Dec 2, 2019, 4:34 PM (Again: Libertine, Anarchist, Libertarian Thought Fails) By: Alain Dwight (via Brandon Hayes) Rules without rulers is impossible. Asserting an active noun or verb (rule) without an actor putting it in play (rulers) is a form of deception. For a sentence to be operationally complete it has to include the actor, the incentive they follow, the change in state and a few other points (P epistemology is the first place I saw this standard detailed). Human flourishing was never created by anarchists, anarchists were always subversive as far as I know, countersignalling our ancestors that created flourishing through rule of law. Between sovereign entities, there can be no authority but reciprocity can be calculated hence rule of law measured by reciprocity is the only actual alternative to authority. Anarchism can be an appealing narrative when seeing the abuse of power but in part, it I think it appeals more ot the juvenile part of us that desires freedom than the part that desires the discipline required to create freedom. If you operationalize the narrative then Propertarianism is what you’re left with. I don’t want to rebel against power I want to have power and to have other good men have power. When good men fall into the vice of not seeking power then it calls into question how good they really are. Edit
Form: Mini Essay
-
Does Metaphysics Exist? Depends on The Definition.
Dec 19, 2019, 7:03 PM The question is only whether metaphysics = paradigm. As far as I know it does (must). So to say there is no such thing as metaphysics, is only to say that there is no such thing as relativism. In other words, there is either a most parsimonious paradigm for the description of reality or their isn’t. As far as I know there is always and everywhere one most parsimonious and most complete paradigm, and that discipline we call science slowly converges upon it. And that this most parsimonious paradigm always and everywhere will provide decidability between less coherent (complete and consistent) paradigms. And the current limitation on progress in physical science is our present failure (or challenge of) creating a language (mathematics or logic of) of geometric rather than point (positional) relations. The more obvious demands of protein modeling appear to be working toward a solution to that problem more so than physicists. As far as I know social science (cooperation, law, politics) is solved because it’s at human scale. As far as I know economics remains unsolved and is a harder problem than the transition from positional (curves) to geometric (shapes), if for no other reason than we simply can’t create consistent categories so are stuck with bayesian categorization, prediction, falsification, and adaptation, with symmetries (which are showing up in certain economic patterns) providing the intermediary measures that the original data itself cannot. So, I don’t see the meaning of a discipline of metaphysics other than the rather obvious demarcation between deflationary (logical, operational, empirical, science) and fictional (allegorical) grammars (vocabularies). And it certainly appears to do nothing more than that. The underlying conflict being that the most parsimonious language launders information present in experience. And as we have seen the empathic vs analytic difference in demand for priority on one hand, and a desire for psychological sedation (suppression, mindfulness,) on the other. And from my tests over the past two years in particular that (masculine vs feminine cognition ) appears to be impossible to resolve. Which as far as I know is the source of the conflict of the present age, and what’s driving the incentive to separate (or dominate).
-
Does Metaphysics Exist? Depends on The Definition.
Dec 19, 2019, 7:03 PM The question is only whether metaphysics = paradigm. As far as I know it does (must). So to say there is no such thing as metaphysics, is only to say that there is no such thing as relativism. In other words, there is either a most parsimonious paradigm for the description of reality or their isn’t. As far as I know there is always and everywhere one most parsimonious and most complete paradigm, and that discipline we call science slowly converges upon it. And that this most parsimonious paradigm always and everywhere will provide decidability between less coherent (complete and consistent) paradigms. And the current limitation on progress in physical science is our present failure (or challenge of) creating a language (mathematics or logic of) of geometric rather than point (positional) relations. The more obvious demands of protein modeling appear to be working toward a solution to that problem more so than physicists. As far as I know social science (cooperation, law, politics) is solved because it’s at human scale. As far as I know economics remains unsolved and is a harder problem than the transition from positional (curves) to geometric (shapes), if for no other reason than we simply can’t create consistent categories so are stuck with bayesian categorization, prediction, falsification, and adaptation, with symmetries (which are showing up in certain economic patterns) providing the intermediary measures that the original data itself cannot. So, I don’t see the meaning of a discipline of metaphysics other than the rather obvious demarcation between deflationary (logical, operational, empirical, science) and fictional (allegorical) grammars (vocabularies). And it certainly appears to do nothing more than that. The underlying conflict being that the most parsimonious language launders information present in experience. And as we have seen the empathic vs analytic difference in demand for priority on one hand, and a desire for psychological sedation (suppression, mindfulness,) on the other. And from my tests over the past two years in particular that (masculine vs feminine cognition ) appears to be impossible to resolve. Which as far as I know is the source of the conflict of the present age, and what’s driving the incentive to separate (or dominate).
