Category: Natural Law and Reciprocity

  • The Past Challenge of Bringing Women Into, and Keeping Them In, Propertarianism

    Oct 25, 2019, 4:01 PM

    —“Enjoying your posts”— A very kind woman 😉

    Awesome. It’s very hard for us to keep women interested, so that makes me (and the leadership) very happy. Three reasons it’s challenging: (I need a reason to post this so I’ll seize the opportunity you’ve created.   ) The general strategy of restoring the compromise between the genders that makes raising children, family, civil society, harmonious society, possible tends to attract men falsifying the excesses of marxism, feminism, postmodernism, and denialism (political correctness) when masculine men always and everywhere think in systems and politics, and women in empathy and relationships means that if we don’t find women who’ve had strong fathers and brothers, that they too often cannot translate male systematizing and political speech(aggregates), and interpret it as personal speech, or and interpersonal speech and find this offensive. Worse, we can attract men with bad experiences making it worse. SO this is why I spend time writing about male and female relationships in economic terms so that we can return to a compromise between the genders rather than a see-saw of conflcit between extremes. Worse, I teach in the masculine method of competition using king of the hill games, taking positions i agree with, disagree with, or can go other way with, or which can be interpreted by me advocating both ways. This generates lots of masculine huffing and chuffing and flexing and dominance, which is how men love to learn and will value what they learn. And very few women like to play the king of the hill game. Most women tend to referee the men instead. And that’s probably our natural dispositions., So a woman has to be able to say ‘thats just silly man talk’ the same way men say ‘thats just silly women talk’ because we’re both expressing our genetic impulses instead of working on compromise through trades. The difference is that is almost universal for masculine men to say ‘men and women engage in silly man talk, and silly women talk and that’s ok’. And for evolutionary reasons – men fear only of force not words, and women primarily concerned with words, both for their own protection from other women, and for protection of their children on many levels – including preventing them from ‘learning what they can’t yet make use of’. I think part of our transition out of the more analytic content and more into the religious, social, and political application of p-law is helping our expansion. Very few people want to understand testimonial truth – and I’m not sure how many can. lol )

  • The Past Challenge of Bringing Women Into, and Keeping Them In, Propertarianism

    Oct 25, 2019, 4:01 PM

    —“Enjoying your posts”— A very kind woman 😉

    Awesome. It’s very hard for us to keep women interested, so that makes me (and the leadership) very happy. Three reasons it’s challenging: (I need a reason to post this so I’ll seize the opportunity you’ve created.   ) The general strategy of restoring the compromise between the genders that makes raising children, family, civil society, harmonious society, possible tends to attract men falsifying the excesses of marxism, feminism, postmodernism, and denialism (political correctness) when masculine men always and everywhere think in systems and politics, and women in empathy and relationships means that if we don’t find women who’ve had strong fathers and brothers, that they too often cannot translate male systematizing and political speech(aggregates), and interpret it as personal speech, or and interpersonal speech and find this offensive. Worse, we can attract men with bad experiences making it worse. SO this is why I spend time writing about male and female relationships in economic terms so that we can return to a compromise between the genders rather than a see-saw of conflcit between extremes. Worse, I teach in the masculine method of competition using king of the hill games, taking positions i agree with, disagree with, or can go other way with, or which can be interpreted by me advocating both ways. This generates lots of masculine huffing and chuffing and flexing and dominance, which is how men love to learn and will value what they learn. And very few women like to play the king of the hill game. Most women tend to referee the men instead. And that’s probably our natural dispositions., So a woman has to be able to say ‘thats just silly man talk’ the same way men say ‘thats just silly women talk’ because we’re both expressing our genetic impulses instead of working on compromise through trades. The difference is that is almost universal for masculine men to say ‘men and women engage in silly man talk, and silly women talk and that’s ok’. And for evolutionary reasons – men fear only of force not words, and women primarily concerned with words, both for their own protection from other women, and for protection of their children on many levels – including preventing them from ‘learning what they can’t yet make use of’. I think part of our transition out of the more analytic content and more into the religious, social, and political application of p-law is helping our expansion. Very few people want to understand testimonial truth – and I’m not sure how many can. lol )

  • White, Grey, Black, Lies in P-Law

    White, Grey, Black, Lies in P-Law https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/white-grey-black-lies-in-p-law/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 15:38:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265668626557919235

  • White, Grey, Black, Lies in P-Law

    Oct 29, 2019, 7:54 PM by Stephen Thomas No one really cares if you lie for vanity’s sake. That’s a white lie.

