Category: Natural Law and Reciprocity

  • EVOLUTION’S TEST OF RECIPROCITY 1) Dominance hierarchy: Fitness giving access to

    EVOLUTION’S TEST OF RECIPROCITY

    1) Dominance hierarchy: Fitness giving access to opportunities, allies, and mates.

    2) Possible Means of Coercion: Force (threat, punishment, murder), Remuneration (Trade, deprivation from trade), Gossip (rallying, shaming, lionizing)

    3) Demonstrated Merit using possible Means of Coercion: Violence, Productivity, Bribery, Voluntary Exchange, Fraud, Theft, Free-Riding.

    4) Only Coercive means not in violation of Reciprocity: Productive, Fully informed, voluntary Exchange, free of imposition of costs upon that which has previously been obtained by exchange.

    5) Single empirical cause of moral reactions: violations of or advancement of, reciprocity.

    6) Single evolutionary instinct necessary for the persistence of cooperation reciprocity.

    7) Only possible test of Morality: Reciprocity.

    8) Function of evolution: suppress the reproduction of those that cannot meet the tests of reciprocity.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-26 14:14:00 UTC

  • DEFINITION: SACRED The exceptionless prohibition on psychological, and verbal, a

    DEFINITION: SACRED

    The exceptionless prohibition on psychological, and verbal, as well as behavioral, imposition of costs upon a commons.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-25 12:12:00 UTC

  • What Do You Know About National Human Rights Commission?

    It is a meddlesome Marxist Institution advocating parasitism by the underclasses against the productive middle classes.

    The only possible human rights are property rights to your life, your body, your thoughts, your actions, that which you have obtained in trade.

    There exist no other possible rights, since the only rights universally possible are those that we are universally capable of delivering to one another. If we cannot universally deliver it cannot be a human right. Ergo, the only rights possible are non-interference and non imposition against the life, body, thoughts, actions, and possessions and interests obtained in trade.

    So our ‘rights’ mirror our obligations. We cannot claim a right without declaring it our obligation, and we cannot claim a right or obligation that we cannot act upon. Therefore the only rights and obligations that are possible are to NOT DO SOMETHING.

    The primary right and obligation that we have not imposed is the right to bear children only that we can afford, and the obligation to bear children only that we can afford, and to NOT bear children we cannot afford.

    This is the one remaining human right that we must struggle produce. Because at present thi sis the cause of the violation of every other human right: creating a moral hazard by violating the rights of others, by producing offspring you cannot provide for, thereby requiring subsidy from those others who can.

    The human obligation not to bear offspring we cannot afford is the cause of poverty.

    But women will never tolerate this law, and this is the purpose of the Human RIghts Commission: to prevent the imposition of the only missing human right and obligation.

    Do you understand?

    That woman and that man, who create children that they cannot provide for are the people who must be punished if we are to obtain human rights for all.

    https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-know-about-National-Human-Rights-Commission

  • What Do You Know About National Human Rights Commission?

    It is a meddlesome Marxist Institution advocating parasitism by the underclasses against the productive middle classes.

    The only possible human rights are property rights to your life, your body, your thoughts, your actions, that which you have obtained in trade.

    There exist no other possible rights, since the only rights universally possible are those that we are universally capable of delivering to one another. If we cannot universally deliver it cannot be a human right. Ergo, the only rights possible are non-interference and non imposition against the life, body, thoughts, actions, and possessions and interests obtained in trade.

    So our ‘rights’ mirror our obligations. We cannot claim a right without declaring it our obligation, and we cannot claim a right or obligation that we cannot act upon. Therefore the only rights and obligations that are possible are to NOT DO SOMETHING.

    The primary right and obligation that we have not imposed is the right to bear children only that we can afford, and the obligation to bear children only that we can afford, and to NOT bear children we cannot afford.

    This is the one remaining human right that we must struggle produce. Because at present thi sis the cause of the violation of every other human right: creating a moral hazard by violating the rights of others, by producing offspring you cannot provide for, thereby requiring subsidy from those others who can.

    The human obligation not to bear offspring we cannot afford is the cause of poverty.

    But women will never tolerate this law, and this is the purpose of the Human RIghts Commission: to prevent the imposition of the only missing human right and obligation.

    Do you understand?

    That woman and that man, who create children that they cannot provide for are the people who must be punished if we are to obtain human rights for all.

    https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-know-about-National-Human-Rights-Commission

  • The only reason to engage in consent is that it is more rewarding to engage in s

    The only reason to engage in consent is that it is more rewarding to engage in such consent than it is to engage in predation or parasitism.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-24 17:27:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867431876314755083

    Reply addressees: @EasternMarxist

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867430416298455041


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867430416298455041

  • The only way any ‘social’ or ‘common’ property CAN exist is by consent of those

    The only way any ‘social’ or ‘common’ property CAN exist is by consent of those capable of defending it from competitors.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-24 17:26:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867431596529524736

    Reply addressees: @EasternMarxist

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867430416298455041


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867430416298455041

  • If you have no clan, family, property, or knowledge, the precondition of your ex

    If you have no clan, family, property, or knowledge, the precondition of your existence is that no one desires to kill you … yet.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-24 17:14:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867428541356535808

    Reply addressees: @EasternMarxist

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867427904766005249


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867427904766005249

  • Definition of ‘Commons’

    Definition of ‘Commons’: https://propertarianism.com/2017/03/23/definition-commons-with-links-to-the-core/


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-24 16:35:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867418911796592640

    Reply addressees: @EasternMarxist

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867392838472019970


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867392838472019970

  • ARISTOCRACY… So, mostly for news, I’m not kidding when I say start from “Why I

    ARISTOCRACY…

    So, mostly for news, I’m not kidding when I say start from “Why I and my kin, clan, and tribe prefer to cooperate with you rather than war, kill, rape, enslave, possess, and occupy that which is currently yours?”

    I start from the position that my only concern is the competitive superiority of myself, my kin, my tribe. And that I can always choose predation, cooperation, or boycott (avoidance).

    All else is merely utilitarian in the pursuit of those ends.

    The difference is that I want to increase our numbers, so that the cost of our superiority is minimized, and the risk of its loss minimized. And the way that I can do that is to create peers with similar interests: sovereignty.

    Curt Doolittle


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-24 15:26:00 UTC

  • This definition of surplus claims kinship that does not exist. There is no ‘comm

    This definition of surplus claims kinship that does not exist. There is no ‘common good’, outside of my family and kin. Only utility.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-24 14:33:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867388162884108289

    Reply addressees: @BernardoGrando @EasternMarxist

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867386226030129153


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867386226030129153