Jan 21, 2020, 4:11 PM

—“I’ll bet I used [Propertarianism] before you ever did. It is amusing that you think”–

Well if you’ll bet, then how much, and what evidence can you present to back your case?

—“2. You would suppress the imposition of costs by inventing counterfeit property, such as a property in things like social trust, average IQ, and feelings of safety.”—

  1. Demonstrated interest is existential: “demonstrated” – a truth. It’s not a choice, opinion, or preference. Any OTHER definition is a choice, preference or opinion. In other words any other choice is arbitrary.
  2. You have to arbitrarily choose something other than demonstrated interest. (This is how Abrahamic Pilpul is used to create an internally consistent set of justificationary lies – and of course you fell for it.)
  3. Humans can’t know scarcity, only demonstrated interest. Look up the origin of the concept of scarcity.
  4. Humans only know objective demonstration of interest and subjective value. Humans could only have evolved identification of value, demonstrated interest, and subjective value. We can’t know scarcity only ignorance.
  5. Any attempt to refute my position is an attempt to refute subjective value, and you would have a very hard time doing that. 😉
  6. Humans can’t avoid conflict by simply being ignorant of the resources necessary to demonstrate an interest something, we can only avoid conflict by knoweldge that others have used resources to demonstrate an interest, and continue to demonstrate that interest.
  7. What you are missing is (a) scarcity of a good is a circular reasoning. (b) that demonstrated interest is the scarcity, (b) that cooperation is the ultimate scarcity, (c) that reciprocity (non imposition against demonstrated interest) is the only means of preserving that cooperation. (d) that those who impose costs upon demonstrated intersets are the only source of conflict over the POTENTIAL to obtain returns on one’s demonstrated interests.
  8. Your opinion on what imposition of costs upon their demonstrated interests does not matter to others or the headman, counsel, court that must resolve conflicts when demonstrated interest is always and everywhere the means of decidability. In other words, you can try to advocate for leaving open the possibility of parasitism upon and harm against others, but it doesn’t mean anything to others, it’s just a lie you and yours tell yourselves to try to justify parasitism upon others and harm against others intersets. Morality is what other people won’t harm or kill you for, and the only reason not to harm or kill you is the value of your cooperation versus non-cooperation, uncooperative-competition, free riding, parasitism, predation upon anything that the use whatsoever to create and preserve their returns on cooperation. In other words, it doesn’t matter what you think – it matters what others do and you can negotiate for survival with them. (This is why I use science not justificationary pilpul like jewish rothbard and jewish-trained Hoppe.

Hoppe is trying to restore free cities but to do so by free riding on on other’s states. Rothbard is trying to restore jewish separatism by free riding on the same states. They’re both trying to justify free riding. There is only one source of determining your rights: the use of organized violence at personal risk to deny others the alternative. The problem is that the only way to hold territory and population is with economic production hence the universal creation of increasingly suppressive laws against parasitism in every empire so that economic velocity is highest, and returns highest, and therefore military capacity highest. ) 9. I do science. Y’all do pilpul (sophistry). Jewish sophistry (pilpul and critique, GSRRM, false promise, baiting into hazard) is the most sophisticated form of deception yet invented by man, just as science is the most sophisticated form of truthful testimony invented by man. There are many means of lying by sophistry, including numerology, astrology, pseudoscience, theology, but the means of lying without appeal to anything external to language is Sophism. The reason it’s effective – weaving internal consistently out of self referentiality – is because it does not, like science, appeal to reality for closure (decidability). Instead the technique seeks to overwhelm (overload) reason (modeling) causing an appeal to moral intuition. Once you understand it’s just a technique of deception that like any other technique that can be mastered, it’s relatively easy to identify. The problem is untangling the self-referentiality rather than modeling the consequences in reality – which is what it seeks to undermine.

Anyway. I don’t err. We all make mistakes. I very rarely err. And since this is my primary line of research I certainly don’t err in this case. I can’t. The science says so.