Category: Politics, Power, and Governance

  • How Can I Become A Libertarian?

    Liber-TINES are under ideological pressure.  And their movement is an abject failure.

    Liber-TARIANS (Classical Liberals) are at least if not more so fervent as they were in the past.

    You cannot ‘become’ a political bias. It’s very likely a genetic preference that reflects your reproductive strategy. What you can “become” is an advocate of of libertarian institutional solutions (which require voluntary exchange) to problems of political cooperation.

    Realistically, libertarianism is an anglo cultural phenomenon, and libertinism (rothbardianism) is a jewish cultural phenomenon.  Both of which rebel against the state.  The Anglo wing (classical liberal) seeks to preserve ‘rights as Englishmen’ under the common law, while preserving the civil society and the production of commons.  The jewish wing (rothbardian) seeks to escape obligations to participate in the civil society, and to prevent free riding upon the commons. 

    Both of these movements share only resistance to the state, since the anglo produces commons and the jewish is antithetical to the commons.

    Realistically, historically, and logically, both strategies are reflections of group evolutionary strategy that assist each group in surviving competitors.  The main difference is that christians are land holders and must construct commons, and jews are diasporic and must escape paying for commons in order to concentrate capital in the minority membership.

    Seen in this rather obvious light, these are not beliefs that are good for all, but strategies we justify because they are in our own interests.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine.

    https://www.quora.com/How-can-I-become-a-libertarian

  • has mastered Chinese Deception, Russian Brutality, and Jewish Propaganda, agains

    http://www.fpri.org/articles/2015/02/russias-use-disinformation-ukraine-conflictRussia has mastered Chinese Deception, Russian Brutality, and Jewish Propaganda, against Western High Trust Denialism. Postmodernism’s natural consequences.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-02-18 12:20:00 UTC

  • “There are two distinct senses of ‘privatization’: (1) The government has one of

    —“There are two distinct senses of ‘privatization’:

    (1) The government has one of its traditional functions performed by private businesses rather than civil servants.

    (2) The government abandons the idea of performing some traditional

    function altogether, and leaves it to the private sector to sort things

    out.”—

    I am not sure, but i think this qualifies as a third:

    (3) a heretofore commons such as land, radio-spectrum, or seas, is sold off to the private sector in order to protect it from consumption.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-02-15 08:28:00 UTC

  • WARFARE –“While particular generational delineations are somewhat arbitrary, th

    http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/modern-warfare-defense-planning-by-joseph-s–nye-2015-02#BFDusSY38tvwVO1w.99N-GENERATION WARFARE

    –“While particular generational delineations are somewhat arbitrary, they reflect an important trend: the blurring of the military front and the civilian rear. Accelerating this shift is the replacement of interstate war by armed conflict involving non-state actors such as insurgent groups, terrorist networks, militias, and criminal organizations.

    Read more at http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/modern-warfare-defense-planning-by-joseph-s–nye-2015-02#BFDusSY38tvwVO1w.99″–

    Are libertarians stupid enough to fail to grasp that the purpose of the state was to prevent this form of war?


    Source date (UTC): 2015-02-09 04:09:00 UTC

  • TRUTHFUL VS MEANINGFUL AND THE SOLUTION TO POLITICS OF THE WEST Plenty of meanin

    TRUTHFUL VS MEANINGFUL AND THE SOLUTION TO POLITICS OF THE WEST

    Plenty of meaningfully true things can be said “Untruthfully”. (Unscientifically.)

    But that’s not the point.

    It’s that very few untrue things can be said “Truthfully”. ( By Truthfully, I mean, scientifically, and including Propertarianism’s operationalism and morality).

    Philosophers, Scholars, intellectuals, pundits, journalists, reporters, and the common man, all emphasize the truth content of their utterances, but not the means by which they make those utterances.

    Science the language of truthful speech. Or rather, the language of truthful speech is science.

    And that is because truthfulness requires we warranty our communications against imagination, error, bias and deceit.

    Science evolves our knowledge because of truthfulness.

    And while truth content may be found in many places, the problem the listener has, is that it is costly and error prone to separate potential truth content, from imagination, error, bias and deception.

