Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response

Q&A: ARE THE MODERN LIBERAL WORKS *WRONG*, OR…?”

—“do you think that the foundational modern liberal works are *wrong* in the sense that they are invalid, that their premises do not hold, or that there are much larger countervailing forces not accounted for in their frameworks?”— A Reader

I am not sure what you mean by ‘prevailing modern liberal works’.

I say, frequently, that the enlightenment project was a failure, in each culture, because it was merely a power play.

The anglo saxon (english) order was the most substantial invention since the roman.

That we had constructed a set of houses that functioned as a market for the construction of commons between the classes.

And that the church consituted the ‘lower’ house, and the aristocracy “warriros” the upper house, and the small business owners the common house. and that there was never a separation of church and state. There was a separation of powers.

And that this model largely worked until the introduction of women, and the use of democracy to create a monopoly (single house) by which we overthrew the other houses, creating a monopoly.

Majority rule is tyranny. always.

We need to return to a market for the commons.

So, in that regard, I don’t see much value in anything other than Hayek and smith for most of the enligthenment. Jefferson’s attempt to create a formal legal logic in our consitution was visoinary. But incomplete.

I would like to correct these two errors, by creating a formal logic of law (propertariansim) a forma logic of truth (testimonialism), and restoring the houses that represent the classes, and particularly the houses for women.

Curt Doolittle

The Propertarian Institute

Kiev, Ukraine