Category: Natural Law and Reciprocity

  • Semi Domesticated Animals

    (humor) I mean, if you can’t integrate with Aristotelianism, truth telling regardless of the consequences, reciprocity in all things, duty of the commons, self sufficiency, and the absolute nuclear family, then you’re just a semi domesticated animal that doesn’t have to turn around in a circle three times before lying down. … And yes, I know that limits the definition of ‘human’ to a single ethnicity’s married couples with children. 😉

  • Ragnar Redbeard and Nietzsche: Introductions to Aristocratic Ethics of Propertarianism

    —“Have you ever read Might is Right? I’m almost finished it. I’d like to know your thoughts on the topic. Can you explain how it relates to Propertarianism?”— Kelly Wilson Ragnar Redbeard (Arthur Desmond) – Might is Right Nietzche: – The Birth of Tragedy – The Geneology of Morals – Beyond Good and Evil – The Will to Power 1) The book Might is Right was written in 1890 as a derivation of Nietzsche – written in English by a Briton, with the ‘clarity’ of anglo sentiments, rather than the ‘romanticized’ prose of German sentiments. In that sense it should be taken as a more aggressive anglo restatement of Nietzsche’s works published at that time. 2) Nietzsche’s works and Redbeard’s (Arthur Desmond), were followed by the social darwinist and eugenics movements, especially (British) Herbert Spencer’s thought. They were extremely popular pre-war. (And should have remained so. That failure will haunt us for centuries.) 3) Neither Nietzsche nor Redbeard solved the problem of replacing ‘slave’ (jewish and christian) morality with aristocratic morality for the simple reason that they did not understand aristocratic morality’s origins in germanic common law. We do see that Hayek, by the late 1970’s has begun to understand but he was german again, and too ‘tepid’, where the more aggressive British Keynes and American Rawls, and the very, very, aggressive ashkenazi marxists and socialists were more successful. 4) I have, I think, in propertarianism, completed the scientific explanation of our ancient heroic morality – although I am frequently criticized for writing it so legally and dryly. Most men want something more romantic (german), or passionate (anglo), or spiritual (Italian). When in reality, it is the Russians who have begun to practice it – absence the commitment to truth and sovereignty and reciprocity. They have at least taken on the Aryan Ambition. 5) So I would say that Ragnar Redbeard is a great … let us say, Young Adult Literary introduction to aristocracy and Propertarianism, yes. Just as Nietzsche is a freshman college introduction to aristocratic ethics and Propertarianism. Where Propertarianism is a bit like the graduate school version of both. Meaning that those are both works of literary inspiration, where Propertarianism is literally ‘The Natural Law Of Reciprocity of Sovereign Peoples: The Law of Aristocratic Egalitarians.” Hope that helps Curt

  • Ragnar Redbeard and Nietzsche: Introductions to Aristocratic Ethics of Propertarianism

    —“Have you ever read Might is Right? I’m almost finished it. I’d like to know your thoughts on the topic. Can you explain how it relates to Propertarianism?”— Kelly Wilson Ragnar Redbeard (Arthur Desmond) – Might is Right Nietzche: – The Birth of Tragedy – The Geneology of Morals – Beyond Good and Evil – The Will to Power 1) The book Might is Right was written in 1890 as a derivation of Nietzsche – written in English by a Briton, with the ‘clarity’ of anglo sentiments, rather than the ‘romanticized’ prose of German sentiments. In that sense it should be taken as a more aggressive anglo restatement of Nietzsche’s works published at that time. 2) Nietzsche’s works and Redbeard’s (Arthur Desmond), were followed by the social darwinist and eugenics movements, especially (British) Herbert Spencer’s thought. They were extremely popular pre-war. (And should have remained so. That failure will haunt us for centuries.) 3) Neither Nietzsche nor Redbeard solved the problem of replacing ‘slave’ (jewish and christian) morality with aristocratic morality for the simple reason that they did not understand aristocratic morality’s origins in germanic common law. We do see that Hayek, by the late 1970’s has begun to understand but he was german again, and too ‘tepid’, where the more aggressive British Keynes and American Rawls, and the very, very, aggressive ashkenazi marxists and socialists were more successful. 4) I have, I think, in propertarianism, completed the scientific explanation of our ancient heroic morality – although I am frequently criticized for writing it so legally and dryly. Most men want something more romantic (german), or passionate (anglo), or spiritual (Italian). When in reality, it is the Russians who have begun to practice it – absence the commitment to truth and sovereignty and reciprocity. They have at least taken on the Aryan Ambition. 5) So I would say that Ragnar Redbeard is a great … let us say, Young Adult Literary introduction to aristocracy and Propertarianism, yes. Just as Nietzsche is a freshman college introduction to aristocratic ethics and Propertarianism. Where Propertarianism is a bit like the graduate school version of both. Meaning that those are both works of literary inspiration, where Propertarianism is literally ‘The Natural Law Of Reciprocity of Sovereign Peoples: The Law of Aristocratic Egalitarians.” Hope that helps Curt

  • (humor) I mean, if you can’t integrate with Aristotelianism, truth telling regar

    (humor)

    I mean, if you can’t integrate with Aristotelianism, truth telling regardless of the consequences, reciprocity in all things, duty of the commons, self sufficiency, and the absolute nuclear family, then you’re just a semi domesticated animal that doesn’t have to turn around in a circle three times before lying down. … And yes, I know that limits the definition of ‘human’ to a single ethnicity’s married couples with children. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-21 15:58:00 UTC

  • The only tax I care you pay is FULL INTEGRATION

    The only tax I care you pay is FULL INTEGRATION.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-21 15:47:00 UTC

  • —“Only the autodidacts are free.”— Nassim Nicholas Taleb,

    —“Only the autodidacts are free.”— Nassim Nicholas Taleb, I would never have been ‘permitted’ to develop Propertarianism (Natural Law) in the academy. The simple reasons that (a) interdisciplinary phd’s are nearly impossible, (b) taking 10+ years to solve a hard problem is unacceptable. (c) publishing along the way to a solution only serves to anchor you in a falsehood. (d) the academy forces presumptions (paradigms) that are false due to its market incentives to produce educational products rather than truth (in other than the physical sciences).

  • —“Only the autodidacts are free.”— Nassim Nicholas Taleb,

    —“Only the autodidacts are free.”— Nassim Nicholas Taleb, I would never have been ‘permitted’ to develop Propertarianism (Natural Law) in the academy. The simple reasons that (a) interdisciplinary phd’s are nearly impossible, (b) taking 10+ years to solve a hard problem is unacceptable. (c) publishing along the way to a solution only serves to anchor you in a falsehood. (d) the academy forces presumptions (paradigms) that are false due to its market incentives to produce educational products rather than truth (in other than the physical sciences).

  • THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LAW AND NATURAL LAW IS MEMORIZATION VS CALCULATION

    THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LAW AND NATURAL LAW IS MEMORIZATION VS CALCULATION


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-20 17:29:46 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1009488490348892164

  • “Sovereignty is not something you give away to others, it’s something you practi

    —“Sovereignty is not something you give away to others, it’s something you practice. If peers practice equivalent sovereignty, institutions emerge between you so that in practice, you respect the sovereignty of others. But nobody rides for free.”—Simon Ström


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-20 13:59:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1009435518579462149

  • THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LAW AND NATURAL LAW IS MEMORIZATION VS CALCULATION

    THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LAW AND NATURAL LAW IS MEMORIZATION VS CALCULATION


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-20 13:29:00 UTC