They are all just women. That is all that they can be. It is what most prefer to be. And truth is irrelevant to women, since that is a matter of contractual constraint and non compromise. They care only for non-conflict( consensus), possibility, consumption.
So the journey for men, is to limit women to reciprocity and possibility, not preference, good, or truth.
“I can do that for you”, and “I cannot do that for you”, and “I can only do that for you (when conditions are met)”, are in the vocabulary of women’s understanding.
The fact that we added women to the men’s voting pool, but did not provide for them a separate house, as we had the nobility(lords), the property owners people(commons), and the labor (church) is the problem of modernity – not their participation in the market for commons or the market for labor.
Markets force cooperation on means despite incompatibility of ends, and construct compromises. Whereas democracy and false equality create markets for propaganda, deception, and bribery of voters through forcible takings and distributions..
When we have opposing reproductive and evolutionary interests, and we have different means of coercion of one another (violence vs seduction), different preferences (numbers versus excellences, equality and consensus vs hierarchy and truth), then the only solution to cooperation that preserves an honest high trust society is a market constructed for the purpose of trade between peoples of different interests.
The market for consumption (Self), the market for fixed capital (home), the market for reproduction (family), the market for production(goods, services, and information), the market for the production of commons(‘govt’), and the market for polities, all regulated by the one law of reciprocity – provides a ‘perfect’ hierarchy of ‘perfect’ institutions that assist us in achieving our differing goals, with differing abilities, by the service of one another’s means, despite our differing ends.
We had the perfect government, built by the aristocracy, and the failure of the aristocracy to expand the houses to replace the church (family and labor), and to expand the houses to include women, broke the meritocratic hierarchy that for millennia had maximized liberty and prosperity by demonstrated merit, by assisting in incremental, demonstrated loyalty and ability by the product of one’s efforts, and the demonstrated consistency of the intergenerational family as an insurer of individual performance.
The one law of reciprocity (tort).
An independent ‘cult’ of the law: the judiciary.
An hereditary monarch as a judge of last resort.
A cabinet of professionals in service of the monarch.
A market for the production of commons (non-consumables) consisting of houses for each of the classes: military, judicial, regional (governors), commerce (property), mothers (women), and dependents(underclasses).
That market produces contracts, not legislation or law.
All contracts ascend unless vetoed by the military, judiciary or King as judge of last resort.
All funds raised are produced by contract between the houses.
All employees the monarchy serve at the pleasure of the king – without exception.
The only ‘Tax’ (non-discretionary cost) for all is 3% of GDP for the military and militia, 1% for the monarchy(use with total discretion), and .01% for the judiciary, raised by the houses.
Category: Politics, Power, and Governance
-
PERFECT GOVERNMENT They are all just women. That is all that they can be. It is
PERFECT GOVERNMENT
They are all just women. That is all that they can be. It is what most prefer to be. And truth is irrelevant to women, since that is a matter of contractual constraint and non compromise. They care only for non-conflict( consensus), possibility, consumption.
So the journey for men, is to limit women to reciprocity and possibility, not preference, good, or truth.
“I can do that for you”, and “I cannot do that for you”, and “I can only do that for you (when conditions are met)”, are in the vocabulary of women’s understanding.
The fact that we added women to the men’s voting pool, but did not provide for them a separate house, as we had the nobility(lords), the property owners people(commons), and the labor (church) is the problem of modernity – not their participation in the market for commons or the market for labor.
Markets force cooperation on means despite incompatibility of ends, and construct compromises. Whereas democracy and false equality create markets for propaganda, deception, and bribery of voters through forcible takings and distributions..
When we have opposing reproductive and evolutionary interests, and we have different means of coercion of one another (violence vs seduction), different preferences (numbers versus excellences, equality and consensus vs hierarchy and truth), then the only solution to cooperation that preserves an honest high trust society is a market constructed for the purpose of trade between peoples of different interests.
The market for consumption (Self), the market for fixed capital (home), the market for reproduction (family), the market for production(goods, services, and information), the market for the production of commons(‘govt’), and the market for polities, all regulated by the one law of reciprocity – provides a ‘perfect’ hierarchy of ‘perfect’ institutions that assist us in achieving our differing goals, with differing abilities, by the service of one another’s means, despite our differing ends.
We had the perfect government, built by the aristocracy, and the failure of the aristocracy to expand the houses to replace the church (family and labor), and to expand the houses to include women, broke the meritocratic hierarchy that for millennia had maximized liberty and prosperity by demonstrated merit, by assisting in incremental, demonstrated loyalty and ability by the product of one’s efforts, and the demonstrated consistency of the intergenerational family as an insurer of individual performance.
The one law of reciprocity (tort).
An independent ‘cult’ of the law: the judiciary.