-
I Don’t Know What ‘liberalism’ Means Any Longer.
Dec 19, 2019, 7:30 PM I don’t know what ‘liberalism’ means any longer. It used to mean constraining government. But it meant that under parliamentary control. I think the western experiment in ‘aristocracy of everyone’ by continuous expansion of the franchise in order to justify taking political power(organization of the production of private and common) from the monarchy and the church, and to justify the expansion of taxation for the purposes of redistribution – is a clear failure. I don’t think you can get away from 1) rule of law and markets for adaptive velocity 2) state-private investment in increasingly complex and expensive investment in competitive innovation, 3) the need for ‘decider of last resort’, whether despot, monarchy, 4) money isn’t real any longer, so it’s just a tool of positive incentive (coercion?) and we will (shortly) see the end of the private global capitalists, and the universal adoption of the chinese method of state money and interest management. The liberal order was made possible by the European Colonial Expansion, and the relative weakness of (small) european governments compared to the strength of the emerging middle class, and the vast pool of middle class genetic reserves built up in europe over more than a thousand years. We have been in the post modern order since marx, freud, boas, cantor, adorno, friedan, rothbard/rand, trotsky/neocons sequentially tried to undermine men (marxism), culture (frankfurt), truth (derrida), women (feminism), and the western identity. We have been in the post liberal order since the bolsheviks started the revolt against it, and now the muslims are revolting against it – last century the jewish revolt, an this century the muslim revolt. The chinese and russians and now indians have been through their experiment and are returning to world norms. The west is more malinvested in the falsehood because of the jewish postwar influence in the academy to suppress all eugenics (study of human behavior)was successful at displacing the germanic martial aristocratic tradition, by rallying women and minorities using media, academy, democracy, immigration to destroy western civilization with false promise of freedom from darwinian necessity that made western excellences possible. Our constitution (Rule of Law of sovereignty and reciprocity ) is not rigid enough (like a scriptural document) to limit our conquest by democratic and propaganda means. ANd we did not understand our traditions we only practiced them. So we were easily sold false promise by sophism, pseudoscience in the modern world like our women and lower classes were sold false promise by sophism and supernaturalism in the ancient world – and this ‘second great failure’ is the end of the possibility of democratic majoritarianism – unless we can prohibit false promise of freedom from natural law from the informational commons. As far as I know there is no optimum social political and economic order, only a sliding scale of what is possible given a genetic distribution and the relative state of development. If it is possible to develop many small monarchies under the same rule of law of sovereignty and reciprocity that is the optimum social and political order, as long as the ‘bottom’ is prohibited from reproduction as it was in the ancient world by nature, the middle world by manorialism, ad the present and future world by eugenic policy. Every other order declines in competitive utility from there.
-
I Don’t Know What ‘liberalism’ Means Any Longer.
