YOU CAN’T GET AROUND RECIPROCITY. POLITICS IS SOLVED.
I mean, you can’t get around reciprocity as the measure of morality. You can’t get around property in toto as the test and limit of reciprocity. You can’t get around natural law of reciprocity as the means of dispute resolution. You can’t get around markets under natural law of reciprocity. You can’t get around the fact that goods services and information can be used to conduct thefts directly, indirectly, and by externality. You can’t get around the fact that you can only warranty what you can perform restitution for, and therefore what you can warranty limits the goods, services, and information that you can bring to market. You can’t get around the fact that even proposing an alternative to a market order is something you cannot warranty, and something that is de facto an attempted theft. You can’t get around the fact that no matter what order you want to produce can be produced through exchange. What you can’t get around and none of us can get around, is that the least able have behavior to trade – what they may not do, and the most able have talents to trade – what they may do. You can’t get around these things. Ever. As far as I know political science is solved. It will just require us to suppress parasitism in this world by political means the same way we have suppressed parasitism by violence, theft, fraud in goods and services. And the principle means of doing so is suppression of advocacy of parasitism by information. And to do that requires only that we publish the requirements for reciprocity in all speech. And it turns out, that is possible, and not all that difficult.
I mean, you can’t get around reciprocity as the measure of morality. You can’t get around property in toto as the test and limit of reciprocity. You can’t get around natural law of reciprocity as the means of dispute resolution. You can’t get around markets under natural law of reciprocity. You can’t get around the fact that goods services and information can be used to conduct thefts directly, indirectly, and by externality. You can’t get around the fact that you can only warranty what you can perform restitution for, and therefore what you can warranty limits the goods, services, and information that you can bring to market. You can’t get around the fact that even proposing an alternative to a market order is something you cannot warranty, and something that is de facto an attempted theft. You can’t get around the fact that no matter what order you want to produce can be produced through exchange. What you can’t get around and none of us can get around, is that the least able have behavior to trade – what they may not do, and the most able have talents to trade – what they may do. You can’t get around these things. Ever. As far as I know political science is solved. It will just require us to suppress parasitism in this world by political means the same way we have suppressed parasitism by violence, theft, fraud in goods and services. And the principle means of doing so is suppression of advocacy of parasitism by information. And to do that requires only that we publish the requirements for reciprocity in all speech. And it turns out, that is possible, and not all that difficult.
You have to falsify the argument that under the real, ideal, and supernatural orders, the ‘real’ has provided our ascent out of ignorance and poverty – and rapidly – while the ideal and the supernatural have provided either stagnation or regression.
You have to falsify the argument that western people (which you always conflate to your argumentative advantage without separating the western from the indian, iranian, west-asian) and you can’t seem to identify the very obvious differnce between gods subject to the universe, and gods holding dominion over the universe. THere is NO ORIGIN MYTH per se in the west. There is not a good and evil – only a dysfunctional family of gods and heroes. There is no ideal, only the real. By the time we find rome, there are no ‘priests’ per se, but all aristocracy practices the rituals.
We still carry the three traditions: real (roman/european), ideal (greek), and supernatural (semitic/persian). And we still practice all three semantic languages. Just as we have practiced three semantic languages in english (anglo saxon, french, and latin).
No other civilization has done what the west has done common law > reason > philosophy > science. And no other civilization has done what the middle eastern has done: abrahamism > marxism > libertarianism > neo conservativsm > postmodernism.
Period.
So you can again, try another lie, (there are at least three in most of your posts) suggestion that the west is perfect, rather than that the result of the western exceptionalism in military orders was dependent upon voluntary orders, which was dependent upon contractualism, all of which were dependent upon truth, and that western civ, like all other civ’s, Anchored on those basic rules of order, just as ever other civlization anchored on those rules of order in the era of Transformation (See Armstrong).
All you do is engage in lie, disapproval, gossip, shaming, and ridicule in order to preserve your bias in favor of lying. The question is – why do you need to lie?
The evidence is the evidence. The greatest man to ever live was Aristotle. And the greeks produced socrates, plato and aristotle just as the germans produced mozart, bach, and beethoven, and the english produced locke, smith, and hume: becasue the evidence is that it takes a very long time over multiple generations to produce an innovator of that scale. (See Murray).
And the reason Aristotle was the greatest man that ever lived is because he synthesized all fields, and mapped out the future of truth for us to follow, and laid enough of a foundation that we have all built upon it.
Why did he, plato, and socrates do that? Because the old habits had been destroyed by the consequences of democracy, and her great days were behind her.
Whereas lies enable conflation, truth provides deflation.
Where democracy creates lies, law creates truth.