An hereditary monarch as a judge of last resort.
A cabinet of professionals in service of the monarch.
A market for the production of commons (non-consumables) consisting of houses for each of the classes: military, judicial, regional (governors), commerce (property), mothers (women), and dependents(underclasses).
That market produces contracts, not legislation or law.
All contracts ascend unless vetoed by the military, judiciary or King as judge of last resort.
All funds raised are produced by contract between the houses.
All employees the monarchy serve at the pleasure of the king – without exception.
The only ‘Tax’ (non-discretionary cost) for all is 3% of GDP for the military and militia, 1% for the monarchy(use with total discretion), and .01% for the judiciary, raised by the houses.
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-30 11:56:00 UTC
-
Perfect Government
They are all just women. That is all that they can be. It is what most prefer to be. And truth is irrelevant to women, since that is a matter of contractual constraint and non compromise. They care only for non-conflict( consensus), possibility, consumption. So the journey for men, is to limit women to reciprocity and possibility, not preference, good, or truth. “I can do that for you”, and “I cannot do that for you”, and “I can only do that for you (when conditions are met)”, are in the vocabulary of women’s understanding. The fact that we added women to the men’s voting pool, but did not provide for them a separate house, as we had the nobility(lords), the property owners people(commons), and the labor (church) is the problem of modernity – not their participation in the market for commons or the market for labor. Markets force cooperation on means despite incompatibility of ends, and construct compromises. Whereas democracy and false equality create markets for propaganda, deception, and bribery of voters through forcible takings and distributions.. When we have opposing reproductive and evolutionary interests, and we have different means of coercion of one another (violence vs seduction), different preferences (numbers versus excellences, equality and consensus vs hierarchy and truth), then the only solution to cooperation that preserves an honest high trust society is a market constructed for the purpose of trade between peoples of different interests. The market for consumption (Self), the market for fixed capital (home), the market for reproduction (family), the market for production(goods, services, and information), the market for the production of commons(‘govt’), and the market for polities, all regulated by the one law of reciprocity – provides a ‘perfect’ hierarchy of ‘perfect’ institutions that assist us in achieving our differing goals, with differing abilities, by the service of one another’s means, despite our differing ends. We had the perfect government, built by the aristocracy, and the failure of the aristocracy to expand the houses to replace the church (family and labor), and to expand the houses to include women, broke the meritocratic hierarchy that for millennia had maximized liberty and prosperity by demonstrated merit, by assisting in incremental, demonstrated loyalty and ability by the product of one’s efforts, and the demonstrated consistency of the intergenerational family as an insurer of individual performance. The one law of reciprocity (tort). An independent ‘cult’ of the law: the judiciary. An hereditary monarch as a judge of last resort. A cabinet of professionals in service of the monarch. A market for the production of commons (non-consumables) consisting of houses for each of the classes: military, judicial, regional (governors), commerce (property), mothers (women), and dependents(underclasses). That market produces contracts, not legislation or law. All contracts ascend unless vetoed by the military, judiciary or King as judge of last resort. All funds raised are produced by contract between the houses. All employees the monarchy serve at the pleasure of the king – without exception. The only ‘Tax’ (non-discretionary cost) for all is 3% of GDP for the military and militia, 1% for the monarchy(use with total discretion), and .01% for the judiciary, raised by the houses. -
My answer to How would an anarcho-capitalist system prevent a monopoly of power?
My answer to How would an anarcho-capitalist system prevent a monopoly of power? Is it a concern in the first place? https://www.quora.com/How-would-an-anarcho-capitalist-system-prevent-a-monopoly-of-power-Is-it-a-concern-in-the-first-place/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=68a493a0
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-29 20:34:29 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/935970242249089024
-
But when to Revolution men bend their will, How soon they find fit, instruments
But when to Revolution men bend their will, How soon they find fit, instruments of ill. Revolution Comes! #Trump #NewRight #Conservative
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-29 16:19:15 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/935906008043606017
-
Ancapism Is Impossible
Anarcho capitalist societies are impossible because it is impossible to create any competitive order without a territorial monopoly, and impossible to create a territorial monopoly without competitive defense, and impossible to create a competitive defense without competitive commons, because it is impossible to create concentrations of wealth without competitive commons. Moreover, all competitive commons in history have included public-private partnerships. There have been no AC societies except the two extremes of jewish ghettos, migratory pastoralists, and gypsy bands. Only unlanded peoples seek a privatization of (parasitism) rather than continuous investment in commons. The west was superior at commons creation because it was superior at high trust production, and it was superior at high trust production, because it held territories that unlike the flood river valleys did not concentrate production that could be centrally administered and taxed, and therefore relied upon a militia, and militia participation for defense. No other civilization could and no other civilization did so. There is no possible liberty except by permission of the sovereign. Only a militia is ever even possibly sovereign. So a person with property, begs for liberty with his property, by permission – the way a slave begs for freedom to sell his labor by permission. The only people who do not beg are those that need not: the sovereign. And the only sovereignty that is possible is the distributed dictatorship of sovereign men for whom no option exists except perfect reciprocity and markets in everything. Anarcho capitalism relies on the ‘ghetto ethics’ of Rothbardian low trust pastoralism: Intersubjectively verifiable property. Whereas western sovereignty relies on high trust, total prohibition, on the imposition of born costs regardless of their form. Thus endeth the lesson. AC will never be. It is the ethics of shepherds, travelling salesmen, gypsies, and thieves. The only sovereignty, is the militia, of all men of property, who provide one another with reciprocal insurance of sovereignty under the natural law of reciprocity. -
ANCAPISM IS IMPOSSIBLE Anarcho capitalist societies are impossible because it is
ANCAPISM IS IMPOSSIBLE
Anarcho capitalist societies are impossible because it is impossible to create any competitive order without a territorial monopoly, and impossible to create a territorial monopoly without competitive defense, and impossible to create a competitive defense without competitive commons, because it is impossible to create concentrations of wealth without competitive commons. Moreover, all competitive commons in history have included public-private partnerships.
