Curt Doolittle

Author: Curt Doolittle

  • HIERARCHY OF MORAL REALISM (ETHICAL REALISM) Hierarchy of Moral (ethical) statem

    HIERARCHY OF MORAL REALISM (ETHICAL REALISM)

    Hierarchy of Moral (ethical) statements may be categorized from strongest to weakest as:

    (a) Necessary for human cooperation (criminal prohibitions)

    (b) Beneficial for human cooperation (ethical and moral prohibitions)

    (c) Beneficial for human organization of cooperation (conspiratorial prohibitions.)

    (d) Contractual and assiting in cooperation (consensual)

    (e) Arbitrary and for the purpose of signaling cooperation (signals, and manners)

    (f) False (meaningless or inhibiting cooperation)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-28 05:46:00 UTC

  • RUSSIA DECLARES BITCOIN A MONEY SUBSTITUTE –“CB noted that according to Article

    RUSSIA DECLARES BITCOIN A MONEY SUBSTITUTE

    –“CB noted that according to Article 27 of the Federal Law “On the Central Bank of the Russian Federation” issuing “money substitutes” on the territory of the Russian Federation is prohibited.

    The regulator also noted that Bitcoin transactions are classified in the category of questionable transactions.

    The Bank of Russia noted that there is no provision for virtual currency and legally obligated economic agents: “Operations on them [virtual currency] are speculative in nature, carried out on the so-called” virtual exchanges “and carry a high risk of loss of value,” – said the Central Bank.

    In addition, as noted by the regulator, the company may inadvertently be parties to the transaction on money laundering, in connection with the fact that the release of virtual currencies engaged in anonymous actors.

    In this regard, the Bank of Russia intends to consider the provision of services to Russian companies Bitcoin exchange for rubles and foreign currency as a potential involvement in the implementation of suspicious transactions.

    CBA first outlined the position in relation to the Bitcoins. Earlier, similar statements were made by other regulators. National Bank of China, for example, forbade banks to use their virtual currency than provoked the collapse of Bitcoin rate to 50 percent. Cautions on the use of Crypto-currency were also isused by CB France, India and Estonia. Nevertheless, none of them did not declare questionable transactions with Bitcoin.

    January 24 Sberbank head German Gref defended the virtual currency. Leader of the largest in Russia Financial Organization said in an interview with Bloomberg, he had sent letters to the Presidential Administration, the Central Bank and Ministry of Finance to prevent the spread of e-money restrictions.’–

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-28 05:19:00 UTC

  • UKRAINE: ECONOMICS DIVISION OF CULTURAL INTEREST –” eastern Ukraine, notably it

    UKRAINE: ECONOMICS DIVISION OF CULTURAL INTEREST

    –” eastern Ukraine, notably its industrial Donetsk basin, feared that growing integration with the EU would wipe out their region’s antiquated manufacturing industry, mining, steel firms, commodity companies and chemical plants, causing high unemployment.”– Eric Margolis

    I didn’t understand this until Max explained it to me this week. But last night I read up on it. It’s true. Eastern Ukraine’s Russian speakers and western Ukraine’s agrarians would be differently affected by moves east or west.

    The west is catholic polish and speaks Ukrainian. The east is byzantine, Russified, and speaks Russian. Although you must understand that genetically, Ukraine is a very diverse, and the data I have seen is that it contains every western tribe in greater mix than any other state I’ve seen.

    I tend to see spiritual differences as meaningless, but differences economic interests are irreconcilable.

    So I overnight I started leaning more toward dividing this torn country. With each side maintaining independence. Two Ukraine’s are the best allies for independent Ukrainians.

    Smaller is better.

    Always.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-28 03:53:00 UTC

  • “LIBERTY REQUIRES POINTED WEAPONS, POINTED ARGUMENTS, AND THE WILLINGNESS TO USE

    “LIBERTY REQUIRES POINTED WEAPONS, POINTED ARGUMENTS, AND THE WILLINGNESS TO USE THEM BOTH”

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-28 02:21:00 UTC

  • LIBERTY’S POINTS Libertarianism needs a reformation. The church was an instrumen

    LIBERTY’S POINTS

    Libertarianism needs a reformation.

    The church was an instrument of totalitarianism whose pacifism came from its weakness, not it’s intentions, where were always self interest.

    The Aristocracy ACTED, and the church TALKED.

    The church’s rhetoric is a dialectical competitor to Aristocratic action.

    The church’s arguments cannot be understood EXCEPT as only half of the dialectical argument with Aristocracy.

    The pacifist church could not exist without the warrior caste.

    And liberty cannot exist without a militia.

    A militia do not beg for liberty – they take it by force.

    And by taking it with force, they make it for others.