Anarchist: “People don’t want me around becasue I’m undesirable for one reason or another – really my own immaturity. But I want to claim I earned access to the benefits of commons without having paid for them. There is nothing more for me to say. Everything else in anarchism is a lie to justify my parasitism.”
(repost)(profoundly important graphic)
(organic common law as a means of incrementally suppressing free riding).
1) Humans acquire at cost and defend what they have acquired at cost.
2) cooperation is disproportionately more productive than predation.
3) cooperation is only preferable to predation in the total absence of parasitism. Or, what we call free-riding.
4) Because of the disproportionate value of cooperation, Humans retaliate against free riding even if at high cost ( altruistic punishment). They protect the institution by severe policing of cheaters.
5) rules against free riding, either normative or codified in law, prohibit parasitism (free riding).
6) prohibitions that are habituated in norms or codified in law provide a means of decision making in matters of conflict.
7) prohibitions against parasitism can be positively expressed as contractual “rights”.
8) community member (shareholders in the local market) insure one another by suppressing retaliation against settlements of grievances according to norms and laws.
9) The common, organic law allows for the least time lapse between an innovation in the means of parasitism and the construction of a prohibition against this new means of parasitism expressed as new law. As such all laws are discovered. (very important)
10) high trust societies use common law to incrementally suppress all available means of free riding, leaving productive participation in the market as the only viable means of survival.
11) as a consequence, the reproduction of the lower classes is suppressed and the distribution of talents increases along with the innovations in technology. (market eugenics). Thus obviating the need for tyranny and redistribution.
Aristocracy, Egalitarianism, morality, Nomocracy, meritocracy, Science, and eugenic evolution are mutually dependent.
The chart below shows the incremental suppression of parasitism stating from the suppression of violence through fraud, through conspiracy, through immigration, through conquest.
Only the west succeeded in developing truth.
And without it we cannot have the jury. And without the jury no judge or common law.
Truth matters above all else.
Pseudoscience is just babylonian monotheistic mysticism in new clothes.
This emperor is naked also.
Truth is enough to rescue the west.
(repost)(profoundly important graphic)
(organic common law as a means of incrementally suppressing free riding).
1) Humans acquire at cost and defend what they have acquired at cost.
2) cooperation is disproportionately more productive than predation.
3) cooperation is only preferable to predation in the total absence of parasitism. Or, what we call free-riding.
4) Because of the disproportionate value of cooperation, Humans retaliate against free riding even if at high cost ( altruistic punishment). They protect the institution by severe policing of cheaters.
5) rules against free riding, either normative or codified in law, prohibit parasitism (free riding).
6) prohibitions that are habituated in norms or codified in law provide a means of decision making in matters of conflict.
7) prohibitions against parasitism can be positively expressed as contractual “rights”.
8) community member (shareholders in the local market) insure one another by suppressing retaliation against settlements of grievances according to norms and laws.
9) The common, organic law allows for the least time lapse between an innovation in the means of parasitism and the construction of a prohibition against this new means of parasitism expressed as new law. As such all laws are discovered. (very important)
10) high trust societies use common law to incrementally suppress all available means of free riding, leaving productive participation in the market as the only viable means of survival.
11) as a consequence, the reproduction of the lower classes is suppressed and the distribution of talents increases along with the innovations in technology. (market eugenics). Thus obviating the need for tyranny and redistribution.
Aristocracy, Egalitarianism, morality, Nomocracy, meritocracy, Science, and eugenic evolution are mutually dependent.
The chart below shows the incremental suppression of parasitism stating from the suppression of violence through fraud, through conspiracy, through immigration, through conquest.
Only the west succeeded in developing truth.
And without it we cannot have the jury. And without the jury no judge or common law.
Truth matters above all else.
Pseudoscience is just babylonian monotheistic mysticism in new clothes.
This emperor is naked also.
Truth is enough to rescue the west.
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_43196237263/23316751_10155870774042264_471572855348292358_n_10155870774042264.jpg THE MEANING OF INCREMENTAL SUPPRESSION
(repost)(profoundly important graphic)
(organic common law as a means of incrementally suppressing free riding).
1) Humans acquire at cost and defend what they have acquired at cost.
2) cooperation is disproportionately more productive than predation.
3) cooperation is only preferable to predation in the total absence of parasitism. Or, what we call free-riding.
4) Because of the disproportionate value of cooperation, Humans retaliate against free riding even if at high cost ( altruistic punishment). They protect the institution by severe policing of cheaters.
5) rules against free riding, either normative or codified in law, prohibit parasitism (free riding).
6) prohibitions that are habituated in norms or codified in law provide a means of decision making in matters of conflict.
