“If we are engaging in negotiation or argument, we want to know if we can cooperate with you. We prefer to cooperate with you only because cooperation in the long term is more rewarding than predation in the short term. The strategy of my people is maneuver: speed in adaptation. As such we practice Heroism, Sovereignty(Reciprocity), Contract, and Testimonial Truth. And because Maneuver using Heroism, Sovereignty, Contract, and Testimonial truth are the most expensive method of cooperation, it is only in our interest to cooperate with you if you can at least participate in Contract and Testimonial Truth. Otherwise, because of our use of Maneuver, by the high costs of Sovereignty, Contract, and Testimonial Truth, it is preferable to defeat you, kill or enslave, and take from you that which we cannot obtain by cooperation under contract and testimonial truth, rather than pay the unnecessary cost of your violation of contract, and your use of deceit. And so in negotiation and argument, if you cannot practice full reciprocity of sovereignty, and constrain yourself to that which you can testify to, then you are incapable of contract for reciprocal sovereign cooperation. And as such we need not discourse, only fight. So no, when you call upon your gods, you cannot testify to them because you cannot demonstrate them, only lie about them. While, if I call upon reason, I can demonstrate reason, and demonstrate all that follows from my reason, or I would not enter it into sovereign, reciprocal, discourse, negotiation, and debate. So if you rely upon that which you cannot demonstrate, then you cannot testify to it, and therefore you are incapable of truth, and therefore incapable of contract, and for these reasons we must, given no other choice, fight, defeat, kill or enslave, and take from you what we cannot obtain by cooperation.”
Category: Natural Law and Reciprocity
-
TRUTHFUL ARGUMENT WITH FICTIONALISTS “If we are engaging in negotiation or argum
TRUTHFUL ARGUMENT WITH FICTIONALISTS
“If we are engaging in negotiation or argument, we want to know if we can cooperate with you. We prefer to cooperate with you only because cooperation in the long term is more rewarding than predation in the short term. The strategy of my people is maneuver: speed in adaptation. As such we practice Heroism, Sovereignty(Reciprocity), Contract, and Testimonial Truth. And because Maneuver using Heroism, Sovereignty, Contract, and Testimonial truth are the most expensive method of cooperation, it is only in our interest to cooperate with you if you can at least participate in Contract and Testimonial Truth. Otherwise, because of our use of Maneuver, by the high costs of Sovereignty, Contract, and Testimonial Truth, it is preferable to defeat you, kill or enslave, and take from you that which we cannot obtain by cooperation under contract and testimonial truth, rather than pay the unnecessary cost of your violation of contract, and your use of deceit. And so in negotiation and argument, if you cannot practice full reciprocity of sovereignty, and constrain yourself to that which you can testify to, then you are incapable of contract for reciprocal sovereign cooperation. And as such we need not discourse, only fight. So no, when you call upon your gods, you cannot testify to them because you cannot demonstrate them, only lie about them. While, if I call upon reason, I can demonstrate reason, and demonstrate all that follows from my reason, or I would not enter it into sovereign, reciprocal, discourse, negotiation, and debate. So if you rely upon that which you cannot demonstrate, then you cannot testify to it, and therefore you are incapable of truth, and therefore incapable of contract, and for these reasons we must, given no other choice, fight, defeat, kill or enslave, and take from you what we cannot obtain by cooperation.”
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-05 08:43:00 UTC
-
Truthful Argument With Fictionalists
“If we are engaging in negotiation or argument, we want to know if we can cooperate with you. We prefer to cooperate with you only because cooperation in the long term is more rewarding than predation in the short term. The strategy of my people is maneuver: speed in adaptation. As such we practice Heroism, Sovereignty(Reciprocity), Contract, and Testimonial Truth. And because Maneuver using Heroism, Sovereignty, Contract, and Testimonial truth are the most expensive method of cooperation, it is only in our interest to cooperate with you if you can at least participate in Contract and Testimonial Truth. Otherwise, because of our use of Maneuver, by the high costs of Sovereignty, Contract, and Testimonial Truth, it is preferable to defeat you, kill or enslave, and take from you that which we cannot obtain by cooperation under contract and testimonial truth, rather than pay the unnecessary cost of your violation of contract, and your use of deceit. And so in negotiation and argument, if you cannot practice full reciprocity of sovereignty, and constrain yourself to that which you can testify to, then you are incapable of contract for reciprocal sovereign cooperation. And as such we need not discourse, only fight. So no, when you call upon your gods, you cannot testify to them because you cannot demonstrate them, only lie about them. While, if I call upon reason, I can demonstrate reason, and demonstrate all that follows from my reason, or I would not enter it into sovereign, reciprocal, discourse, negotiation, and debate. So if you rely upon that which you cannot demonstrate, then you cannot testify to it, and therefore you are incapable of truth, and therefore incapable of contract, and for these reasons we must, given no other choice, fight, defeat, kill or enslave, and take from you what we cannot obtain by cooperation.” -
We need to TAKE BACK OUR RIGHTS BY VIOLENCE if not returned to us by courts. The
We need to TAKE BACK OUR RIGHTS BY VIOLENCE if not returned to us by courts. There is only one law: Natural Law. The rest is Command. Rebel.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-04 16:30:02 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/871403682075750400
Reply addressees: @realDonaldTrump
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/871143765473406976
IN REPLY TO:
@realDonaldTrump
We need to be smart, vigilant and tough. We need the courts to give us back our rights. We need the Travel Ban as an extra level of safety!