    And worse, individuals load, frame, and overload us to bypass our ability to defend against imagination, error, bias and deception.

    So we must give individuals a counter-incentive, against imagination, error, bias, and deception, to speak truthfully – by raising the cost of speaking untruthfully.

    By punishing untruthful speech. Not untrue speech but untruthful speech.

    So why can’t law, government, politics and public speech evolve because of truthfulness as well?

    It can.

    *The informational commons*

    Distribute shares in the informational commons. Privatize everything. Create universal standing.

    Propertarianism.

    The attack on the west has been conducted by sophisticated lying: repetition, pseudoscience, rationalism, and postmodernism, the same way it was conducted by sophisticated lying the first time: christianity.

    Why should we tolerate people who lie? Why do we forgo violence, and cooperate, if we are to be lied to? Isn’t it irrational to cooperate with someone unless they are both non-violent, non-theiving, non-conspiratorial and truthful?

    We don’t need to tolerate liars, or cooperate with liars. And it’s harmful – its a violation of the rational incentives to cooperate, and by cooperating abandoning violence.

    We can abandon cooperation for all those who speak untruthfully, and return to violence.

    If someone speaks untruthfully, they abandon all implicit and explicit agreements to cooperate. And having broken that contract, you, we – all of us – are no longer bound to refrain from violence.

    So, unbound from our agreement to refrain from violence, let us use our wealth of violence.

    Speak truthfully or die.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev


    Source date (UTC): 2015-02-09 01:09:00 UTC

  • YOU CAN’T CONVINCE PEOPLE, WE DON’T NEED TO, AND YOU’RE IMMORAL IF YOU TRY TO. (

    YOU CAN’T CONVINCE PEOPLE, WE DON’T NEED TO, AND YOU’RE IMMORAL IF YOU TRY TO. (CONVINCE THEM OF ANYTHING THEY SHOULD PREFER, RATHER THAN STATE THAT WHICH WE PREFER, AND THEY MUST GRANT US OR PAY THE CONSEQUENCES.)

    (from elsewhere)

    Yeah… I agree that you can’t persuade people. but that’s mostly because of the investment cost: the fact that the intuitionistic searching we do (that which we cannot observe) determines the subjective probability (possibility) of answers. And I suspect some of our learning isn’t open to re-weighting (what we call metaphysical value judgements), because all consequential development is dependent upon those pre-rational, pre-cognitive, unobservable, weights.

    I am never going to convince a person highly invested in ‘meaning’, highly invested in ‘rationalism’, or highly invested in ‘postmodern construction of social reality’ any more than I am going to convince their precursors: metaphorical and historical analogists, or mystics and magians, or even those few cultures who never developed any post-experiential thought such as mythic history (and yes they do exist.)

    Furthermore, I’m not going to convince someone like Wilber (Nor do I feel the need to ) to adopt the level of scientific argument I’m working on, because his inquiry is into the personal and experiential, just as mine is in the political and INEXPERIENTIAL. I want to prevent people from doing harm (law). People like him want to help people find happiness(religion).

    I cannot convince the feminine (submissive) bias in favor of buddhism, to switch to the male (dominance) bias in favor of stoicism, even though both are only concerned with mindfulness, and happiness achieved through mindfulness. The difference between them being buddhist discipline in escapism, and stoic action in reality. Any more than I can convince a hedonist to prefer either, or scientific ascetic like myself to do either.

    We cannot convince others.

    And the only reason we even think of it, is so that we can form alliances in order to obtain power by means of gossip and ostracism, or authority, law and violence, or to encourage consumption for the purpose of profiting from it.

    We don’t need ideals and monopolies. We are not only unequal, but very different – different casts, that perform different functions in the inter-temporal division of reproductive labor.

    There is only one ‘law’ that must be observed for all of us to have the possibility of happiness, and that law is the prohibition on parasitism, without which violence is our only rational recourse.

    And propertarianism is the only logical means of providing decideablity between individuals in a heterogeneous polity of heterogeneous interests, working in our self interest, through nothing but signals and information, in a voluntary order of cooperation toward one end: the persistence of our genes, and the persistence of man.

