Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response

  • tip. consent vs dissent?

    tip. consent vs dissent?


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-19 02:46:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174515022413869057

    Reply addressees: @KralcTrebor @Darren_B_Lane @primalpoly

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174471666279337985


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174471666279337985

  • Thats a keeper

    Thats a keeper… https://twitter.com/gabrielamadej/status/1174501076210524162

  • ( you are innovating. nice! )

    ( you are innovating. nice! )


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-19 02:13:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174506701480955904

    Reply addressees: @Nationalist7346

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174489690415796224


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174489690415796224

  • Already Declared: I have to try that line of argument.;)

    Already Declared: I have to try that line of argument.;)


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-18 22:08:15 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174445052971683840

    Reply addressees: @jamesfoxhiggins @NoahRevoy

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174443355498938368


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174443355498938368

  • Untitled

    https://propertarianism.com/2019/09/18/71105/

    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-18 17:03:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174368423016566787

  • Will Wilkinson, GSRRM Against Conservatives. I…Explain.

    —“In my latest at  @nytopinion, I argue that the truculent response to  @BetoORourke’s mandatory assault weapon buyback proposal betrays a disturbing hostility to democracy on the right. Why an Assault Weapons Ban Hits Such a Nerve With Many Conservatives. The premise of Trumpist populism is that the political preferences of a shrinking minority of citizens matter more than democracy.”–Will Wilkinson @willwilkinson

    It’s not a hostility to democracy(Mob Rule), it’s a hostility to your continued undermining of Rule of Law (Reciprocity, Tort, Trespass), by incrementally deceiving the population that there any means, whether authoritarian, bureaucratic, representative, or democratic of legitimizing violation of Rule of Law. I don’t know if you (Will Wilkinson) are ignorant or intellectually dishonest by inverting the relationship between Rule of Law and Democracy – where Rule of law consists in the spectrum: Reciprocity(natural) vs substantive(Rights) vs formalist (Procedure) vs Functional (arbitrary) – and Democracy refers to a means of choosing the priority of commons given scarce resources, within that law). But Conservatism is empirical (evidentiary), not ideal(imagined) and we hold to rule of law (sovereignty, reciprocity, jury) and limit The State, Houses of Government, and Polity from violating that rule of law – and we are the only people to have built a civilization upon it, and a majority middle class because of it. WE ARE SPECIAL BECAUSE OF OUR RULE OF LAW, NOT DEMOCRACY. America, the anglo countries, and the germanic countries, are ‘special’ not because of government, but because we have rule of law. The world does not need democracy, and continues to rebel against it. They need rule of law. With rule of law the form of government is irrelevant. Under rule of law people have no choice to obtain status and consumption by any other means that the voluntary service of others in markets for association, production, reproduction, commons production, and polity production. Every alternative is just one excuse or another. YOU SEEK TO REPLACE RULE OF LAW WITH ARBITRARY RULE OF MAN So if you are just mistaken, then it’s worth educating you. If you are instead, continuing your campaign to destroy the first written Constitution of Natural Law (reciprocity) for the first middle class civilization(the third way), then that is why we have arms – to stop you. And every agitation you conduct against that law of reciprocity – our “political religion” – moves one step closer to turning this civil war from one of words, political infighting, and sporadic violence, into the bloodiest in human history – so, please, by all means continue. THERE IS NO “WE” There is no ‘we’. We can peacefully separate and return to a federation of states for the single purpose of defense, returning local control over local policy to the local people, or we will roll the dice on whether we win, you win, or, if it lasts six months, no one wins. We have our weapons – because of you.

  • Will Wilkinson, GSRRM Against Conservatives. I…Explain.

