freedoms
2. SP Freedom of Election
Any party is allowed - except one advocating the end of these freedoms
3. SP Freedom from Voter Importation
Immigration is allowed - except where that changes the political demography (this is electoral fraud)
4. SP Freedom from Debt
The Central Bank is allowed to create debt - except where that debt burden can pass across a generation (25 years).

An additional Freedom from Religion is deducible if the law is applied equally to everyone:

  • Religious and cultural activities are exempt from legal oversight except where they intrude into the public sphere (Res Publica)"

© 2021   Created by Netcon.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service