(Today) “Who is Curt Doolittle and what is he doing to libertarianism?”
I’m the person who is gutting immoral libertinism, and make it intellectually embarrassing to mention the name rothbard, non aggression, and open borders, so that we can return liberty to the high trust society where it came from.
Source date (UTC): 2014-09-17 17:35:00 UTC
(worth repeating) –“Economics will not be a science until it is causal, and it cannot be causal if it is immoral. And universalism is immoral because it is suicidal.”–
Source date (UTC): 2014-09-16 06:30:00 UTC
The only question is what will be destroyed first?
Source date (UTC): 2014-09-13 13:50:00 UTC
The Cathedral places a burden on academics that intellectuals outside of the Cathedral do not bear = conformity.
Source date (UTC): 2014-09-08 09:33:00 UTC
WORTH REPEATING
—“The fallacy of the enlightenment is that of equality, since equality is a code word for monopoly, and monopoly is a code word for tyranny, and tyranny is a code word for parasitism.”—
Source date (UTC): 2014-08-29 04:31:00 UTC
“Chivalry: The Religion of Honor. Given priority over all other forms of culture.”
Source date (UTC): 2014-08-27 14:45:00 UTC
[P]eople who live in tents, ride animals, and shepherd other animals, talk about beliefs. People with fixed capital, who live in castles talk about laws. There is a reason for that.
When you ask people to value something that’s an informal institution we call belief.
When you tell people that property is a rule that you cannot violate, that’s a formal institution we call law.
The first is religion. The second is government.
Is your brand of liberty for goatherds living in tents (religion) that requires belief, or for engineers, builders and craftsmen, (government) that requires laws?
People who live in tents have very simple property. They need very simple laws.
Liberty in modernity isn’t for simpletons.
Try not to think like one.
[P]eople who live in tents, ride animals, and shepherd other animals, talk about beliefs. People with fixed capital, who live in castles talk about laws. There is a reason for that.
When you ask people to value something that’s an informal institution we call belief.
When you tell people that property is a rule that you cannot violate, that’s a formal institution we call law.
The first is religion. The second is government.
Is your brand of liberty for goatherds living in tents (religion) that requires belief, or for engineers, builders and craftsmen, (government) that requires laws?
People who live in tents have very simple property. They need very simple laws.
Liberty in modernity isn’t for simpletons.
Try not to think like one.
Marxists assume people will voluntarily work (if they are honest).
Libertines (Libertarians) assume people will voluntarily be honest (if they are honest).
Neocons assume people desire democracy (if they are honest).
And each of those assumptions is clearly false.
Why is it that we accept falsehoods?
Is it nothing more than our genes causing words to come out of our mouths?
Marxists assume people will voluntarily work (if they are honest).
Libertines (Libertarians) assume people will voluntarily be honest (if they are honest).
Neocons assume people desire democracy (if they are honest).
And each of those assumptions is clearly false.
Why is it that we accept falsehoods?
Is it nothing more than our genes causing words to come out of our mouths?