7) prohibitions against parasitism can be positively expressed as contractual “rights”.
8) community member (shareholders in the local market) insure one another by suppressing retaliation against settlements of grievances according to norms and laws.
9) The common, organic law allows for the least time lapse between an innovation in the means of parasitism and the construction of a prohibition against this new means of parasitism expressed as new law. As such all laws are discovered. (very important)
10) high trust societies use common law to incrementally suppress all available means of free riding, leaving productive participation in the market as the only viable means of survival.
11) as a consequence, the reproduction of the lower classes is suppressed and the distribution of talents increases along with the innovations in technology. (market eugenics). Thus obviating the need for tyranny and redistribution.
Aristocracy, Egalitarianism, morality, Nomocracy, meritocracy, Science, and eugenic evolution are mutually dependent.
The chart below shows the incremental suppression of parasitism stating from the suppression of violence through fraud, through conspiracy, through immigration, through conquest.
Only the west succeeded in developing truth.
And without it we cannot have the jury. And without the jury no judge or common law.
Truth matters above all else.
Pseudoscience is just babylonian monotheistic mysticism in new clothes.
This emperor is naked also.
Truth is enough to rescue the west.Oliver WestcottEgalitarianism? Do you mean before the law?Nov 10, 2017 9:37amCurt DoolittleAristocratic Egalitarianism refers to (a) the peerage, and (b) the aristocracy’s openness to increasing their numbers. In other words, western aristocracy functioned as a market.Nov 10, 2017 9:50amCurt DoolittleThis is largely to do with the inability of peoples above the 45th latitude, and roughly centered on the eurasian plain to concentrate agrarian production as had done the flood river civilizations.Nov 10, 2017 9:52amTHE MEANING OF INCREMENTAL SUPPRESSION
(repost)(profoundly important graphic)
(organic common law as a means of incrementally suppressing free riding).
1) Humans acquire at cost and defend what they have acquired at cost.
2) cooperation is disproportionately more productive than predation.
3) cooperation is only preferable to predation in the total absence of parasitism. Or, what we call free-riding.
4) Because of the disproportionate value of cooperation, Humans retaliate against free riding even if at high cost ( altruistic punishment). They protect the institution by severe policing of cheaters.
5) rules against free riding, either normative or codified in law, prohibit parasitism (free riding).
6) prohibitions that are habituated in norms or codified in law provide a means of decision making in matters of conflict.
7) prohibitions against parasitism can be positively expressed as contractual “rights”.
8) community member (shareholders in the local market) insure one another by suppressing retaliation against settlements of grievances according to norms and laws.
9) The common, organic law allows for the least time lapse between an innovation in the means of parasitism and the construction of a prohibition against this new means of parasitism expressed as new law. As such all laws are discovered. (very important)
10) high trust societies use common law to incrementally suppress all available means of free riding, leaving productive participation in the market as the only viable means of survival.
11) as a consequence, the reproduction of the lower classes is suppressed and the distribution of talents increases along with the innovations in technology. (market eugenics). Thus obviating the need for tyranny and redistribution.
Aristocracy, Egalitarianism, morality, Nomocracy, meritocracy, Science, and eugenic evolution are mutually dependent.
The chart below shows the incremental suppression of parasitism stating from the suppression of violence through fraud, through conspiracy, through immigration, through conquest.
Only the west succeeded in developing truth.
And without it we cannot have the jury. And without the jury no judge or common law.
Truth matters above all else.
Pseudoscience is just babylonian monotheistic mysticism in new clothes.
–“CURT, I’D LIKE TO DEBATE YOU ON LIBERTARIAN….”— A Friend.
Let me arm you a bit so that you’re prepared for such a debate:
First, we have to define ‘state’. As far as I know the term state refers to one or more of the following (a) a territorial corporation with individual or group management, preserving a monopoly of final decidability – usually a figurehead, a military, (b) an individual or group that negotiates with third parties on behalf of a territorial population in matters of opportunity(trade) and conflict (war) in order to prevent defectors from acting against the interests of other members. Conversely, as far as I know a government consists of an individual or group that provides decidability in the production of commons of all sorts.
Second, my central argument with you or any anti-state/anti-government libertarian will be whether the formation and survival of such a polity is possible in the market for territory and polities. And I will attempt to demonstrate that libertarians are just trying to obtain liberty by permission of superior forces, instead of sovereignty in fact because of their merits. And I sincerely doubt that it is possible for any anarchic (meaning pastoral or diasporic or borderland political order – parasitic order) to compete with an agrarian or industrial order that directs its energies to the production of commons – a productive order). And I will, as always, expose libertarianism as an attempt to live parasitically off existing markets without paying the cost of maintenance of those markets.
