Category: Natural Law and Reciprocity

  • VIOLENCE IS THE MOST TRUTHFUL FORM OF ARGUMENT AND THE NECESSARY RESPONSE TO DEC

    VIOLENCE IS THE MOST TRUTHFUL FORM OF ARGUMENT AND THE NECESSARY RESPONSE TO DECEIT

    It took a long time for the right to slowly abandon our Victorian taboos and to stoop to the vaudevillian farce and ridicule of the left.

    But we are better at it than they are. Just as we were better at the Victorian good manners that they rebelled against.

    If we had not abandoned our ancient ways of the duel, libel and slander we could have maintained argumentative taboos and punished the left for their avoidance if truth and use of gossip and ridicule and lies.

    But even so how would we have constrained their innovation upon lying by mysticism, by the invention of pseudoscience, relativistic law, cultural criticism, false promise of Utopianism?

    To do that we must create a test of truth.

    Now that we have a test if truth we can return to the full set of prohibitions that require truthfulness – or resort to the only logical response to gossip, critique, pseudo rationalism, relativistic legalism, pseudoscience, and deceit: Violence.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-30 07:00:00 UTC

  • Let me say that again. ***Part of being a man of good character is killing those

    Let me say that again.

    ***Part of being a man of good character is killing those that need killing for the sake of your family, tribe, and nation.***


    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-28 04:54:00 UTC

  • You assume, that like you, we are limited in our choices. But If we cannot agree

    You assume, that like you, we are limited in our choices. But If we cannot agree on rules ( terms of cooperation), then we need not agree to anything. If we don’t agree to anything, then there are no rules – meaning no limits to our choices other than our own will.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-25 14:30:00 UTC

  • FORCED INCLUSION ISN”T ‘FASHY’ – IT”S THEFT PREVENTION

    FORCED INCLUSION ISN”T ‘FASHY’ – IT”S THEFT PREVENTION


    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-25 03:54:00 UTC

  • I AM A CONTRACTUALIST: A CLASSICAL LIBERAL CONSERVATIVE LIBERTARIAN. If you want

    I AM A CONTRACTUALIST: A CLASSICAL LIBERAL CONSERVATIVE LIBERTARIAN.

    If you want to classify me, I am a contractualist. This means a classical liberal, libertarian. I am conservative because I’m an empiricist. And I am a Nationalist because I’m from a germanic, martial class by intuition, and because as an empiricist I understand the superior ability to govern contractually under homogeneity.

    So I know how my work on truthfulness sounds to contemporary people, just as I am aware how Darwin, Hume, Machiavelli, and Socrates were considered immoral people, and how western contractualism in its current degraded form, sounds immoral to less advanced peoples.

    If I **DIDN”T** make you feel a moral twinge, then I wouldn’t be advancing human understanding by reordering values. The difference is that I’m trying to improve human conditions for prosperity not dominate others, harm others, or even exclude others. The problem is that exclusion of differences in strategies is necessary for the development of the prosperity and peace that contractualism provides for us.

    Curt Doolittle


    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-25 03:52:00 UTC

  • MORAL LANGUAGE AS ATTEMPTED FRAUD? —“CURT. YOU DON”T KNOW WHAT HUMAN DIGNITY M

    MORAL LANGUAGE AS ATTEMPTED FRAUD?

    —“CURT. YOU DON”T KNOW WHAT HUMAN DIGNITY MEANS? SAY IT ISN”T SO!!!!”—

    I just understand that moral language, like religious language it evolved from, is usually just another polite way of conducting fraud, so I try to avoid the language of fraud, and use the language in which its most difficult to engage in fraud and deceit: scientific (truthful).

    Law evolved as those rules that prevent retaliation spirals by forcible standardization of crime and punishment (an extension of weights and measures) so that the king’s peace, and the people’s market prosperity (and therefore taxation) can expand.

    Natural rights evolved as those that preserve the church’s peace, and require, the governments to standardize both law and policy.

    Human rights evolved out of the wars of Europe, where the purpose was to force states to maintain their borders, and seek prosperity in the interests of their people, rather than at the expense of their neighbors.

    Now, just like the mystics told us comforting lies, and the church told us comforting lies, and philosophers search for comforting lies, the academy replaces the church, selling diplomas instead of indulgences by telling us comforting lies, and the politicians under the deceit of fiat credit and the merits of democracy tell us comforting lies.

    This is because the truth is often unpleasant.

