Hereditary monarchies eliminate the tragedy of the commons, and the problem of participatory government is tragedy of the commons. The competition between monarchy and participatory government prevents both privatization and tragedy of the commons.
Source date (UTC): 2020-03-09 01:56:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1236833080272437248
Hereditary monarchies eliminate the tragedy of the commons, and the problem of participatory government is tragedy of the commons. The competition between monarchy and participatory government prevents both privatization and tragedy of the commons.
Source date (UTC): 2020-03-09 01:55:39 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1236832993500684289
Reply addressees: @EricLiford
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1236832620559962113
It’s impossible to be sovereign as an individual
You don’t have a choice.
Sovereignty is the result of large numbers of men exchanging sovereignty with each other
And paying to costs of maintaining it.
You’re just trying to free ride (parasite) upon others.
That’s libertarianism.
Source date (UTC): 2020-03-08 15:31:01 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1236675798616231936
Reply addressees: @Gyeff
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1236521268335296512
Thirdly, restore liability for interference in a marriage; end child support and alimony; The great collapse we are about to enter will end the era of hyperconsumption and most of this that was made possible by the temporary credit expansion will disappear
Source date (UTC): 2020-03-06 15:30:42 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1235950945567223808
Reply addressees: @90_guillem
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1235950393907179520
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@90_guillem That’s not true. It’s that 30% of men are less desirable b/c they’ve been deprived of necessary male training, education, and fraternity in order to accomodate (the frailties of) women’s intolerance for dominance play. Yes, 1/3 of men are undesirable, but b/c dysgenia – fix both.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1235950393907179520
Houses, boats, cars, appliances, furniture, clothing etc – anything not entertainment is rent seeking. If we exchange zero interest for accelerated payments we dont disrupt the pricing system (rapidly) but we do rapidly make children affordable.
Source date (UTC): 2020-03-05 18:22:28 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1235631783007395847
Reply addressees: @ekiekipatang
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1235631185516257293
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@ekiekipatang Interest is necessary for temporal calculation of production, distribution and trade, but not for consumption. All end point interest, meaning consumer credit on capital purchases (durable goods) under fiat money(a fractional share in the economy) is rent seeking (prohibited).
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1235631185516257293
Interest is necessary for temporal calculation of production, distribution and trade, but not for consumption. All end point interest, meaning consumer credit on capital purchases (durable goods) under fiat money(a fractional share in the economy) is rent seeking (prohibited).
Source date (UTC): 2020-03-05 18:20:06 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1235631185516257293
Reply addressees: @ekiekipatang
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1235609188132405248
—“Regarding: “Inalienable human rights only exist if we provide them to ourselves.” How is this done? Watched John Mark’s recent video with Curt and the topic came up, but it’s not quite sinking in yet. My best guess is it means I am obligated to defend those rights with words, actions, arms, etc., for myself (and perhaps others), otherwise it is a crime.”—Jack Scarbrough
Correct. None may speak or act to remove them, nor may you by speaking or not, acting or not, surrender them.
—“Regarding: “Inalienable human rights only exist if we provide them to ourselves.” How is this done? Watched John Mark’s recent video with Curt and the topic came up, but it’s not quite sinking in yet. My best guess is it means I am obligated to defend those rights with words, actions, arms, etc., for myself (and perhaps others), otherwise it is a crime.”—Jack Scarbrough
Correct. None may speak or act to remove them, nor may you by speaking or not, acting or not, surrender them.
You’re confusing anti-semitism (genetics) with anti-abrahamism (the method of creating and propagating social construction that baits into hazard) and was used to create rabbinical judaism, christianity, islam, and marxism, postmodernism, and feminism. And your making the presumption that we think anyone has any agency over their moral bias, group strategy and means of advocating and pursuing it. We don’t make that mistake. Our position is just the opposite: harmony is achievable by preventing the use of pseudoscience and sophistry to bait people into hazard in matters of the commons, and to end monopoly government so that as we did in Europe, we can separate into groups that produce the normative and social and economic commons desirable by groups, each of whom, thanks to the european system of thought, and the scientific and industrial revolution, has the luxury of pursuing polities and commons best suited to their genetic and cultural preferences. But to federally govern such polities, we must have rule of law that is decidable across polities in matters material (property). That is the propertarian project. To product a constitution of natural law limiting the federal government to its original intent – continental defense and resolution of property conflicts between independent traditional european states. While at the same time allowing the evolution of various states with different and competing interests to serve interests of groups with different interests and needs. When all we are trying to do is solve the great political question of the 21st century. .The point is, that when the population gets to the point of civil war, we will have a solution ready to resolve the crisis. And it’s all online. Now. We work on it publicly.
You’re confusing anti-semitism (genetics) with anti-abrahamism (the method of creating and propagating social construction that baits into hazard) and was used to create rabbinical judaism, christianity, islam, and marxism, postmodernism, and feminism. And your making the presumption that we think anyone has any agency over their moral bias, group strategy and means of advocating and pursuing it. We don’t make that mistake. Our position is just the opposite: harmony is achievable by preventing the use of pseudoscience and sophistry to bait people into hazard in matters of the commons, and to end monopoly government so that as we did in Europe, we can separate into groups that produce the normative and social and economic commons desirable by groups, each of whom, thanks to the european system of thought, and the scientific and industrial revolution, has the luxury of pursuing polities and commons best suited to their genetic and cultural preferences. But to federally govern such polities, we must have rule of law that is decidable across polities in matters material (property). That is the propertarian project. To product a constitution of natural law limiting the federal government to its original intent – continental defense and resolution of property conflicts between independent traditional european states. While at the same time allowing the evolution of various states with different and competing interests to serve interests of groups with different interests and needs. When all we are trying to do is solve the great political question of the 21st century. .The point is, that when the population gets to the point of civil war, we will have a solution ready to resolve the crisis. And it’s all online. Now. We work on it publicly.