Q&A: WHAT DOES ANCAPISM DO RIGHT AND WRONG? (trigger warning: criticism of ashke

Q&A: WHAT DOES ANCAPISM DO RIGHT AND WRONG?

(trigger warning: criticism of ashkenazi cosmopolitanism) (low trust ashkenazi anarcho capitalism vs high trust germanic rule of law under the common law)

Hey Curt,

—“What does AnCap-ism do right and what does it do wrong form the Propertarianism perspective. I know there is a problem with Rothbard’s ghetto ethics, and I know AnCap-ism has a problem with its limited understanding of human nature. But that is where my understanding ends. If you have written anything on this subject I would love to read it.”—

First, lets contrast Ashkenazi Anarcho Capitalism with the Germanic (Teutonic) Rule of Law.

What does it do right?

(a) expresses all morality as reducible to property rights.

(b) and as such creates an amoral (non-moral) and therefore objective means of analyzing, criticizing, describing, and debating moral arguments.

What does it do wrong.

(a) Falsely sets the criterion for moral action as voluntary rather than non-production-of-incentive-to-retaliate, which is the basis for all moral systems, and moral instincts and intuitions. The first question of ethics is “Why do I not kill you and take your things?” The answer is, “only if it is preferable not to kill you.” The reason law developed was to prevent retaliation. The division of labor came much later, and scarcity does in fact exist, but was not the origin of moral choice: non parasitism was.

(b) Falsely sets the limit of property protections to intersubjectively verifiable property instead of the scope of property necessary to prevent retaliation.

(c) By falsely establishing (a) and (b), fails to provide sufficient means of dispute resolution that demand for authority – the state – is eliminated. This effectively falsifies all of rothbardian thought.

(d) By falsely establishing (a) and (b) fails to provide sufficient economic incentive to join an anarchic polity rather than a rule-of-law polity, or even sufficient incentive to join an anarchic polity rather than a social democratic polity – simply because local transaction costs are so high that it is non-rational to join a lower trust, higher transaction cost polity, than a higher trust, low transaction cost polity, or a higher cost social democratic polity.

So in summary, Ancapism cannot possibly produce a society that it is rational to join – unless one is a pirate or other distributor of harm.

Only Germanic Rule of Law that prohibits any action that might produce retaliation, can produce a society that it is rational to prefer over the alternatives, since only under rule of law, and under high trust law, are the reasons for conflict suppressed.

Ashkenazi Anarcho Capitalism is a proposed **competitor** to European Aristocratic Rule of Law. The Ashkenazi practiced this form of capitalism as a means of preying upon eastern europeans.This has been the ashkenazi reproductive strategy for centuries: ally with the state against the people. (just as socialists, left anarchists, and neocons have done);

The origin of the Ashkenazi ethic (its extreme example in the parasitism of the most devoted sect: the hassidim (which developed in Ukraine), originated in pastoralists (shepherds). In other words, transitory raiders. They succeeded by isolationism and high trust inside and low trust outside (just as gypsies do today, and jews somewhat less so).

The Teutonic rule of law practiced by the ruling classes originated in the need to prevent warfare or fighting or feuds among warriors who were in effect their own legislators, but were dependent upon one another in times of war. So the purpose of european law (christian law, pagan law) was to prevent retaliation by the total prohibition of the imposition of costs upon others – including lying and cheating.

The ethic of Men who move on or run away, versus the ethic of men who must hold a fixed territory.

In historical context, cleansed of the pretenses of liberty, ancapism is an attempt to restore the parasitism of the ashkenazim and hassidim, by changing the definition of moral from that which causes retaliation, to that which one voluntarily enters into regardless of whether he was lied, cheated, or taken advantage of in a period of weakness.

Ancapism is no less immoral than marxism and neo-conservatism. The only source of liberty is the high trust society made possible by the total prohibition on parasitism of any kind, forcing all men to engage in productive work, and productive work only, in order to survive. Under common law, under rule of law, the law adapts to the first newly invented means of parasitism. By prohibiting the construction of incentives to retaliate, requiring truthful speech, using rapid evolution of the common law, we eliminate all possible transaction costs.

This is the origin of Austrian Economics by the Christian and Germanic Austrians: the study of that which increases the quality of available information, reduces risk, and transaction costs, and therefore create the highest velocity economy that is possible for man to participate in.

Curt Doolittle

The Propertarian Institute

Kiev, Ukraine