Source date (UTC): 2022-07-26 16:21:01 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1551965824860229632
Category: Natural Law and Reciprocity
-
I think this is right: Ternary: (F) Irresponsibility <> (AM) Reciprocity <> DM(R
I think this is right:
Ternary: (F) Irresponsibility <> (AM) Reciprocity <> DM(Responsibility).
Yes?
Source date (UTC): 2022-07-25 17:23:24 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1551619136639336449
Reply addressees: @LukeWeinhagen
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1551615856060276740
-
“Will-to-Responsibility is a line drawn between Survival and Cooperation, and pe
–“Will-to-Responsibility is a line drawn between Survival and Cooperation, and people’s ability determines where they fall on that line.”– G. Graciano
Will-to-responsibility is genius. Will to irresponsibility vs Will to responsibility vs will to power.
Thank you. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2022-07-25 16:17:06 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1551602451274407936
-
If I have to write or decide law it’s not. Technically it’s the metaphysical pre
If I have to write or decide law it’s not. Technically it’s the metaphysical presumptions of western natural religion in the formal sense. If we are going to just communicate with people, cult is a perfectly useful shorthand. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2022-07-23 20:31:08 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1550941605829525506
Reply addressees: @bierlingm
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1550941154396590082
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@bierlingm It depends on what you’re asking me. Are these things equal? (no) Are they similar enough because they are applied for the same purpose (yes). Though, you say ‘but you said’ and then I have to distinguish between measure(Truth) and associations(Utility). 😉 Cult is fine. 😉
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1550941154396590082
-
Without this reciprocal insurance, we are subjects, not citizens, not sovereigns
Without this reciprocal insurance, we are subjects, not citizens, not sovereigns.
All Sovereignty, liberty, and freedom are dependent upon this insurance of self-determination and the capacity to replace a government that has adopted self-interest over that of its ‘investors’. https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1549829597432274944
Source date (UTC): 2022-07-20 18:57:36 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1549830902435520516
https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1549829597432274944
-
If you don’t know what reciprocity means, you can’t comprehend rights. Reciproci
If you don’t know what reciprocity means, you can’t comprehend rights. Reciprocity requires voluntary exchange. You can never have an irreciprocal right to take from others. It’s not possible. That’s just theft, and that causes resistance, retaliation, violence, and war.
Source date (UTC): 2022-07-20 18:24:24 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1549822549852393472
Reply addressees: @Nessy_says @ehs06702 @Sampj19 @merlisa @DaveCBenoit @realrobcopeland
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1549821422440046593
-
AFAIK(you don’t know this) I understand rights better than anyone living – possi
AFAIK(you don’t know this) I understand rights better than anyone living – possibly better than ever. Rights are constructed behaviorally like all commons. They are insured by institutions. They can be necessary rights(natural), preferred(contract), and privileges(takings).
Source date (UTC): 2022-07-20 18:23:11 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1549822242690940930
Reply addressees: @Nessy_says @ehs06702 @Sampj19 @merlisa @DaveCBenoit @realrobcopeland
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1549821422440046593
-
You cannot have a right to cohabitation, since that is forced involuntary asssoc
You cannot have a right to cohabitation, since that is forced involuntary asssociation. So, sorry. Rights do not exist, they are made by man, by exchange, and only when they are reciprocally beneficial. Else we always end with war.
Sorry. Game over.
Source date (UTC): 2022-07-20 18:13:12 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1549819727773679618
Reply addressees: @Nessy_says @ehs06702 @Sampj19 @merlisa @DaveCBenoit @realrobcopeland
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1549819124573806592
-
When we separate we can create the various spectrum of commons we desire, yet se
When we separate we can create the various spectrum of commons we desire, yet serve one another through trade. When we cohabitate, we force conflict, in which only undermines our ability to cooperate – even via trade.
This is just boring science. Sorry. It is what it is.
Source date (UTC): 2022-07-20 18:02:22 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1549817004600819714
Reply addressees: @Nessy_says @ehs06702 @Sampj19 @merlisa @DaveCBenoit @realrobcopeland
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1549798114080411649
-
RESPONSIBILITY: paying the cost of the defense of a personal, private, semi-priv
RESPONSIBILITY: paying the cost of the defense of a personal, private, semi-private, common demonstrated interest. This applies both via positiva (before, demand) and via negativa (after, supply). AGENCY:the capacity to do so (ability, opportunity).
Yes, it really is that simple.
Source date (UTC): 2022-07-19 18:29:22 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1549461412333895682