    —“In my latest at  @nytopinion, I argue that the truculent response to  @BetoORourke’s mandatory assault weapon buyback proposal betrays a disturbing hostility to democracy on the right. Why an Assault Weapons Ban Hits Such a Nerve With Many Conservatives. The premise of Trumpist populism is that the political preferences of a shrinking minority of citizens matter more than democracy.”–Will Wilkinson @willwilkinson

    It’s not a hostility to democracy(Mob Rule), it’s a hostility to your continued undermining of Rule of Law (Reciprocity, Tort, Trespass), by incrementally deceiving the population that there any means, whether authoritarian, bureaucratic, representative, or democratic of legitimizing violation of Rule of Law. I don’t know if you (Will Wilkinson) are ignorant or intellectually dishonest by inverting the relationship between Rule of Law and Democracy – where Rule of law consists in the spectrum: Reciprocity(natural) vs substantive(Rights) vs formalist (Procedure) vs Functional (arbitrary) – and Democracy refers to a means of choosing the priority of commons given scarce resources, within that law). But Conservatism is empirical (evidentiary), not ideal(imagined) and we hold to rule of law (sovereignty, reciprocity, jury) and limit The State, Houses of Government, and Polity from violating that rule of law – and we are the only people to have built a civilization upon it, and a majority middle class because of it. WE ARE SPECIAL BECAUSE OF OUR RULE OF LAW, NOT DEMOCRACY. America, the anglo countries, and the germanic countries, are ‘special’ not because of government, but because we have rule of law. The world does not need democracy, and continues to rebel against it. They need rule of law. With rule of law the form of government is irrelevant. Under rule of law people have no choice to obtain status and consumption by any other means that the voluntary service of others in markets for association, production, reproduction, commons production, and polity production. Every alternative is just one excuse or another. YOU SEEK TO REPLACE RULE OF LAW WITH ARBITRARY RULE OF MAN So if you are just mistaken, then it’s worth educating you. If you are instead, continuing your campaign to destroy the first written Constitution of Natural Law (reciprocity) for the first middle class civilization(the third way), then that is why we have arms – to stop you. And every agitation you conduct against that law of reciprocity – our “political religion” – moves one step closer to turning this civil war from one of words, political infighting, and sporadic violence, into the bloodiest in human history – so, please, by all means continue. THERE IS NO “WE” There is no ‘we’. We can peacefully separate and return to a federation of states for the single purpose of defense, returning local control over local policy to the local people, or we will roll the dice on whether we win, you win, or, if it lasts six months, no one wins. We have our weapons – because of you.

  • I don’t know if you (Will) are ignorant or intellectually dishonest by inverting

    I don’t know if you (Will) are ignorant or intellectually dishonest by inverting the relationship between Rule of Law (Reciprocity(natural) vs substantive(Rights) vs formalist (Procedure) vs Functional (arbitrary), and Democracy (means of choosing priority of commons within law).


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-18 16:48:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174364567784361985

    Reply addressees: @willwilkinson @nytopinion @BetoORourke

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174363590721245191


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @willwilkinson @nytopinion @BetoORourke It’s not a hostility to democracy(Mob Rule), it’s a hostility to your continued undermining of Rule of Law (Reciprocity, Tort, Trespass), by incrementally deceiving the population that there any means: authoritarian, political, democratic of legitimizes violation of rule of law.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1174363590721245191


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @willwilkinson @nytopinion @BetoORourke It’s not a hostility to democracy(Mob Rule), it’s a hostility to your continued undermining of Rule of Law (Reciprocity, Tort, Trespass), by incrementally deceiving the population that there any means: authoritarian, political, democratic of legitimizes violation of rule of law.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1174363590721245191

  • 2019-09-18

    2019-09-18

    https://t.co/RbftLKtfNc


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-18 14:38:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174331894625984514

    Reply addressees: @LadyAodh @MartianHoplite

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173017621622657025


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173017621622657025

  • None. Not sure it matters. Effect is the same either way: exciting the feet on t

    None. Not sure it matters. Effect is the same either way: exciting the feet on the street.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-18 12:24:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174298243657883649

    Reply addressees: @AugustusOctav10

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174297694862487562


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174297694862487562