Reading a piece by Block, and exasperated at the amount of verbal justification

Reading a piece by Block, and exasperated at the amount of verbal justification as a means of producing overloading (deception).

Let me help you folks: The first rule of cooperation is “why don’t I just kill you and take your stuff?” Now a weakling might not like that, and a coward might not like that, and a free rider might not like that, but that’s simply a fact. It abuses northern european universalism, which is easily susceptible to overloading and suggestion that implies a breach of the universalist’s assumed trust.

But that is a mere cultural assumption that can be abused by ghetto pragmatism. Instead, we always have the ability to kill and take your stuff. Why wouldn’t we? Mostly because its either too rewarding to engage in trade, or not worth killing you and taking your stuff.

Verbal contradiction doesn’t hold any weight when the choice is between whether to kill you or to trade with you. Negotiation is not bound by logic. It’s bound by not doing what the other person will kill you for.