Curt Doolittle

Category: Natural Law and Reciprocity

  • YOU GET AN A+. (from elsewhere) Propertarian = the reduction of social science,

    YOU GET AN A+.

    (from elsewhere)

    Propertarian = the reduction of social science, group evolutionary strategy, morality, politics, law, ethics, and cognition, to statements of the voluntary or involuntary transfer of property between consenting individuals.

    Next you will grasp that the scope of property Rothbard claims (physical intersubjective) lacking rule of law, and Hoppe’s use of rule of law, limited to the intersubjectively verifiable), cannot provide the incentives necessary to produce a sustainable voluntary polity capable of surviving competition against other polities.

    Once you have made that distinction you can come join Propertarianism:

    1) Acquisitionism (psychology)

    2) Testimonialism (epistemology)

    3) Propertarianism (ethics and morality)

    4) Evolutionary Strategy (Sociology)

    5) Market Government (Politics) (“Market Fascism for the insiders – meaning only markets”)

    6) Group Evolutionary Strategy (avoidance, competition, conflict, war)

    7) Aesthetics of Transcendence (obtaining Sovereignty through Agency)

    8) Natural Law: the logic, grammar, and rhetoric of all of the above.

    The normal path of maturity appears to be Libertarian > Anarcho Capitalist > Dark Enlightenment > Propertarianism.

    This spectrum describes hope (Libertarianisn), separatism (anarcho capitalism), hopelessness (dark enlightenment), taking responsibility (Sovereignty: Propertarianism : Natural Law of Sovereign Men.)

    Its a lot harder than memorizing a few simple phrases common in libertarianism, or mastering a few arguments as in Anarcho Capitalism. But if it was easy it wouldn’t have taken us so long to write a formal grammar of Natural Law.

    We’re waiting for you. Or at least, those who can make the journey.

    -Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-16 15:07:00 UTC

  • THE NATURAL LAW OF SOVEREIGNS, THE COMMONS AND MERE LIBERTY ***’One who possesse

    THE NATURAL LAW OF SOVEREIGNS, THE COMMONS AND MERE LIBERTY

    ***’One who possesses sovereignty in fact by perfect reciprocity CANNOT fail to police the commons without violating the contract for perfect reciprocity. This is what separates the SOVEREIGN IN FACT from those who experience LIBERTY BY PERMISSION of sovereigns.***

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-16 14:00:00 UTC

  • NICELY STATED —“So, I am thinking of rights not as a naturally-occurring pheno

    NICELY STATED

    —“So, I am thinking of rights not as a naturally-occurring phenomenon that the Rothbardians assert it to be, but the end result of a market exchange between those demanding privileges and those able to supply the defense of those privileges. That is why rights are not absolute (you cannot yell “fire” in a movie theater, cannot use speech to engage in a criminal conspiracy, cannot own certain classes of weapons, etc.) and it is the meeting of the demand for privileges by the citizenry and the supply of defense by the sovereign (with both sides negotiating for their interests and settling on a compromise) that is the actual right. The right is the outcome of this market exchange.”— A Friend

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-11 23:45:00 UTC

  • QUESTION OF THE DAY: SELF DEFENSE What are the Definition, Scope, and Limits of

    QUESTION OF THE DAY: SELF DEFENSE

    What are the Definition, Scope, and Limits of Self Defense Under the Natural Law of Sovereign Men: Perfect Reciprocity?

    ( I’ve tried a few experiments and the quality of the responses has been far and away above my expectations so for those who feel capable of constructing statements of natural law, this is the next example I’d like to try.)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-10 10:12:00 UTC

  • You wanna see what the 21st century Judge Dredd looks like? He looks like a Prop

    You wanna see what the 21st century Judge Dredd looks like? He looks like a Propertarian. The new inquisition.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-09 11:28:00 UTC

  • WE’RE THE INQUISITION They don’t understand. We’re the inquisition. Our purpose,

    WE’RE THE INQUISITION

    They don’t understand. We’re the inquisition. Our purpose, our function, is to issue verdicts. Once issued, moral men have moral license to commit acts of force, violence, and heady murder.

    Many branches of Literary philosophy bring you inspiration. They suggest candidate goods. We practice law. Natural Law. We decide only what is bad. We do not choose what is good. Anything not bad is a candidate good.

    And by our judgements we can license restitution, retaliation, punishment, and death.

    Truth is enough. With sovereignty, truth, and violence we built the west, and with sovereignty, truth and violence we can restore the west.

    The most frightening consequence of natural law, is if an individual takes action for which he is not capable of paying restitution from his assets, then his life, property, (and that of his kin) is the only form of restitution possible.