    Libel, Slander False Advertising Baiting into Hazard Fraud private or Political Subversion of the Commons Conspiracy to subvert the Commons All of which are well defined. Those are black lies. You must lie in public to the public about matters public or conspire to propagate lies to the public about matters public And worse, you mustn’t lie FROM a position OF influence TO the public ABOUT the public, about products, policy, economics, science or law. If you want to tell everyone you wear the wrong size shoe. No one is gonna to arrest you. We will however laugh at you for being so damn petty!

    (—“I would tell you your baby’s is cute, your children are beautiful, your wife is lovely, and you are charming, brave, and witty. None of those is true. But they demonstrate I will invest in building trust in our relationship.”—CurtD )

  • White, Grey, Black, Lies in P-Law

    Oct 29, 2019, 7:54 PM by Stephen Thomas No one really cares if you lie for vanity’s sake. That’s a white lie.

    Libel, Slander False Advertising Baiting into Hazard Fraud private or Political Subversion of the Commons Conspiracy to subvert the Commons All of which are well defined. Those are black lies. You must lie in public to the public about matters public or conspire to propagate lies to the public about matters public And worse, you mustn’t lie FROM a position OF influence TO the public ABOUT the public, about products, policy, economics, science or law. If you want to tell everyone you wear the wrong size shoe. No one is gonna to arrest you. We will however laugh at you for being so damn petty!

    (—“I would tell you your baby’s is cute, your children are beautiful, your wife is lovely, and you are charming, brave, and witty. None of those is true. But they demonstrate I will invest in building trust in our relationship.”—CurtD )

  • What We Do Differently

    We do (Propertarians);

    – reciprocal (productive) vs irreciprocal ( parasitic) – testifiable vs untestifiable – truthful and untruthful You do (Others):

    – approval or rejection (feminine) – desirable or undesirable (feminine) – proportional or disproportional. (feminine lef) – moral or immoral (christian right) – right or wrong. (masculine right) – true or false (everyone)

  • What We Do Differently

    We do (Propertarians);

    – reciprocal (productive) vs irreciprocal ( parasitic) – testifiable vs untestifiable – truthful and untruthful You do (Others):

    – approval or rejection (feminine) – desirable or undesirable (feminine) – proportional or disproportional. (feminine lef) – moral or immoral (christian right) – right or wrong. (masculine right) – true or false (everyone)

  • I Don”t Do Mgtow, I Fix the Problem

    Oct 30, 2019, 9:09 AM While I understand the sentiment, and understand the need to restore masculinity, I don’t MGTOW – I only do truth, reciprocity, compatibilism, markets, and anti-feminism, anti-marxism, anti-postmodernism, and re-masculinization through restoration of bonding through competition and achievement, and re-militarization to preserve hierarchy in role, equality in value, self sacrifice for the common good. You do not see me in MGTOW circles. MGTOW is an expression of withdrawal, in the christian and buddhist models, not an expression of achievement or restoration. The movement exists because men feel they can only achieve individually improvement, instead collective improvement of in civic groups. This again was the product of feminism in eduction, both undermining male boding by competition, and male bonding by military conflict, and male bonding in commercial endeavors, and male bonding in civic improvement. MGTOW is the incorrect strategy. Instead it is restoration of male social orders that create male tribal spaces, leaving women to their nesting spaces. We must restore the destruction of male civc organizations by the feminists using the court system, to deprive men of the equivalent of the female brood and her gossip circle of friends. We must eliminate the dysgenia of the state incentives to redistribute disproportionate male contribution to state revenues, to disproportionate female consumption of state services, without reciprocal exchange. End common property, alimony, child support, and women must fund ‘women’s issues’ with their revenues. Just as men musts fund ‘mens issues’ with their revenues. Unless they exchange in trades. We must restore reciprocity and compatibility. And to do that we must threaten retribution and restitution, by equal and opposite means. Which is how I argue the return to compromise: “We can easily reverse asymmetric female benefit from asymmetric male contribution, so that male asymmetric contribution remains male asymmetric benefit. Or we can compromise and return to exchanges that is the very reason why western women had standing to abuse any asymmetric benefit.

    1. MGTOW to restore male self-care – reconstructive education and therapy.
    2. Teach Stoic Method, Masculine Aryan Virtues-Feminine Christian Values, Epicurean Means

    3. Restore voluntary association and disassociation in law.

    4. Restore men’s sport, military, trade, commercial, and civilc organizations.

    5. De-Financialize the economy, and end consumer interest, to restore working and middle class reproduction, and restore rates of reproduction.

    6. Restore the “church” under secular, traditional, christian-feminine, and pagan-masculine options instead of the academy-state as the central organ of education, family, and family finance, creating the most advanced system of family support ever existing in human history.