    The source of liberty was, is, and always will be the organized use of violence to suppress free riding in all its forms.

    Property is the result of that prohibition on free riding – ‘cheating’.

    Property is not the cause of liberty, and it is not created by ‘appeals to reason’.

    Property is the consequence of the organized suppression of ‘cheating’ in all its forms.

    And Rothbardian ethics fully endorse and justify ‘cheating’.

    THAT IS WHY WE FAIL

    We need leadership with solutions that will work. Not tolerance.

    Appeals to tolerance are merely a symptom of our lack of good philosophical arguments.

    Our lack of good philosophical arguments is evidenced by our failure to enfranchise the worlds moral specialists: conservatives.

    Conservatives are the moral specialists, not us. And we can, and have, measured that fact empirically.

    But conservatives cannot reform their ancient moral code because their philosophy is metaphorical, not rhetorical.

    Their moral arguments are not open to rational criticism.

    Which is why they retreat into religion.

    And we are not, with Rothbard’s ethics, either giving them a tool to express their morality in rational terms, so that THEY can reform their ideas.

    By failing our role as the intellectual leaders of aristocratic egalitarian liberty, we drive the conservatives into religion as their only defense against the state.

    Our failures: The failure of libertarianism. The failure to obtain liberty.

    The failure to constrain the expansion of the state.

    All of this is our fault.

    We fail not because the world does not understand us.

    It is because our prophet was terribly, terribly, immorally wrong.

    The source of liberty – property rights – is the enfranchisement of any individual who will use the threat of violence to suppress free riding – cheating – anywhere and everywhere.

    And all other arguments are cheap and failed attempts to obtain liberty at a discount by relying on the empty verbalism of the church.

    LIBERTY REQUIRES POINTED WEAPONS, POINTED ARGUMENTS, AND THE WILLINGNESS TO USE THEM BOTH.

    Everything else, is just a cheap and ineffective technique for trying to obtain liberty at a discount.

    Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-28 02:09:00 UTC

  • OF DOWNTOWN KIEV HELD BY PROTESTERS Red is protester-controlled core commerce ar

    http://zyalt.livejournal.com/986385.htmlMAP OF DOWNTOWN KIEV HELD BY PROTESTERS

    Red is protester-controlled core commerce area. Blue is government buildings. I didn’t actually realize they had this much of the area under control.

    (I live just off the map at about where eleven o’clock would be)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-27 17:00:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    http://www.businessinsider.com/report-ceo-of-major-bitcoin-exchange-arrested-2014-1http://www.businessinsider.com/report-ceo-of-major-bitcoin-exchange-arrested-2014-1

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-27 16:21:00 UTC

  • PROPERTARIANISM Types of Property The anarchist libertarians have artificially n

    PROPERTARIANISM

    Types of Property

    The anarchist libertarians have artificially narrowed the concept of property to suit their desired ends. Property exists in those forms that people ACT as if it exists. If the anarchists choose to suggest otherwise, they refute their own arguments for the Praxeological necessity for the institution of property. Humans demonstrably act as though there are four categories of property:

    I. Interpersonal (Relationship) Property

    Cooperative Property: “relationships with others and tools of relationships upon which we reciprocally depend.”

    Mates (access to sex/reproduction)

    Children (genetic reproduction)

    Familial Relations (security)

    Non-Familial Relations (utility)

    Consanguineous Relations (tribal and family ties)

    Racial property (racial ties)

    Organizational ties (work)

    Knowledge ties (skills, crafts)

    Status and Class (reputation)

    II. Several (Personal) Property

    Personal property: “Things an individual has a Monopoly Of Control over the use of.”

    Physical Body

    Actions and Time

    Memories, Concepts and Identities: tools that enable us to plan and act. In the consumer economy this includes brands.

    Several Property: Those things we claim a monopoly of control over.

    III. Artificial Property

    Artificial Property: “Can a group issue specific rights to members?” This topic is dependent again, upon the ORIGIN question above. If markets are made, then the shareholders of the market may create artificial property of any type that they desire. Including but not limited to:

    Shares in property: Recorded And Quantified Shareholder Property (claims for partial ownership)

    Monopoly Property such as intellectual property. (grants of monopoly within a geography)

    Trademarks and Brands (prohibitions on fraudulent transfers within a geography).

    IV. Institutional (Community) Property

    Institutional Property: “Those objects into which we have invested our forgone opportunities, our efforts, or our material assets, in order to aggregate capital from multiple individuals for mutual gain.”

    Informal (Normative) Institutions: Our norms: manners, ethics and morals. Informal institutional property is nearly impossible to quantify and price. The costs are subjective and consists of forgone opportunities.

    Formal (Procedural) Institutions: Our institutions: Religion (including the secular religion), Government, Laws. Formal institutional property is easy to price. costs are visible. And the productivity of the social order is at least marginally measurable.