I use operational language (most science) to defeat ‘idealism’ (most philosophy). Using operational language rapidly exposes Rothbardian anarcho capitalism (jewish diasporic group evolutionary strategy) as different from Anglo Rule of Natural Law (anglo saxon group evolutionary strategy) from which an ethical capitalism is an outcome, not an ambition.
The weak and unable seek socialism (subsidy of consumption and commons).
The weak but able seek libertarianism(accumulation of capital, subsidy of commons).
The strong and able seek aristocracy(constraint of consumption and accumulation of capital in the commons ).
This sequence roughly corresponds to the three levels of maturity and power: female, young male, adult male.
And this is what the genetic, biological, social, economic, and voting data show us.
Looking forward to the discourse.
–“CURT, I’D LIKE TO DEBATE YOU ON LIBERTARIAN….”— A Friend.
Let me arm you a bit so that you’re prepared for such a debate:
First, we have to define ‘state’. As far as I know the term state refers to one or more of the following (a) a territorial corporation with individual or group management, preserving a monopoly of final decidability – usually a figurehead, a military, (b) an individual or group that negotiates with third parties on behalf of a territorial population in matters of opportunity(trade) and conflict (war) in order to prevent defectors from acting against the interests of other members. Conversely, as far as I know a government consists of an individual or group that provides decidability in the production of commons of all sorts.
Second, my central argument with you or any anti-state/anti-government libertarian will be whether the formation and survival of such a polity is possible in the market for territory and polities. And I will attempt to demonstrate that libertarians are just trying to obtain liberty by permission of superior forces, instead of sovereignty in fact because of their merits. And I sincerely doubt that it is possible for any anarchic (meaning pastoral or diasporic or borderland political order – parasitic order) to compete with an agrarian or industrial order that directs its energies to the production of commons – a productive order). And I will, as always, expose libertarianism as an attempt to live parasitically off existing markets without paying the cost of maintenance of those markets.
I use operational language (most science) to defeat ‘idealism’ (most philosophy). Using operational language rapidly exposes Rothbardian anarcho capitalism (jewish diasporic group evolutionary strategy) as different from Anglo Rule of Natural Law (anglo saxon group evolutionary strategy) from which an ethical capitalism is an outcome, not an ambition.
The weak and unable seek socialism (subsidy of consumption and commons).
The weak but able seek libertarianism(accumulation of capital, subsidy of commons).
The strong and able seek aristocracy(constraint of consumption and accumulation of capital in the commons ).
This sequence roughly corresponds to the three levels of maturity and power: female, young male, adult male.
And this is what the genetic, biological, social, economic, and voting data show us.
Looking forward to the discourse.
–“CURT, I’D LIKE TO DEBATE YOU ON LIBERTARIAN….”— A Friend.
Let me arm you a bit so that you’re prepared for such a debate:
First, we have to define ‘state’. As far as I know the term state refers to one or more of the following (a) a territorial corporation with individual or group management, preserving a monopoly of final decidability – usually a figurehead, a military, (b) an individual or group that negotiates with third parties on behalf of a territorial population in matters of opportunity(trade) and conflict (war) in order to prevent defectors from acting against the interests of other members. Conversely, as far as I know a government consists of an individual or group that provides decidability in the production of commons of all sorts.
Second, my central argument with you or any anti-state/anti-government libertarian will be whether the formation and survival of such a polity is possible in the market for territory and polities. And I will attempt to demonstrate that libertarians are just trying to obtain liberty by permission of superior forces, instead of sovereignty in fact because of their merits. And I sincerely doubt that it is possible for any anarchic (meaning pastoral or diasporic or borderland political order – parasitic order) to compete with an agrarian or industrial order that directs its energies to the production of commons – a productive order). And I will, as always, expose libertarianism as an attempt to live parasitically off existing markets without paying the cost of maintenance of those markets.
I use operational language (most science) to defeat ‘idealism’ (most philosophy). Using operational language rapidly exposes Rothbardian anarcho capitalism (jewish diasporic group evolutionary strategy) as different from Anglo Rule of Natural Law (anglo saxon group evolutionary strategy) from which an ethical capitalism is an outcome, not an ambition.
The weak and unable seek socialism (subsidy of consumption and commons).
The weak but able seek libertarianism(accumulation of capital, subsidy of commons).
The strong and able seek aristocracy(constraint of consumption and accumulation of capital in the commons ).
This sequence roughly corresponds to the three levels of maturity and power: female, young male, adult male.
And this is what the genetic, biological, social, economic, and voting data show us.
