Curt Doolittle

Form: Definition

  • Definition: Demonstrated Interests

    Mar 22, 2020, 12:30 PM

    —“What’s a Demonstrated interest?”—

    Demonstrated interest without imposing upon others demonstrated interests is a fact. Possession is a fact. Property requires an an agreement. Property rights require an institutional means of enforcement. I bear costs of existing (Natural Interest). I bear costs of acting (Demonstration) I bear costs of acquiring goods, services, information, opportunity. (Demonstrated Interests) I demonstrate an interest by bearing a cost on that which no other has born a cost to demonstrate an interest. I consent to a portfolio of reciprocally insured property with others. I consent or am forced to comply with an institutional means of reciprocally insuring property with others.

    —“Does theft demonstrate an interest? (you still have to invest your time into committing a theft) The stolen good can be a possession as long as defended but it’s not property. If demonstrated interest is obtained by homesteading, can’t it can be obtained by any kind of investment and become possession – but when it’s not collectively insured, it doesn’t become property, and when it’s an imposition of cost on someone who had it collectively insured, it’s a prohibited possession?”—

    Conflating cost and interest. One bears a cost to demonstrate an interest. One bears a cost but fails to demonstrate an interest. So a thief has born a cost and taken possession but he has not demonstrated an interest. But this is an excellent, and deep question that means you are getting to the first foundations.

  • Definition: Demonstrated Interests

    Mar 22, 2020, 12:30 PM

    —“What’s a Demonstrated interest?”—

    Demonstrated interest without imposing upon others demonstrated interests is a fact. Possession is a fact. Property requires an an agreement. Property rights require an institutional means of enforcement. I bear costs of existing (Natural Interest). I bear costs of acting (Demonstration) I bear costs of acquiring goods, services, information, opportunity. (Demonstrated Interests) I demonstrate an interest by bearing a cost on that which no other has born a cost to demonstrate an interest. I consent to a portfolio of reciprocally insured property with others. I consent or am forced to comply with an institutional means of reciprocally insuring property with others.

    —“Does theft demonstrate an interest? (you still have to invest your time into committing a theft) The stolen good can be a possession as long as defended but it’s not property. If demonstrated interest is obtained by homesteading, can’t it can be obtained by any kind of investment and become possession – but when it’s not collectively insured, it doesn’t become property, and when it’s an imposition of cost on someone who had it collectively insured, it’s a prohibited possession?”—

    Conflating cost and interest. One bears a cost to demonstrate an interest. One bears a cost but fails to demonstrate an interest. So a thief has born a cost and taken possession but he has not demonstrated an interest. But this is an excellent, and deep question that means you are getting to the first foundations.

  • The Law

    Mar 23, 2020, 1:04 PM Claiming the existence of potential interest, natural interest, and demonstrated interests are true. Claiming the existence of Ownership is a lie. Property is a lie. Property rights is a lie. Potential, natural, demonstrated interests, and possession exist in fact, independent of others. Property and Property Rights, and as a result that legal Ownership must be constructed by cooperation using the organized application of violence by others to ensure them. Everything libertarianism said was sophistry to avoid the necessity of producing commons at personal cost and of defense of those commons at personal cost. Why? Jewish diaspora (rothbard, rand). German Free Cities (hoppe) under which the magical authority of the empire and its taxes were somehow an oppressor rather than a producer of defense under which commercial civilization was possible.

  • The Law

    Mar 23, 2020, 1:04 PM Claiming the existence of potential interest, natural interest, and demonstrated interests are true. Claiming the existence of Ownership is a lie. Property is a lie. Property rights is a lie. Potential, natural, demonstrated interests, and possession exist in fact, independent of others. Property and Property Rights, and as a result that legal Ownership must be constructed by cooperation using the organized application of violence by others to ensure them. Everything libertarianism said was sophistry to avoid the necessity of producing commons at personal cost and of defense of those commons at personal cost. Why? Jewish diaspora (rothbard, rand). German Free Cities (hoppe) under which the magical authority of the empire and its taxes were somehow an oppressor rather than a producer of defense under which commercial civilization was possible.