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/871143765473406976
-
Natural Law on Gender
NATURAL LAW ON GENDER Whereas There exist but two genders. Male and Female. These genders are compatible. Both genders provide necessary reciprocity to one another in the production of family and offspring. Both genders develop traits for each gender, and each gender divides the labor of transcendence with different traits, but with greater or lesser intensity of either. Individuals are born with determining genitalia and genetics. Individuals are born with in utero successes and in utero failures. Individuals mature with developmental successes and developmental failures. Individuals develop psychological successes and failures, primarily due to insufficient training by socialization, shocks or trauma that disrupt the psychological training. Whereas Defects of birth that cannot be changed or that individuals desire to preserve, must be either tolerated or not. Defects of development must be tolerated or not. But defects of training of one’s psychology need not be tolerated. And the export of the costs of one’s defects in utero, development, or training may not be imposed by any means onto the body of the people for whom the transcendence of man by the transcendence of their family is of necessity, and the accommodation and tolerance of failures in that transcendence a cost they may choose to bear or not. As such homosexuality may not be punished, nor accommodated. And all other deviations of gender need not be tolerated if they are perceivable in the commons. And deviations that threaten the young or less able, need be cured or the individual terminated. Therefore The Natural Law recognizes only two genders male and female, defects of birth, defects of training, and defects of choice. And therefore no imposition shall be forced upon those with defects other than that of birth defect, fraud of weights and measures, or imposition of costs upon the commons. Therefore All public word, deed, and display shall conform to one’s gender such that none impose his defects upon others in the commons. And none shall impose upon private word, deed and display, unless it imposes costs upon those external to the voluntary exchange of word, deed, and display.CounselKnowledge of a thing’s existence is not the same as sense of its existence. It is only sense and cost of existence that the Law prohibits.
-
Natural Law on Gender
NATURAL LAW ON GENDER Whereas There exist but two genders. Male and Female. These genders are compatible. Both genders provide necessary reciprocity to one another in the production of family and offspring. Both genders develop traits for each gender, and each gender divides the labor of transcendence with different traits, but with greater or lesser intensity of either. Individuals are born with determining genitalia and genetics. Individuals are born with in utero successes and in utero failures. Individuals mature with developmental successes and developmental failures. Individuals develop psychological successes and failures, primarily due to insufficient training by socialization, shocks or trauma that disrupt the psychological training. Whereas Defects of birth that cannot be changed or that individuals desire to preserve, must be either tolerated or not. Defects of development must be tolerated or not. But defects of training of one’s psychology need not be tolerated. And the export of the costs of one’s defects in utero, development, or training may not be imposed by any means onto the body of the people for whom the transcendence of man by the transcendence of their family is of necessity, and the accommodation and tolerance of failures in that transcendence a cost they may choose to bear or not. As such homosexuality may not be punished, nor accommodated. And all other deviations of gender need not be tolerated if they are perceivable in the commons. And deviations that threaten the young or less able, need be cured or the individual terminated. Therefore The Natural Law recognizes only two genders male and female, defects of birth, defects of training, and defects of choice. And therefore no imposition shall be forced upon those with defects other than that of birth defect, fraud of weights and measures, or imposition of costs upon the commons. Therefore All public word, deed, and display shall conform to one’s gender such that none impose his defects upon others in the commons. And none shall impose upon private word, deed and display, unless it imposes costs upon those external to the voluntary exchange of word, deed, and display.CounselKnowledge of a thing’s existence is not the same as sense of its existence. It is only sense and cost of existence that the Law prohibits.
