Yes. Should a journalist be fired for saying jewish, black, or hispanic people are evil?
RECIPROCITY IN EVERYTHING.
https://www.quora.com/Should-journalist-Lara-Witt-be-fired-for-saying-white-people-are-evil
Yes. Should a journalist be fired for saying jewish, black, or hispanic people are evil?
RECIPROCITY IN EVERYTHING.
https://www.quora.com/Should-journalist-Lara-Witt-be-fired-for-saying-white-people-are-evil
Man is a rational actor. If people disagree with you, it’s because they have a good reason to disagree with you.
There are no common goods other than productive, fully informed, voluntary, exchange, free of imposition of costs upon others by externality.
Everything else isn’t reason – it’s excuse making.
That’s what Rationalize means. That’s what Justification means.
Making excuses.
https://www.quora.com/What-can-someone-do-to-motivate-people-the-average-American-to-reason
Ask the question, which is more voluntarily reciprocal?
https://www.quora.com/Between-American-Conservatism-and-American-Liberalism-which-ideology-is-more-consistently-egalitarian
Majoritarianism (Democracy) is only reciprocal(ethical) among peoples with homogenous interests. Otherwise it is merely a means of circumventing cooperation by voluntary exchange, through the imposition of monopoly (Tyranny). #Trump #RevolutionComes
Source date (UTC): 2017-12-12 18:48:48 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/940654684951506944
There exists only one law of cooperation: voluntary, productive, fully informed, warrantied, exchange, free of imposition of costs by externality against all investments of effort and asset. All law either is constructed from this, or is but predation. #Trump #RevolutionComes
Source date (UTC): 2017-12-12 18:45:03 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/940653744794030080
by Roman Busta
An important false assumption in libertarianism is that everyone shares self-ownership. In praxeological terms, it doesn’t even make sense because not everyone demonstrates a preference for self-governance.
In scientific terms, it especially doesn’t work because ownership requires reciprocity. Generally speaking, nobody strong enough to rule over you, who ascribes to and shares different interests than you, will ever permit you to own yourself when it is more profitable for them to extract tax dollars from the many individuals that reside in a given geographical territory by demonstrating sovereignty. That’s just the way it is.
So, there can only be liberty through sovereignty, never sovereignty through liberty. Therefore you have two practical choices. Either you submit to the sovereign who shares your values so that you can compete, or you submit to the sovereign who has interests adversarial to your own.
Source date (UTC): 2017-12-08 00:14:00 UTC
Anarchists vs Libertarians vs Sovereigntarians
I think we agree on what constitutes aggression. I think we disagree about the scope of property against one can aggress, and the responsibilities we bear for the Commons.
Source date (UTC): 2017-12-06 14:22:00 UTC