IVP – Intersubjectively Verifiable Property
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-15 06:45:00 UTC
IVP – Intersubjectively Verifiable Property
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-15 06:45:00 UTC
I don’t like making people feel bad. I have a problem coercing people. I have a problem enslaving people. I have a problem hurting people. I have a problem torturing people. But I have no problem at all killing people – in fact, we do too little of it. There is no excuse for causing human pain and suffering – and anyone who engages in it is a threat to all of us. And that is the only reason to eschew the imposition of suffering – because of what it means about our own people. But in competition and conflict, killing people – and as many of them possible – is the necessary, right, just, and moral thing to do. Eliminating a problem and reveling in the suffering of others, are two different things. Killing people, and often a lot of them, is merely solving a problem. And better yet, if they know that is your position you will be much less likely to have to engage in it. So the commitment to killing people, and a lot of them, albeit without causing suffering, is the best means of ensuring one does not have to.
Punish the wicked.
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-13 08:38:00 UTC
Well, of COURSE statism is a crime. It’s a conspiracy to use organized violence to deprive you of anything someone chooses to deprive you of.
Conspiring to impose morality under the threat of violence – and more morality than people may desire, isn’t a crime – it’s eliminating all forms of crime.
So neither the nobility nor the judiciary constitute a criminal organization.
But If you work for the government proper you’re a criminal.
And we are morally justified in just rounding you up and killing you.
Quickly and without suffering perhaps.
But morally justified in killing you none the less.
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-13 08:38:00 UTC
–“Propertarianism is a formal logic of morality, ethics and politics – and the necessary basis for a non-arbitrary, value-independent, universal, body of law; upon which any and all political orders can be constructed, and with which all questions of morality, ethics and politics are commensurable and all such propositions decidable.”—
–“Propertarianism is a formal logic of morality, ethics and politics – and the necessary basis for a non-arbitrary, value-independent, universal, body of law; upon which any and all political orders can be constructed, and with which all questions of morality, ethics and politics are commensurable and all such propositions decidable.”—
http://www.propertarianism.com/?p=7206THE PROPERTARIAN CANON
(worth repeating)
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-11 06:36:00 UTC
THERE WE GO – CLOSE TO FINAL
–“Propertarianism is a formal logic of morality, ethics and politics – and the necessary basis for a non-arbitrary, value-independent, universal, body of law; upon which any and all political orders can be constructed, and with which all questions of morality, ethics and politics can be commensurably compared and all such propositions decided.”—
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-11 02:44:00 UTC
PROPERTARIANISM
Propertarianism refers to a logical methodology that evolved first from John Locke, and then through the American libertarian movement, that attempts to express all ethical, moral, and political questions as consisting of various forms of property that can be voluntarily exchanged. This technique reduces all moral propositions to testable statements: if something is ethical, moral, right and just, then what was exchanged?
USAGE
The term is used casually to suggest that all questions of liberty are reducible to a statements of property and its voluntary transfer; then more accurately, that property rights are deontologically constructed necessities of human existence under natural law; and lastly, formally, the term is used to refer to a complete system of philosophy named ‘Propertarianism’ developed by Curt Doolittle for the analysis and criticism of all political moral and ethical questions, whether libertarian or not. (Where complete means that it both answers metaphysical, epistemological, ethical, political and aesthetic questions and satisfies Owen Flanagan’s test of a sufficient moral psychology.)
Usage: Propertarianism, (capitalized) for the explicit philosophy; and lower case for ‘propertarian’, which is used to refer to all three senses: “Locke was the first to state a propertarian argument.”
In grammatically correct usage, one makes a propertarian argument; one ‘is’ a propertarian if he merely holds ideological bias in favor of its use; one relies upon propertarian reasoning if he can make use of it, or one advocates propertarianism in some manner or other; and the name of the formal philosophy is Propertarianism.
DIFFERENCES FROM LIBERTARIANISM
Apples and oranges: Propertarianism is a logical system for the rational comparison of human moral propositions across all possible moral codes. Libertarianism is an ideological system of thought for the purpose of either obtaining political power, denying others political power, or bringing about a particular social and ethical system.
So while libertarianism may make use of Propertarianism and propertarian reasoning, because perhaps it best suits libertarian preferences, and because it evolved out of the libertarian movement, Propertarianism is a system of logical analysis of human cooperation, and not an advocacy of any particular political bias. It is just as easy to construct conservative and progressive arguments using Propertarianism as it is libertarian. It’s just that propertarianism, as a method of argument, makes it extremely difficult to ‘cheat’ and deceive others (or mislead yourself) when conducting a political argument or negotiation.
To the contrary, Doolittle uses Propertarianism to specifically criticize those libertarians who attempt to escape paying for the behavioral costs that make a libertarian society under the rule of law possible. Instead Doolittle argues that conservatives are more right than other groups in their moral preferences, they merely haven’t developed a rational language for discussion of their ideas, advocacy of their ideas, or, most importantly, the reformation of their ideas when we obtain sufficient knowledge via science to reform those ideas.
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-09 08:44:00 UTC
Speak truthfully;
Do nothing unto others
… to impose a cost upon them;
Require the same of others; and,
Mete out justice if others do not.
This is not a difficult proposition.
It is a very simple general rule.
But it requires a man to know:
… how to speak truthfully,
… how not to impose costs unto others,
… and to have the ability to hold a jury, and;
… have the strength and will to mete out justice.
Nobility = Judge, Sheriff, Chevalier (caretaker) and Warrior.
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-08 03:48:00 UTC
–F_ck ‘To each his own’ and ‘Forgive and forget’. Instead, Never forgive, never forget, ‘Punish the wicked’, and punish them relentlessly—
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-08 02:24:00 UTC