    VOLUNTARY TRANSFER

    Types of Voluntary Transfer

    i – Self-Eschange: (for perks)

    ii – Other-Exchange (everything is exchange)

    iii – Commons-Exchange (contribution to the commons)

    Constraints on Voluntary Transfer

    1. Symmetry (Ethics): Fully informed exchange. The responsibility or lack of responsibility for symmetric knowledge in an exchange. Stated as “In any exchange the seller has an ethical obligation to mitigate fraud from the asymmetry of knowledge.” Classical liberals and Christian authors advocate symmetrical-knowledge ethics. Anarchists and Jewish authors advocate asymmetrical-knowledge ethics. Rothbard and Block are asymmetrical advocates. Most classical liberals lack the knowledge of Rothbardian/Hoppian ethics necessary to articulate their values in Propertarian terms. However, the classical liberals as well as the Hayekians, both advocate symmetrical-knowledge ethics whether they articulate the ideas effectively or not.

    2. Warranty: Implied warranty is a derivation of Symmetrical Knowledge Ethics above. Expressed as: “In any exchange the seller must warrant his goods and services to prevent fraud by asymmetry of information.” Classical liberal and Christian authors imply warranty. Anarchist and Jewish authors expressly deny warranty. (I address this elsewhere as the bazaar exchange ethic vs the warrior exchange ethic.)

    3. Contribution (value added): You must add value to any item exchanged for profit, and you certainly may not profit from others distress or harm.

    4. Externalities: “No exchange, action or inaction may cause involuntary transfers from others”. Whether or not there is a prohibition against all involuntary external transfers (classical liberal and Christian authors), or a prohibition only against state conduct of involuntary transfers (anarchist and Jewish authors).

    5. Exclusion (Ostracization) Whether individuals can aggregate into groups have the right of exclusion. That is, to prohibit individuals from a defined area. While all seem to agree that individuals must have the right of passage in some way, others deny groups from forming a boundary and in effect prohibiting immigration.

    INVOLUNTARY TRANSFER (PARASITISM)

    Types of Involuntary Transfer

    i-Direct Interpersonal

    – Murder

    – Violence

    – Destruction

    – Theft

    – Theft by Fraud

    – Theft by Fraud by omission

    ii – Indirect Interpersonal

    – Theft by Obstruction

    – Theft by Externalization

    iii – Indirect Social

    – Theft by Free riding

    – Theft by privatization

    – Theft by socialization

    iv – Conspiratorial Social

    – Theft by Rent seeking

    – Theft by Complexity, Rule, Process or Obscurantism

    – Theft by Extortion

    – Murder, Destruction and Theft by War

    v – Conquest

    – Immigration

    – Overbreeding

    – Religious Expansion

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-27 14:12:00 UTC

  • **Basic rule of ethics: if you aren’t willing to insure it yourself then you sho

    **Basic rule of ethics: if you aren’t willing to insure it yourself then you shouldn’t have made the loan.**

    The govenrment had to insert all this risk into the economy in order to use the financial system as a distribution network for getting money into the hands of consumers.

    We don’t need to use a financial system to distribute money to consumers with loans.

    We can just DISTRIBUTE IT TO CONSUMERS.

    I’d rather fight for consumer’s spending than fight my government and corrupt bankers who exploit my people, and destroy my savings.

    I’d rather the average joe who doesn’t pay any substantial taxes had the same self interest in shrinking the government than I do as a taxpayer.

    I don’t like redistribution. But then, I like consumers to have money that I can capture a piece of – that I can COMPETE for.

    I like government abuse of me and my citizens, and government’s predilection for war, more than I dislike redistribution.

    I like that if we redistributed cash, then we wouldn’t be dependent upon immigration, and in fact, we’d have every incentive NOT to allow immigration except of highly talented people.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-27 13:01:00 UTC

  • (I can get my facts wrong like anyone else. And I can get my theory wrong – alth

    (I can get my facts wrong like anyone else. And I can get my theory wrong – although I’m better at that than I used to be, because I tend to test a theory pretty excruciatingly. But you know, my logic is pretty damned good. All the way ’round. I know that. Simply from experience I know that. Logic is an incredibly useful tool. The only way to test theories and facts for internal consistency is through logic, and the only way to test external correspondence is by constantly subjecting your theories to tests against all data new that you can find. You’re never really ‘done’ testing your theory until no further increase in use can be obtained from it. When you run out of things that you can test and it holds up for the purposes you need it then you’re pretty well set. As such people jump to conclusions far too early. The only way you know something is when you run out of ways to test it. And you must test both internal consistency and external correspondence for both explanatory power and falsifications power.)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-27 05:29:00 UTC