Form: Argument

The common natural law of reciprocity, adjudicated by professional judges, constitutes a market for the resolution of differences using the incremental discovery of the application of the test of reciprocity. To argue for poly-anything law is not to argue for scientific (reciprocity) law, but to argue for FALSE AND scientifically (objectively) IMMORAL LAW. (Yes, really) WHEREAS No group, under rule of law, can compete in the market for polities, which themselves constitute a market for markets, without the production of commons. The question is only the method by which commons are chosen and produced, and the method by which parasitism(privatization) of, and free riding upon those commons is prevented. While majoritarian democracy constitutes a MONOPOLY production of commons, which is unnecessary and the source of our conflicts; And while it is not clear that democracy is a good method of decision making for the production of commons; and while it s certain that representative democracy is disaster in the production of commons, it is not true – whatsoever – that direct democracy limited by rule of law, where votes are proportional(economic) or equal(shareholder), would be any less effective, than monarchical (private ownership of the commons) government. In fact, it is very hard to make the case that monarchical decision making limited by rule of law, was not and would not be superior to democratic decision making – as long as the polities were small enough (city states) such that individual discretion (decision making) on the production of commons was physically possible (by direct and empirical experience.) FURTHERMORE No group, under rule of law, under markets for commons, can defend itself from competition for territory, and monopoly definition of property rights, and No group, under rule of law, can resolve conflicts without a judge of last resort (monarchy or oligarchy). No group, under rule of law, can produce commons without a judge of last resort (monarchy or oligarchy) THEREFORE This is why libertarianism cannot exist, and never will exist, and only NOMOCRACY can, ever, exist. WE HAD PERFECT GOVERNMENT: An independent judiciary under the common, natural law of reciprocity. A monarchy as judge of last resort (veto) A House of Territories (Nobility) Limiting the fashion of the middle class. A House of Business Owners (House of Commons) The Church (A house of labor and dependents) which should have been replaced with: A House of Common People (non-propertied and dependent peoples) An Independent (private) treasury. A separate set of institutions for education in virtues, mindfulness, normative skills (Church) and Academy A separate set of institutions for education in commercial skills (Apprenticeships, Guilds, “Colleges”.) By this method we created “Markets In Everything”. Association, Cooperation, Reproduction, Production of goods, services, and information, Production of Commons, Production of Polities, and Production of Group Evolutionary Strategies. Libertarianism was a nonsense experiment in applying the eastern european borderland Ashkenazi (Polish, Ukrainian, Belarusian, Russian) diasporic ethic as a universal ethic, but it is nothing but judaism version two, just as Postmodernism is nothing but Catholicism version two. And we know how diasporic peoples do: Jews and Gypsies. They are persecuted forever as hostile minorities at both ends of the normative scale. Neither Christianity nor Judaism are possible without the Martial aristocracy to rule. They are nothing but cults of rebellion whereby the middle and lower classes try to avoid the necessary costs of production the market for commons. There is a reason northern europeans and americans were high trust people and literally NO ONE ELSE ON EARTH ever was other than perhaps the spartans. MAN WAS NOT OPPRESSED HE WAS DOMESTICATED LIKE EVERY OTHER ANIMAL. Time to grow up, kiddies. Sovereignty is had or not by the ability to enforce it by arms. But liberty is had only by permission of the sovereign. And the sovereign have no incentive to grant it other than to borderlands – and there are no borderlands left that are habitable. Sovereignty or slavery. Choose. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.

The common natural law of reciprocity, adjudicated by professional judges, constitutes a market for the resolution of differences using the incremental discovery of the application of the test of reciprocity. To argue for poly-anything law is not to argue for scientific (reciprocity) law, but to argue for FALSE AND scientifically (objectively) IMMORAL LAW. (Yes, really) WHEREAS No group, under rule of law, can compete in the market for polities, which themselves constitute a market for markets, without the production of commons. The question is only the method by which commons are chosen and produced, and the method by which parasitism(privatization) of, and free riding upon those commons is prevented. While majoritarian democracy constitutes a MONOPOLY production of commons, which is unnecessary and the source of our conflicts; And while it is not clear that democracy is a good method of decision making for the production of commons; and while it s certain that representative democracy is disaster in the production of commons, it is not true – whatsoever – that direct democracy limited by rule of law, where votes are proportional(economic) or equal(shareholder), would be any less effective, than monarchical (private ownership of the commons) government. In fact, it is very hard to make the case that monarchical decision making limited by rule of law, was not and would not be superior to democratic decision making – as long as the polities were small enough (city states) such that individual discretion (decision making) on the production of commons was physically possible (by direct and empirical experience.) FURTHERMORE No group, under rule of law, under markets for commons, can defend itself from competition for territory, and monopoly definition of property rights, and No group, under rule of law, can resolve conflicts without a judge of last resort (monarchy or oligarchy). No group, under rule of law, can produce commons without a judge of last resort (monarchy or oligarchy) THEREFORE This is why libertarianism cannot exist, and never will exist, and only NOMOCRACY can, ever, exist. WE HAD PERFECT GOVERNMENT: An independent judiciary under the common, natural law of reciprocity. A monarchy as judge of last resort (veto) A House of Territories (Nobility) Limiting the fashion of the middle class. A House of Business Owners (House of Commons) The Church (A house of labor and dependents) which should have been replaced with: A House of Common People (non-propertied and dependent peoples) An Independent (private) treasury. A separate set of institutions for education in virtues, mindfulness, normative skills (Church) and Academy A separate set of institutions for education in commercial skills (Apprenticeships, Guilds, “Colleges”.) By this method we created “Markets In Everything”. Association, Cooperation, Reproduction, Production of goods, services, and information, Production of Commons, Production of Polities, and Production of Group Evolutionary Strategies. Libertarianism was a nonsense experiment in applying the eastern european borderland Ashkenazi (Polish, Ukrainian, Belarusian, Russian) diasporic ethic as a universal ethic, but it is nothing but judaism version two, just as Postmodernism is nothing but Catholicism version two. And we know how diasporic peoples do: Jews and Gypsies. They are persecuted forever as hostile minorities at both ends of the normative scale. Neither Christianity nor Judaism are possible without the Martial aristocracy to rule. They are nothing but cults of rebellion whereby the middle and lower classes try to avoid the necessary costs of production the market for commons. There is a reason northern europeans and americans were high trust people and literally NO ONE ELSE ON EARTH ever was other than perhaps the spartans. MAN WAS NOT OPPRESSED HE WAS DOMESTICATED LIKE EVERY OTHER ANIMAL. Time to grow up, kiddies. Sovereignty is had or not by the ability to enforce it by arms. But liberty is had only by permission of the sovereign. And the sovereign have no incentive to grant it other than to borderlands – and there are no borderlands left that are habitable. Sovereignty or slavery. Choose. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.