Dec 19, 2019, 7:30 PM I don’t know what ‘liberalism’ means any longer. It used to mean constraining government. But it meant that under parliamentary control. I think the western experiment in ‘aristocracy of everyone’ by continuous expansion of the franchise in order to justify taking political power(organization of the production of private and common) from the monarchy and the church, and to justify the expansion of taxation for the purposes of redistribution – is a clear failure. I don’t think you can get away from 1) rule of law and markets for adaptive velocity 2) state-private investment in increasingly complex and expensive investment in competitive innovation, 3) the need for ‘decider of last resort’, whether despot, monarchy, 4) money isn’t real any longer, so it’s just a tool of positive incentive (coercion?) and we will (shortly) see the end of the private global capitalists, and the universal adoption of the chinese method of state money and interest management. The liberal order was made possible by the European Colonial Expansion, and the relative weakness of (small) european governments compared to the strength of the emerging middle class, and the vast pool of middle class genetic reserves built up in europe over more than a thousand years. We have been in the post modern order since marx, freud, boas, cantor, adorno, friedan, rothbard/rand, trotsky/neocons sequentially tried to undermine men (marxism), culture (frankfurt), truth (derrida), women (feminism), and the western identity. We have been in the post liberal order since the bolsheviks started the revolt against it, and now the muslims are revolting against it – last century the jewish revolt, an this century the muslim revolt. The chinese and russians and now indians have been through their experiment and are returning to world norms. The west is more malinvested in the falsehood because of the jewish postwar influence in the academy to suppress all eugenics (study of human behavior)was successful at displacing the germanic martial aristocratic tradition, by rallying women and minorities using media, academy, democracy, immigration to destroy western civilization with false promise of freedom from darwinian necessity that made western excellences possible. Our constitution (Rule of Law of sovereignty and reciprocity ) is not rigid enough (like a scriptural document) to limit our conquest by democratic and propaganda means. ANd we did not understand our traditions we only practiced them. So we were easily sold false promise by sophism, pseudoscience in the modern world like our women and lower classes were sold false promise by sophism and supernaturalism in the ancient world – and this ‘second great failure’ is the end of the possibility of democratic majoritarianism – unless we can prohibit false promise of freedom from natural law from the informational commons. As far as I know there is no optimum social political and economic order, only a sliding scale of what is possible given a genetic distribution and the relative state of development. If it is possible to develop many small monarchies under the same rule of law of sovereignty and reciprocity that is the optimum social and political order, as long as the ‘bottom’ is prohibited from reproduction as it was in the ancient world by nature, the middle world by manorialism, ad the present and future world by eugenic policy. Every other order declines in competitive utility from there.
-
Expanding the Bullet List: What Is Propertarianism?
LETS USE MINIMUM DETAIL “Propertarianism is the completion of (the complete) scientific method.” That’s it. Period. But it’s a profound thing. Very. Now what do we do with that completed scientific method? This scientific method is value neutral, and commensurable regardless of discipline, and universal in application. We use that scientific method to produce a value neutral fully commensurable language across all disciplines. We use that logic and language to produce a universally commensurable value neutral system of law. We used that value neutral system of law to produce a constitution. That constitution’s principle innovation is to incrementally suppress the means by which western civlization in the ancient and modern world was undermined by crimes of plausible deniability (which I won’t explain right here), but that’s what you think of when you think of leftism. One can create an infinite number of constitutions of infinite variety using that law, as long as one constructs them truthfully and reciprocally – which is a problem for the left. The constitution we propose restores the american constitution to its original intent as military and treasury that allows for the concentration of military power sufficient for defense of the continent, devolves all other powers to the states, makes everyone liable for the truth and reciprocity of speech in public to the public about matters public (outlaws leftism), and reforms every single aspect of life so that we restore our civilization from the ((())) harms done to it this past century. That constitution is on line and in progress and is a lot to swallow, but then so are the Declaration, Articles of Confederation, Federalist Papers, Constitution, Bill of Rights, The Amendements, History of Supreme Court Rulings, Federal Code, and Individual State constitutions and codes. Propertarianism is the completion of the scientific method, it’s application to the totality of