    America is ‘great’ because we conquered and sell off a continent every year to offspring and immigrants the same way that china uses fiat credit to move people from its poor hinterlands in the hope of creating a more productive economy from which taxation can be extracted by the state and profits extracted by the oligarchies. Just as the Russians did. We used this excess profit from selling off land to first displace Europe from the hemisphere, then once the European civil war began between the Atlantics and the continental (germans, eastern Europeans, and Russians), we used our wealth to defeat them, and

    Today our economy like that of Canada is not wealthy because of our virtues, but because we have the greatest asset that we can sell off to the world: housing, adequate rule of law, and the Ponzi scheme that such multiple generations create by doing so under fiat credit (hopefully inflated away fast enough that the illusion persists.)

    This military that we have seems expensive until we understand that since Nixon it has been paid for by demand for dollars used to buy oil. And the rest of the world understands this which is why Russia Iran and to a lesser degree china desire to control the archaic and anachronistic Muslim world: because most of the worlds oil exists between the Saudi peninsula and the arctic northeast of Moscow.

    If they can create an alternative currency backed by oil they can displace America and the dollar as the country or countries or block that can issue world fiat credit for at least the next century, and at the same time make the American military which polices the world system of finance and trade, impossible to pay for, and end western expansion of democratic secular humanism, and the imposition of the aristocratic model on familial and state-corporate civilizations that require central management because of low trust familial norms and traditions and institutions.

    (Hence the Saudi attempt to exit the oil business and transition into a financial rather than oil power.)

    Now I don’t hope to do anything by producing this illustrative narrative other than to state that it is silly people, naive people, ignorant people, who take any position that morality is other than an ingroup method of argument for the pooling of opportunity costs for limited gains.

    It is just as foolish to apply the economics of the family, to that of the firm, to that of the nation, to that of the world, since they operate on opposing laws of nature – just as it is foolish to apply Newtonian physics and euclidian geometry to the universe that works by its antithesis in quantum mechanics and post-euclidian geometry.

    Moral statements if not false are equivalent to the promise that your small investment will produce aggregate returns for all investors, that are multiples of the upfront cost, despite the risk.

    To say otherwise is an attempt to conduct the foolish application of a local technology to a scale in which it no longer applies OR, an attempt to conduct a fraud in order to obtain unearned returns at other’s expense, or any other variation on such frauds.

    Advocates of Human rights (which are ony natural and negative rights plus half a dozen later positive ambitions made as nods to then-communist states in order to obtain their consent), use moral language to make a ‘pitch’ but the answer is that unless we and our governments refrain from parasitism, there can be no peace and prosperity among men, nor dividends from production that produce the desired multiples on our investments in the commons, nor the taxes to create those commons.

    The chief difference between civilizations at this point is merely trust – who talks religiously, who talks morally, who talks legislatively, and who talks scientifically. The more truth that one relies upon the less friction exists in a society and the more productivity it releases without resistance from parasitism.

    I hope that is enough uncomfortable truth to circumvent the mythology we manufacture for consumption by the common people lie folk music, television serials, blockbuster movies, liberal arts classes and intellectual propaganda.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-24 11:04:00 UTC

  • Like Nietzsche, Transcendence, but unlike Nietzsche’s personal philosophy Proper

    Like Nietzsche, Transcendence, but unlike Nietzsche’s personal philosophy Propertarianism is a political philosophy: Natural Law.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-24 04:53:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/768310259135881216

    Reply addressees: @cupedetat

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/768304153495867392


    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/768304153495867392

  • Why do you fail to propose an hypothesis then fail to warranty it? Why do you wi

    Why do you fail to propose an hypothesis then fail to warranty it? Why do you wish to construct commands rather than contract?


    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-23 11:52:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/768053383206961152

    Reply addressees: @Lord_Keynes2

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/768052387202289665


    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/768052387202289665

  • It is not your justification that creates cause for the imposition of costs upon

    It is not your justification that creates cause for the imposition of costs upon them, but their acceptance of your argument.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-23 11:48:07 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/768052193723289600

    Reply addressees: @Lord_Keynes2

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/767973853712687104


    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/767973853712687104

  • RT @MartianHoplite: Blog Post: #Borders are analogous to #propertylines. #social

    RT @MartianHoplite: Blog Post: #Borders are analogous to #propertylines. #socialcontract #propertarianism #reciprocity #rights https://t.co…


    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-21 20:14:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/767454972401377280