-
THE NATURAL LAW REGARDING TRADEMARKS, COPYRIGHTS, AND PATENTS Abstract, or so ca
THE NATURAL LAW REGARDING TRADEMARKS, COPYRIGHTS, AND PATENTS
Abstract, or so called, “Intellectual Property”.
There are three forms of ‘abstract property’ if we speak operationally:
1) Trademarks. A trademark serves as a weight and measure preventing fraud, as well as seizing and unearned opportunity, by fraudulent representation. The test of trademark is quite simple. If in three seconds a randomly selected group of jurors can confuse the two, it is a trademark violation. Otherwise not. This is simply empirical. Trademarks are necessary for the prevention of fraud, and violation of the requirement for productive fully informed warrantied exchange. (BTW: lots of research on this subject from different disciplines.)
2) Copyrights. A copyright serves as a means of preventing the unearned profits from the works of others, and the taxes earned from it to pay for enforcement. Copyright both violates natural law by providing subsidy rather than just preventing unearned gains (violation of reciprocity for productivity), and by externality violates natural law, through the creation of moral hazard, and the financing of literature that violates natural law. For this reason, the Copyright can and should be replaced by trademark, which will not prevent copying for personal use, but will prevent unreciprocated earnings. Ergo, the current Creative Commons license serves as a trademark that must be licensed in order to perform reciprocity. As a side benefit, when combined with the requirement for testimonial truth in the commons (market), this will defund the entertainment industry, the advertising industry, the publishing industry, the privatization of research performed via public funds.
3) Patents. Assuming a patent is applied for and issued as a means of producing goods that cannot be produced by market means otherwise, an exclusive license to recoup investments and produce multiples of returns is a useful means by which the population can encourage research and development using off-book financing. However, production in the normal course of business, and research and development are very different things. Therefore patents should only be granted in exchange for shares in the product producing returns for the population. And patents should be granted only for those goods that have some such public function. And a patent cannot be used to deny a product or service or information from the market, nor to control the prices of products and services and information on the market.
In other words, a trademark functions as a weight and measure. A copyright as a trademark. and a few patents as contracts with the common people for assisting in the research and development of those goods, services, and information, that cannot be produced because of great expense and low chances of success.
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 19:39:00 UTC
-
PROPOSED FINAL DEFINITION OF NATURAL LAW The One Law of Reciprocity. (Natural La
PROPOSED FINAL DEFINITION OF NATURAL LAW
The One Law of Reciprocity. (Natural Law)
Thou shalt not, by word, deed, absence of word or deed, impose or allow the the imposition of, costs upon the demonstrated interests of others (property-in-toto), either directly or indirectly, where those interests were obtained by settlement (conversion, or first use) or productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange without such imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others. Therefore thou shalt limit thy words and deeds, and the words and deeds of others, to the productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange of interests (property in toto), free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others either directly or indirectly.
NOTE:
Fully understanding this one law may also require:
1) the knowledge that when we come together in proximity, we decrease opportunity costs, and therefore create opportunities, and that opportunities must be homesteaded (settled/converted/first use), and put into production, in order to demonstrate an interest.
2) the definition of the three synonyms: demonstrated interest, demonstrated property, or property-in-toto, as that which people empirically retaliate for impositions against *and* have demonstrated an interest.
3) The use of the common law (of torts) as the means by which we incrementally and immediately suppress new innovations in parasitism that violate the Natural Law of Reciprocity.
4) The use of Testimonialism (warranty of due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism, and deceit) as an involuntary warranty on public speech in matters of the commons, just as we currently force involuntary warranty of due diligence on products, services, and our words regarding products and services.
If you understand the one law, and these criteria, nearly all questions of conflict, ethics, morality, politics, and group competition are decidable. (really).
This solves the libertarian fallacy of non-aggression by specifically stating the scope of property that we must refrain from imposing costs upon; the cause of that scope (retaliation), the empirical means of determining that scope(demonstrate action), and the means by which violations of that law are discovered, recorded, and evolve.
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 19:16:00 UTC
-
Why can’t we have a Pope of Natural Law?
Why can’t we have a Pope of Natural Law?
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 17:50:00 UTC
-
CAN YOU PLEASE DEFINE NATURAL LAW? In short, it’s ‘reciprocity’
https://propertarianism.com/2017/01/12/definitionnatural-law/CURT: CAN YOU PLEASE DEFINE NATURAL LAW?
In short, it’s ‘reciprocity’.
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 09:44:00 UTC