HOW TO ASK CURT TO EXPLAIN ‘GIBBERISH’ (DENSE) ARGUMENTS – AND WHY THEY ARE DENS

HOW TO ASK CURT TO EXPLAIN ‘GIBBERISH’ (DENSE) ARGUMENTS – AND WHY THEY ARE DENSE IN THE FIRST PLACE

—“Regarding: “I will venture you do not understand the necessary meaning of politics rather than the conventional,” You are babbling gibberish as always. What does this sentence mean?”— Joseph Nerevar

It’s not gibberish, its very dense, but thank you for asking.

In the future, the ‘gentlemanly’ way to ask a question is:

“Curt can you *unpack* that sentence or paragraph for me?”

Necessary, vs academic, vs traditional, vs normative, vs colloquial language. By necessary I refer to ‘what it can mean’ versus what we mean academically, traditionally, normatively, or colloqually.

The principle function of Testimonialism (the funny way I talk) is to speak in very precise language so that you can’t fool yourself (or others) into thinking you know what you’re talking about (or lying).

We use a particular technique when defining terms, that is a bit complicated for me to repeat here. But just as I listed Necessary, academic, traditional, normative and colloquial above as a *series* of terms, when we use any term we create a series (list) that includes it, and then we define each term as a series of human actions (and decisions) using a particularly rigid grammar (sentence structure, and vocabulary), where we list what states of property people are trying to change, and whether they are doing so honestly and truthfully or not, and what degree of precision they are using (scientific to literary to supernatural for example). The end product is a very clear set of definitions that cannot be used to ‘hide’ attempted thefts (or frauds or whatever).

In the case of ‘politics’, we use this word in an ancient sense, but conflate it (mix it up in colloquial language) as if it’s a catch-all for ‘stuff related to government. What politics means of necessity (scientifically), is a means by which groups organize to construct commons (territory, capital, organizations, goods, services, information and institutions).

But what groups? Groups that have the choice to organize a MARKET for the production of commons, or a deciding body that does so, or a dictator that does so?

The west made use of markets for the production of commons at different scales – almost always locally, and as often as possible in government. We made markets in everything: association, cooperation, reproduction, production, production of commons, production of the resolution of disputes (law), production of polities, and war.

How many other civilizations used politics (markets?) in everything? And why is it that we developed reason, a science of politics, common law, republicanism and democracy, and why are those methods almost unique to the west?

Politics: the operations of a market for construction of commons.

Rule is something else altogether.

Ergo, where we use the word Politics, other civilizations use Rule. And we do not ourselves even understand the necessary meaning of the word that we use.

Hence why democracy has been conducted as a war on rule of law, in order to end the market for the construction of commons, and replace it, like all other civilizations have, with discretionary rule.

CLOSING

So you see, what you ‘hear’ as gibberish is a scientific language, but because you are used to speaking morally (intuitively) about these subjects, you hear this very technical method of argument and react to it, where if we were talking about chemistry or physics, or mathematics, or epistemology, you would simply accept that they are terms that you don’t know.

I speak, and those who follow me learn to speak, in truthful (scientific) language, where meanings are precise, just like any other professional discipline.

Now …. do you expect me to write this kind of detail in every argument that I make, or do I have your permission to speak in dense language for those who grasp it, and leave open the opportunity for explanation for those who are curious but lack the knowledge to comprehend it on their own?

Curt Doolittle

The Propertarian Institute

Kiev, Ukraine