We Have No Choice. Equality in Reciprocity or In Poverty https://propertarianism.com/2020/06/01/we-have-no-choice-equality-in-reciprocity-or-in-poverty-2/
Source date (UTC): 2020-06-01 12:12:06 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267428708111003655
Our only possibilities are equality in reciprocity or equality in ignorance, superstition, and absolute poverty. There is no choice. It’s just physics. Humans have memories, predictions from memories, and ability to choose to act on those predictions, so that we can outwit time in ways physical processes lacking memory, prediction, choice, and action cannot. However that only allows us to benefit from physical processes not deny or circumvent them. We are as physically constrained as is the rest of the universe. And our only substantial advantage is that the ability to imitate, empathize, sympathize, predict futures from them, and choose to cooperate on those possible futures, is so much more efficient and provides so many greater returns, that we can do a bit better than the rest of life forms – at least with our limits – to convert more calories, and continuously increase our consumption through continuous expansion of cooperation. But in doing so we form Pareto distributions of influence, in order to obtain Nash equilibriums of rewards. And that is a physical necessity of physical reality. We don’t have any choice. We are not wealthier than cave men, our only asset is time. Through cooperation we have made the purchasing power of time increase over and over again throughout history, although disproportionately so with the invention of aristotielainsim, and even more so with the mastery of heat, steam, electricity, chemistry, and now information.
Our only possibilities are equality in reciprocity or equality in ignorance, superstition, and absolute poverty. There is no choice. It’s just physics. Humans have memories, predictions from memories, and ability to choose to act on those predictions, so that we can outwit time in ways physical processes lacking memory, prediction, choice, and action cannot. However that only allows us to benefit from physical processes not deny or circumvent them. We are as physically constrained as is the rest of the universe. And our only substantial advantage is that the ability to imitate, empathize, sympathize, predict futures from them, and choose to cooperate on those possible futures, is so much more efficient and provides so many greater returns, that we can do a bit better than the rest of life forms – at least with our limits – to convert more calories, and continuously increase our consumption through continuous expansion of cooperation. But in doing so we form Pareto distributions of influence, in order to obtain Nash equilibriums of rewards. And that is a physical necessity of physical reality. We don’t have any choice. We are not wealthier than cave men, our only asset is time. Through cooperation we have made the purchasing power of time increase over and over again throughout history, although disproportionately so with the invention of aristotielainsim, and even more so with the mastery of heat, steam, electricity, chemistry, and now information.
Reciprocity Entering the Mainstream https://t.co/i5C8hLS9fb
Reciprocity Entering the Mainstream https://propertarianism.com/2020/06/01/reciprocity-entering-the-mainstream-2/
Source date (UTC): 2020-06-01 12:10:55 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267428411284340738
—“There’s that word reciprocity again… Where have I heard that before?!?”— JWarren Warren
We will get there. We will standardize that term as the central object of conflict, thereby replacing equality. We probably wont get credit for it. But we will get there. Everyone will use the term. It is the foundation of western civilization. It’s the reason for our success. Its true and it’s moral. But the harder problem in the future will be preventing the use of abrahamic deceit to undermine that term. And every time they try we will have an opportunity to train the world about abrahamic deceit ,and its cause of past present conflcit dark age, and destruction. THE BIG HISTORY IN P This is the ‘big history’ (as someone said yesterday) provided by my research into Propertarianism. It’s that the war between the masculine eugenic indo-europea, the feminine dysgenic semitic, the masculine eugenic east asian, remains with India providing the most interesting compromise position at the expense of continuous failure to evolve.
—“There’s that word reciprocity again… Where have I heard that before?!?”— JWarren Warren
We will get there. We will standardize that term as the central object of conflict, thereby replacing equality. We probably wont get credit for it. But we will get there. Everyone will use the term. It is the foundation of western civilization. It’s the reason for our success. Its true and it’s moral. But the harder problem in the future will be preventing the use of abrahamic deceit to undermine that term. And every time they try we will have an opportunity to train the world about abrahamic deceit ,and its cause of past present conflcit dark age, and destruction. THE BIG HISTORY IN P This is the ‘big history’ (as someone said yesterday) provided by my research into Propertarianism. It’s that the war between the masculine eugenic indo-europea, the feminine dysgenic semitic, the masculine eugenic east asian, remains with India providing the most interesting compromise position at the expense of continuous failure to evolve.
—Because “Responsible” is a moral term in which one has choice, and “Insurer” is a legal term in which one has no choice.— Curt Doolittle
Bill Joslin: Insurer seems to tie into property in that if one does not or fails to insure a property (abandon it) they lose the ability to demonstrate it as property. I.e. if one is not responsible (insure) for their children – they don’t have an ability to claim parental rights. If one doesn’t maintain a possession they are not recognized as the owner .(secure it and or maintain it) for example If you claim membership to a polity yet do not or are not willing to insure it, you can not demonstrate membership and thus can not claim membership benefits. (Says the Canadian who watched his nation demonstrate they are not willing to insure their country)
—Because “Responsible” is a moral term in which one has choice, and “Insurer” is a legal term in which one has no choice.— Curt Doolittle
Bill Joslin: Insurer seems to tie into property in that if one does not or fails to insure a property (abandon it) they lose the ability to demonstrate it as property. I.e. if one is not responsible (insure) for their children – they don’t have an ability to claim parental rights. If one doesn’t maintain a possession they are not recognized as the owner .(secure it and or maintain it) for example If you claim membership to a polity yet do not or are not willing to insure it, you can not demonstrate membership and thus can not claim membership benefits. (Says the Canadian who watched his nation demonstrate they are not willing to insure their country)
What ‘Traditional’ Means, What to Say Instead, and How to Restore Reciprocity Between Genders. https://t.co/YCq1W7CJyZ