    A monopolist of preferences, whether socialist conservative, or libertarian, is a tyrant. It doesn’t matter which point in the spectrum you advocate. Monopoly in political systems requires the elimination of choice.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-02-07 06:25:00 UTC

  • FWIW: My positions Regarding Russia are : (a) That the Russian criticism of west

    FWIW: My positions Regarding Russia are :

    (a) That the Russian criticism of western socialism, neo-puritanism, progressivism, and libertarianism, just like Western conservative criticisms, and the prediction of the outcome by both Russians and western Conservatives – are correct.

    (b) The world is not a better place with a bigger Russian empire moving west, but it is a better place moving south and east.

    (c) Russians are demonstrably not capable of self government, nor of government of others because of their low trust society. They retain their Mongolian and Tatar ethics and morality.

    (d) Their low trust society, persistent in the modern world, is a function of lack of property rights, and lack of rule of law, which creates rule by corruption.

    (e) Without a martial aristocracy, a militia, and a middle class that depends upon commerce, or the equivalent class produced by a church that needs the common law to defend itself from the state, it is impossible to develop a judiciary that can impose rule of law.

    (f) The west however retains rule of law, and must retain rule of law, to maintain our competitive advantage against lower trust, more aggressive socieites.. And that we do not need to give up trust and rule of law in order to purge anglo neo-puritanism, anglo puritanism, jewish socialism, and jewish libertinism, from the west – and restore german aristocratic stoicism.

    That is a pretty straightforward argument.

    Curt Doolittle


    Source date (UTC): 2015-02-06 12:22:00 UTC

  • GOING OUR OWN WAY: THE WAY OF WESTERN MAN: TRUTH AND COMMONS. NATIONALISM, TRADI

    GOING OUR OWN WAY: THE WAY OF WESTERN MAN: TRUTH AND COMMONS.

    NATIONALISM, TRADITIONALISM are one thing. RULE OF LAW is another, and TRUTH TELLING is yet another. Putin wants to expand Nationalism and Traditionalism using propaganda because they produce power, but he does not want Rule of law, or Truth Telling, because they constraint, limit, and in most cases, eliminate power.

    Power is necessary in Russia, because like China – who must keep oppressing it’s conquered territories – Russia is a military empire. That’s because Russians have no ‘Cutlure’. There is nothing at all ethnically or culturally “Rus” in Russia. Russia is not of the clan Rus (Scandinavian) but of Muscovites, who spend long periods under despotic Mongolian rule, looked to the south to the byzantines and arabs for inspiration, and whose invading peoples brought with them Asiatic concepts of the evil in man – not greek concepts of man’s perfection and potential to sit among the gods. Russia (Muscovia) is a Mongolian and Tatar State steeped in Steppe culture that blends orthodox christianity and islamic Familialism, with Chinese deception.

    With some work Peter the Great tried to move the Russian empire into Europa, and without Germany’s aggression at England’s seduction, might have completed the transition. But the largely Jewish postwar uprising that we call the Russian revolution, returned Russia to despotism, with Asiatic Lenin and Stalin joining Asian Mao as the greatest murderers in human history.

    Thanks to the church, the Russian concept of interpersonal ethical action, is identical to the western. But the Russian concept of moral, cannot even IMAGINE the western man’s moral intuitions, nor his faith in one’s fellow man. It is unimaginable to a Russian that Western man acts primarily out of moral habit – moral tradition, and altruistic punishment[1] of those who do not observe it. Primarily because we have been both wealthy enough to afford to act morally, and because we were successfully able to use law and the church to enforce morality by punishment by law, by ostracization by the church, and by starvation by deprivation of access to land necessary for sustenance and survival.

    The Russian does not pay for commons. He does not pay to punish. He does not pay to reward. He does nothing that is not in his direct interest. And he expects all others to do the same. He cannot imagine a world where we take as little as possible to one another and contribute as much to the commons as we can – unknowingly.