    7. Reform academy by limiting it to the teaching of courses in calculative and operationally constructible methods; cause all colleges and universities to warranty their services; cause all colleges and universities to carry any and all student debt – payable within six years; restore the division of grades 8+ to trades, clerical, managerial, professional, entrepreneurial, financial, and scientific specialization. And have children in education overlap ages in this classroom to compensate for different rates of development, or separate into classrooms again by degree of development that masks the fact that the principle difference between us is the tradeoff between rate of physical maturity and rate of leaning increasingly complex content.(and ending stigmas that wrongly stick thru life). Yes we are all in the end different in cognitive complexity we are not different in achievement within our degree of cognitive complexity. This is the issue. We can learn conscientiousness to some degree even if we cannot learn to learn complexity faster.

    8. Restore all production of commons to the sphere of influence and responsibility over the commons, but limiting the federal to it’s functions, state and city-state to its functions, county to its functions, locality to its functions, neighborhood to its functions, and family to its functions and individual to his functions.

    This will restore mutual consideration and care, the civic society only europeans developed, and the high trust civilization upon which all of our privileges both western and across all mankind derived.

  • I Don”t Do Mgtow, I Fix the Problem

    Oct 30, 2019, 9:09 AM While I understand the sentiment, and understand the need to restore masculinity, I don’t MGTOW – I only do truth, reciprocity, compatibilism, markets, and anti-feminism, anti-marxism, anti-postmodernism, and re-masculinization through restoration of bonding through competition and achievement, and re-militarization to preserve hierarchy in role, equality in value, self sacrifice for the common good. You do not see me in MGTOW circles. MGTOW is an expression of withdrawal, in the christian and buddhist models, not an expression of achievement or restoration. The movement exists because men feel they can only achieve individually improvement, instead collective improvement of in civic groups. This again was the product of feminism in eduction, both undermining male boding by competition, and male bonding by military conflict, and male bonding in commercial endeavors, and male bonding in civic improvement. MGTOW is the incorrect strategy. Instead it is restoration of male social orders that create male tribal spaces, leaving women to their nesting spaces. We must restore the destruction of male civc organizations by the feminists using the court system, to deprive men of the equivalent of the female brood and her gossip circle of friends. We must eliminate the dysgenia of the state incentives to redistribute disproportionate male contribution to state revenues, to disproportionate female consumption of state services, without reciprocal exchange. End common property, alimony, child support, and women must fund ‘women’s issues’ with their revenues. Just as men musts fund ‘mens issues’ with their revenues. Unless they exchange in trades. We must restore reciprocity and compatibility. And to do that we must threaten retribution and restitution, by equal and opposite means. Which is how I argue the return to compromise: “We can easily reverse asymmetric female benefit from asymmetric male contribution, so that male asymmetric contribution remains male asymmetric benefit. Or we can compromise and return to exchanges that is the very reason why western women had standing to abuse any asymmetric benefit.

    1. MGTOW to restore male self-care – reconstructive education and therapy.
    2. Teach Stoic Method, Masculine Aryan Virtues-Feminine Christian Values, Epicurean Means

    3. Restore voluntary association and disassociation in law.

    4. Restore men’s sport, military, trade, commercial, and civilc organizations.

    5. De-Financialize the economy, and end consumer interest, to restore working and middle class reproduction, and restore rates of reproduction.

    6. Restore the “church” under secular, traditional, christian-feminine, and pagan-masculine options instead of the academy-state as the central organ of education, family, and family finance, creating the most advanced system of family support ever existing in human history.

    7. Reform academy by limiting it to the teaching of courses in calculative and operationally constructible methods; cause all colleges and universities to warranty their services; cause all colleges and universities to carry any and all student debt – payable within six years; restore the division of grades 8+ to trades, clerical, managerial, professional, entrepreneurial, financial, and scientific specialization. And have children in education overlap ages in this classroom to compensate for different rates of development, or separate into classrooms again by degree of development that masks the fact that the principle difference between us is the tradeoff between rate of physical maturity and rate of leaning increasingly complex content.(and ending stigmas that wrongly stick thru life). Yes we are all in the end different in cognitive complexity we are not different in achievement within our degree of cognitive complexity. This is the issue. We can learn conscientiousness to some degree even if we cannot learn to learn complexity faster.

    8. Restore all production of commons to the sphere of influence and responsibility over the commons, but limiting the federal to it’s functions, state and city-state to its functions, county to its functions, locality to its functions, neighborhood to its functions, and family to its functions and individual to his functions.

    This will restore mutual consideration and care, the civic society only europeans developed, and the high trust civilization upon which all of our privileges both western and across all mankind derived.

  • “THE WHITE LAW” (LEX EUROPAE)

    “THE WHITE LAW” (LEX EUROPAE) https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/the-white-law-lex-europae-2/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 15:18:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265663719637422083