human knowledge, creating a universally commensurable value neutral language; its embodiment in the natural common law of tort; and as a consequence the eradication of [all deceit] from the informational commons. See? LETS ADD A LITTLE MORE DETAIL. Propertarianism completes the scientific method. The culmination of the philosophical program of the 20th century was that there is no via positiva scientific method. Instead, The scientific method is a via negativa method: falsificationary. There are only so many dimensions humans can cognitively imagine and cognitively falsify by tests of consistency: categorical, logical, operational, empirical, rational, reciprocal, complete in scope with defined limits, and consistent and therefore coherent across those dimensions, where one warranties such due diligence, and is liable for the consequence of his displays words and deeds resulting from such statements. By using this method we can create a universally commensurable, value neutral, operational language and as such a universally commensurable logic, across all fields: a system of measurement for the truthfulness of speech. We can then use this language and this method to restate the constitution, and our law, in scientific, and operational language, closed to interpretation (legislation from the bench). Moreover we can use this law to outlaw the primary innovation in organized crime that was used to undermine western civilization: false promise; baiting into hazard, using pilpul (sophism) and critique(undermining, straw manning) under cover of plausible deniability to profit from the imposition of harms upon others by financialization (innumeracy), pseudoscience, sophism, supernaturalism, denialism, including the false promises, pseudo-mathematics, pseudoscience, sophistry, and denial of marx, boas, freud, Cantor, Adorno et al, Gramsci et al, Derrida et al, Friedan et al, rand/rothbard, and the neocons. And yes, we can even use it to reform and obtain insight into the failures of Bohr ad Einstein that hilbert predicted, and we can explain the 20th century of mysticism and deceit that hayek warned us of. In other words we can end the jewish-muslim, marxist-postmodernis-feminist program of lying by false promise, and explain why it’s a crime. So, hopefully you can understand why this brief passage here is not something I would stick on the front page for marketing purposes WHAT IS A SYSTEM OF THOUGHT? (A GRAMMAR) What’s the difference between aristotelianism, platonism, and abrahamism? What’s the difference between reason, logic, rationalism? What’s the difference between Aristotelian, enlightenment(empirical) and scientific, revolutions? Whats the difference between math, logic, programming, recipes, and protocols? So what is the difference between aristotelianism, empiricism, science, and testimonialism (propertarianism)? Well, the difference is from the rational to the empirical to the operational. What does operational mean? It means the difference between logic (Sets) and programming (operations). It means the difference between logic (language), empiricism (observation), and operations (actions). And if you can’t comprehend it – it doesn’t matter. You probably don’t know calculus, analysis, algebraic geometry, relativity, quantum mechanics, or the difference between hierarchical, relational, functional, object oriented, and bayesian programming, or the design patterns in each. Or the fundamental problems of mathematical economics, categories, use of symmetries as intermediary systems of economic measurement. Or even the problem of protein folding or why all of those questions are related by the problem a lack of an operational logic of geometries that replaces the operational logic of lines and curves using positional names that we call mathematics.
-
Expanding the Bullet List: What Is Propertarianism?
LETS USE MINIMUM DETAIL “Propertarianism is the completion of (the complete) scientific method.” That’s it. Period. But it’s a profound thing. Very. Now what do we do with that completed scientific method? This scientific method is value neutral, and commensurable regardless of discipline, and universal in application. We use that scientific method to produce a value neutral fully commensurable language across all disciplines. We use that logic and language to produce a universally commensurable value neutral system of law. We used that value neutral system of law to produce a constitution. That constitution’s principle innovation is to incrementally suppress the means by which western civlization in the ancient and modern world was undermined by crimes of plausible deniability (which I won’t explain right here), but that’s what you think of when you think of leftism. One can create an infinite number of constitutions of infinite variety using that law, as long as one constructs them truthfully and reciprocally – which is a problem for the left. The constitution we propose restores the american constitution to its original intent as military and treasury that allows for the concentration of military power sufficient for defense of the continent, devolves all other powers to the states, makes everyone liable for the truth and reciprocity of speech in public to the public about matters public (outlaws leftism), and reforms every single aspect of life so that we restore our civilization from the ((())) harms done to it this past century. That constitution is on line and in progress