    This is why authoritarian governments are necessary: commons are not voluntarily constructed, because all fear that any such contributions will be privatized by individuals, or corruption by the state. It is challenging enough to create a civic order such that we produce ethical man. But it is extremely expensive to create moral man – the man who neither externalizes costs into the commons, nor avoids paying for the commons, and instead, constantly contributes to the commons.

    Western man is moral man taken to the logical extreme. This is why motivating the western man to neoconservative war is easy – by invoking and appealing to our instinct of altruistic punishment . Motivating the Russian to war, requires creating the feeling that he is under threat. He does not fight for moral reasons. he fights to steal, or to prevent stealing, but he does not fight for the common good.

    This is the opposite of western man. Western man produces commons. It is our competitive advantage: truth telling, monuments, parks, civic architecture, civic organizations, arts, chivalry, the jury, and consensual government are commons unique to western man.

    Yes, we are full of own folly – we still feel, as true Burkeian evangelism, that we must save the world from ignorance, mysticism, poverty, familialism, hierarchy and tyranny. And we cannot grasp, that like our light skin, hair, and eyes, our moral intuitions are recessive, and preserved only through biological and cultural selection and inbreeding.

    Current emerging evidence suggests it is in no small part genetic. And that it emerged somewhere in the north of the North Sea – Baltic Region. That it emerged less than 20k years ago. And that it is a recessive trait, like intelligence, only sustained, and protected from regression against them mean by inbreeding.

    Russians cannot imagine that western man operates by altruistic punishment – of paying high personal cost to build what he sees as the voluntary civic order. Even if we are unaware that our genetics and culture are a unique, fragile and vulnerable outlier possible only in and around the north sea, and that not only can the reset of the world NOT make use of our model, but that it is antithetical to them to conceive of a world in which we all contribute to the commons, rather than seek to contribute as little as possible and take as much as we can.

    Russia(Muscovia)[2] and the West can both have Nationalism (advancing the interests of the extended family and tribe), and we can both have Traditionalism (the family as the central unit of society), but unless we wish to descend into Russo-Jewish brutality and Asiatic deception, we in the west must retain what separates us from the rest: truth telling, rule of law, the jury, and the civic society.

    We already have had enough of Russo-jewish influence for one century in this world, and the Russian-sponsored Frankfurt school’s damage to our society through pseudoscientific propaganda remains with us like an intellectual cancer, destroying our people and our culture.

    Love your people first. Defend the west from what the Russo-Jewish empire have done to us already with Marxism, Communism, socialist, postmodernism, progressivism. Russia is not a model.

    Instead, raise arms, steel yourself for heady violence, and get into the streets, and start a revolution – for you and yours. Defend the west from the tyranny of the east. WE have done it for almost 5000 years, and now is not the time to surrender.

    The best revolution is the one with the greatest volume of heady murder. A lot of killing is needed. A lot of killing must be done. And if we kill enough of them, then we will restore the west.

    Deeds not words.

    Cry havoc.

    Curt Doolittle

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    [1] “Altruistic punishment means that individuals punish, although the punishment is costly for them and yields no material gain. “

    [2] The only “Rus” are in Ukraine. Kiev was the founding city of the Rus (Scandinavian) peoples who created it as a trading post – largely for slave trading – with byzantium. The Mongols destroyed it and teh Muscovites tried to gain their narrative history by adopting the Rus history of Kiev as their own. This is Russia’s problem. They have no history to be proud of. No culture to be proud of. No civic mythos, and no common people to rally. They are a set of conquered peoples, despotic peoples ruled by despots in Moscow. The head of the Muscovite empire, won by brutality, held by brutality, and now expanding through postmodern lies and brutality.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-02-04 07:05:00 UTC

  • NATO uniform shop is open again in Kiev and doing a brisk business. Having fun t

    NATO uniform shop is open again in Kiev and doing a brisk business.

    Having fun trolling true believer Russians.

    (Feeling nationalist this morning)


    Source date (UTC): 2015-01-28 02:32:00 UTC

  • LIBERALISM

    http://ex-army.blogspot.com/2014/12/caucasoids-whites-and-jews.html?spref=fbRE-NATIONALIZE LIBERALISM


    Source date (UTC): 2015-01-26 21:36:00 UTC