  • DEFINITION: Own, Owning, Ownership

    DEFINITION: Own, Owning, Ownership https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/definition-own-owning-ownership/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 19:12:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266085003680550912

  • DEFINITION: Own, Owning, Ownership

    Mar 23, 2020, 2:01 PM OWNING The concept of ‘own’ cannot come into existence without others to compete with you for control of something, and as such as a means of enforcement by self, or others, justifying retaliation. Without others: |ACTIONS| I know of something or not > I act to bear a cost of it or not > I take physical control of it or not > i defend it or not > i engage in reciprocal defense of others or not (Property Ownership) > we construct institutions of defense or not (Rights Title). So, interest, where interest = born a cost. |INTEREST| potential interest > demonstrated interest > demonstrated possession > demonstrated defense > demonstrated reciprocal defense (property, ownership) > demonstrated institutional defense (property rights, title). You can demonstrate an potential interest, demonstrated interest, possession, independent of others. You can only demonstrate defense, property-ownership, rights-title with others. I mean. that’s a proof. In other words, that’s a set of series that fully disambiguate all dimensions, and prevents the use of sophistry (deceit) by conflation. We retroactively apply the terms rights property ownership given that we habituate the terms under our laws. But these terms are dependent on those laws and institutions – produced with others. Notice how I use “demonstrated” – meaning actions. Notice how I don’t use ‘ideals’ (Platonisms) without defining them operationally as how they came into being. You see? P uses this technique of disambiguation by operationalization, and serialization. This transforms what we call ‘logic’ into a system of measurment.

  • DEFINITION: Own, Owning, Ownership

    Mar 23, 2020, 2:01 PM OWNING The concept of ‘own’ cannot come into existence without others to compete with you for control of something, and as such as a means of enforcement by self, or others, justifying retaliation. Without others: |ACTIONS| I know of something or not > I act to bear a cost of it or not > I take physical control of it or not > i defend it or not > i engage in reciprocal defense of others or not (Property Ownership) > we construct institutions of defense or not (Rights Title). So, interest, where interest = born a cost. |INTEREST| potential interest > demonstrated interest > demonstrated possession > demonstrated defense > demonstrated reciprocal defense (property, ownership) > demonstrated institutional defense (property rights, title). You can demonstrate an potential interest, demonstrated interest, possession, independent of others. You can only demonstrate defense, property-ownership, rights-title with others. I mean. that’s a proof. In other words, that’s a set of series that fully disambiguate all dimensions, and prevents the use of sophistry (deceit) by conflation. We retroactively apply the terms rights property ownership given that we habituate the terms under our laws. But these terms are dependent on those laws and institutions – produced with others. Notice how I use “demonstrated” – meaning actions. Notice how I don’t use ‘ideals’ (Platonisms) without defining them operationally as how they came into being. You see? P uses this technique of disambiguation by operationalization, and serialization. This transforms what we call ‘logic’ into a system of measurment.

  • Class = Market Value

    Class = Market Value https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/class-market-value/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 18:57:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266081200583688194

  • Class = Market Value

    Mar 24, 2020, 3:57 PM Let me help. Class measures your sexual, social, economic, political, military market value. One can work to improve those market values. One can ride on those market values. One can depreciate those market values. Like intelligence, class tends to scale evenly across all market values, except at the extremes. There are poor, attractive aristocrats and wealthy attractive entertainers. But as a general rule, class like stereotypes is the second a most accurate measure in social science.

  • Class = Market Value

    Mar 24, 2020, 3:57 PM Let me help. Class measures your sexual, social, economic, political, military market value. One can work to improve those market values. One can ride on those market values. One can depreciate those market values. Like intelligence, class tends to scale evenly across all market values, except at the extremes. There are poor, attractive aristocrats and wealthy attractive entertainers. But as a general rule, class like stereotypes is the second a most accurate measure in social science.