There have been no AC societies except the two extremes of jewish ghettos, migratory pastoralists, and gypsy bands. Only unlanded peoples seek a privatization of (parasitism) rather than continuous investment in commons.
The west was superior at commons creation because it was superior at high trust production, and it was superior at high trust production, because it held territories that unlike the flood river valleys did not concentrate production that could be centrally administered and taxed, and therefore relied upon a militia, and militia participation for defense. No other civilization could and no other civilization did so.
There is no possible liberty except by permission of the sovereign. Only a militia is ever even possibly sovereign. So a person with property, begs for liberty with his property, by permission – the way a slave begs for freedom to sell his labor by permission.
The only people who do not beg are those that need not: the sovereign. And the only sovereignty that is possible is the distributed dictatorship of sovereign men for whom no option exists except perfect reciprocity and markets in everything.
Anarcho capitalism relies on the ‘ghetto ethics’ of Rothbardian low trust pastoralism: Intersubjectively verifiable property. Whereas western sovereignty relies on high trust, total prohibition, on the imposition of born costs regardless of their form.
Thus endeth the lesson.
AC will never be. It is the ethics of shepherds, travelling salesmen, gypsies, and thieves.
The only sovereignty, is the militia, of all men of property, who provide one another with reciprocal insurance of sovereignty under the natural law of reciprocity.
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-29 15:34:00 UTC
-
Ancapism Is Impossible
Anarcho capitalist societies are impossible because it is impossible to create any competitive order without a territorial monopoly, and impossible to create a territorial monopoly without competitive defense, and impossible to create a competitive defense without competitive commons, because it is impossible to create concentrations of wealth without competitive commons. Moreover, all competitive commons in history have included public-private partnerships. There have been no AC societies except the two extremes of jewish ghettos, migratory pastoralists, and gypsy bands. Only unlanded peoples seek a privatization of (parasitism) rather than continuous investment in commons. The west was superior at commons creation because it was superior at high trust production, and it was superior at high trust production, because it held territories that unlike the flood river valleys did not concentrate production that could be centrally administered and taxed, and therefore relied upon a militia, and militia participation for defense. No other civilization could and no other civilization did so. There is no possible liberty except by permission of the sovereign. Only a militia is ever even possibly sovereign. So a person with property, begs for liberty with his property, by permission – the way a slave begs for freedom to sell his labor by permission. The only people who do not beg are those that need not: the sovereign. And the only sovereignty that is possible is the distributed dictatorship of sovereign men for whom no option exists except perfect reciprocity and markets in everything. Anarcho capitalism relies on the ‘ghetto ethics’ of Rothbardian low trust pastoralism: Intersubjectively verifiable property. Whereas western sovereignty relies on high trust, total prohibition, on the imposition of born costs regardless of their form. Thus endeth the lesson. AC will never be. It is the ethics of shepherds, travelling salesmen, gypsies, and thieves. The only sovereignty, is the militia, of all men of property, who provide one another with reciprocal insurance of sovereignty under the natural law of reciprocity. -
No More Monopoly Government And Economics
Aesthetic and generational returns for the aristocracy. Investment returns for the bourgeoise. Discounts for the laymen. -
NO MORE MONOPOLY GOVERNMENT AND ECONOMICS Aesthetic and generational returns for
NO MORE MONOPOLY GOVERNMENT AND ECONOMICS
Aesthetic and generational returns for the aristocracy. Investment returns for the bourgeoise. Discounts for the laymen.
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-29 13:15:00 UTC