    The identifying characteristic of the 20th century is the use of political action, the consequences for which individuals cannot pay restitution – except with their lives.

    We are going to take a lot of life and property with our judgements.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-09 11:27:00 UTC

  • NATURAL LAW, SOVEREIGNTY, AND THE RESTORATION NATURAL LAW Testimonialism: Episte

    NATURAL LAW, SOVEREIGNTY, AND THE RESTORATION

    NATURAL LAW

    Testimonialism: Epistemology and Truth (Testimony), and Propertarianism: Ethics and Natural Law (Cooperation), and Natural Common Law (a grammar), provide the means of producing contracts (Constitutions), that are ‘scientific’ – which in testimonialism means ‘truthful’, and not open to creative interpretation by the judiciary. This ‘precision’ was necessary in order to increase the demand for warranty of due diligence against fraud from covering products and services, to covering information (speech).

    SOVEREIGNTY (WESTERN CIVILIZATION)

    Sovereignty (‘liberty in fact not by permission’), Market Civilization (association, cooperation, production, reproduction, production of commons, production of polities, production of group evolutionary strategy), and Western Group Evolutionary Strategy (Transcendence / Domestication), Provide an analytic explanation of the reasons for western rapid evolution in the bronze, iron, and steel ages.

    THE RESTORATION

    1 – How we were met by supernatural mysticism, monotheistic religion, and pseudoscientific/pseudorational ‘religion’ by the people to the east, in each era. And how the current pseudoscientific came about.

    2- How we can use Natural Law to restore western civilization, by reforming or rewriting our constitution and that of others.

    3 – Including various institutional methods of producing commons truthfully.

    4 – Including the necessity, under Sovereignty, of markets for the production of commons.

    5 – Including the necessity of various policies under the group strategy of Transcendence

    So, given that we can use propertarianism and testimonialism to produce ANY government truthfully, what I THINK you are asking, is that if we chose to pursue Sovereignty and Transcendence to restore western civilization under strictly constructed natural law, what would be the optimum(?) end state?

    We can choose from any number of options, but the lowest risk is to selectively revoke, restore and amend the constitution and with it the judiciary, restore the monarchy and militia, reduce any ‘federal’ government to a corporeal insurer of last resort, with courts limited to dispute resolution on narrow forms of commercial non normative property; with a market for commons consisting of multiple “houses” representing various classes, (Territorial, Commercial, Familial, and Dependent) which vote by apportionment (put money to what they want), and any contract not opposed by the other houses on legal basis survives. In other words “a market” using some of the proceeds of “the markets” for the production of commons, that improve the returns in the market.

    My ‘belief’ (forecast) is that the proceeds of suppressing falsehood (by testimonialism) will be greater than the proceeds of suppressing mysticism (by empiricism).

    The converse question is that if you cannot provide warranty of due diligence of your words, then why should others tolerate them any more than whether they tolerate a lack of due diligence of your actions (services), or productions (goods)?f

    Every liar no matter how well intentioned finds an excuse to defend his lies. But why is it that we must tolerate lies?

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-02 09:42:00 UTC

  • “If the silver rule (definition of “the bad” via defining “not good”), creates a

    —“If the silver rule (definition of “the bad” via defining “not good”), creates a clearing for people to seek and define any possible good (a market for the good) then we could classify the desirable behavior in this market as virtues. Now signaling has a value. We cant reduce virtue to signaling only. But rather to decoupling signaling as a basis for moral judgements (decidability), and coupling it to the idea of manufacturing “the good”… thinking in terms of Adam Smith’s argument for “being lovely”. Being held in high esteem (loveliness) by those we respect, which we’d call reputation, incentivizes us to produce “the good”. This is why I don’t like signaling to take a back seat to consequentialism or to discount it as a juvenile sentiment – Because it’s important: it serves us in decidability.”— Bill Joslin

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-01 11:05:00 UTC

  • That’s just a lie, or profound stupidity. Reciprocity survives all tests. Yet ma

    That’s just a lie, or profound stupidity. Reciprocity survives all tests. Yet makes no positive claims, only prohibitive. Period.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-01 10:36:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/836887824016293891

    Reply addressees: @LueYee

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/836829536398499841

    IN REPLY TO:

    @lueyee

    A construct of #positivelaw is not at all an attempt at #naturallaw. https://t.co/Ks9ETBaOmD

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/836829536398499841

  • Testimonial Truth, Sovereignty, and Natural Law, Are Sacred To Western Man

    Testimonial Truth, Sovereignty, and Natural Law, Are Sacred To Western Man.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-01 07:39:00 UTC