and is a lot to swallow, but then so are the Declaration, Articles of Confederation, Federalist Papers, Constitution, Bill of Rights, The Amendements, History of Supreme Court Rulings, Federal Code, and Individual State constitutions and codes. Propertarianism is the completion of the scientific method, it’s application to the totality of human knowledge, creating a universally commensurable value neutral language; its embodiment in the natural common law of tort; and as a consequence the eradication of [all deceit] from the informational commons. See? LETS ADD A LITTLE MORE DETAIL. Propertarianism completes the scientific method. The culmination of the philosophical program of the 20th century was that there is no via positiva scientific method. Instead, The scientific method is a via negativa method: falsificationary. There are only so many dimensions humans can cognitively imagine and cognitively falsify by tests of consistency: categorical, logical, operational, empirical, rational, reciprocal, complete in scope with defined limits, and consistent and therefore coherent across those dimensions, where one warranties such due diligence, and is liable for the consequence of his displays words and deeds resulting from such statements. By using this method we can create a universally commensurable, value neutral, operational language and as such a universally commensurable logic, across all fields: a system of measurement for the truthfulness of speech. We can then use this language and this method to restate the constitution, and our law, in scientific, and operational language, closed to interpretation (legislation from the bench). Moreover we can use this law to outlaw the primary innovation in organized crime that was used to undermine western civilization: false promise; baiting into hazard, using pilpul (sophism) and critique(undermining, straw manning) under cover of plausible deniability to profit from the imposition of harms upon others by financialization (innumeracy), pseudoscience, sophism, supernaturalism, denialism, including the false promises, pseudo-mathematics, pseudoscience, sophistry, and denial of marx, boas, freud, Cantor, Adorno et al, Gramsci et al, Derrida et al, Friedan et al, rand/rothbard, and the neocons. And yes, we can even use it to reform and obtain insight into the failures of Bohr ad Einstein that hilbert predicted, and we can explain the 20th century of mysticism and deceit that hayek warned us of. In other words we can end the jewish-muslim, marxist-postmodernis-feminist program of lying by false promise, and explain why it’s a crime. So, hopefully you can understand why this brief passage here is not something I would stick on the front page for marketing purposes WHAT IS A SYSTEM OF THOUGHT? (A GRAMMAR) What’s the difference between aristotelianism, platonism, and abrahamism? What’s the difference between reason, logic, rationalism? What’s the difference between Aristotelian, enlightenment(empirical) and scientific, revolutions? Whats the difference between math, logic, programming, recipes, and protocols? So what is the difference between aristotelianism, empiricism, science, and testimonialism (propertarianism)? Well, the difference is from the rational to the empirical to the operational. What does operational mean? It means the difference between logic (Sets) and programming (operations). It means the difference between logic (language), empiricism (observation), and operations (actions). And if you can’t comprehend it – it doesn’t matter. You probably don’t know calculus, analysis, algebraic geometry, relativity, quantum mechanics, or the difference between hierarchical, relational, functional, object oriented, and bayesian programming, or the design patterns in each. Or the fundamental problems of mathematical economics, categories, use of symmetries as intermediary systems of economic measurement. Or even the problem of protein folding or why all of those questions are related by the problem a lack of an operational logic of geometries that replaces the operational logic of lines and curves using positional names that we call mathematics.
-
Corporations Should Not Be Allowed to Exist without Benefiting the Commons Directly.
Dec 25, 2019, 2:41 PM Millennials quoting Millennials studying Curt Doolittle. All will be well. Heimdallr Aldafaðir I believe one of the ways America and the West have lost their way. We started to prioritize “profits” over Commons. Jobs over communities. Nomadic capitalism over ” generational roots”. The Socialists aren’t wrong about the dangers of Capitalism. Their solution is mostly moronic. But the danger exists. From what I gather of History and Economics. The only or best way to safeguard the Commons (society, families, countries, people, etc.) is to temper the profit motive with a strong incentive to invest in the Commons. Which is one of the things America (especially) has lost over the centuries. Corporate Charters should return to mortality. They should also require investment in the Commons directly or face termination entirely. Only by showing a direct causal link to the betterment of the Commons should they be allowed to maintain legality and operation. Prove to US how you benefit US. Endless (or functionally endless) Charters are parasitic and enable almost exclusively free riders. No. More. Free. Rides.
- Stephen Thomas
-
Corporations Should Not Be Allowed to Exist without Benefiting the Commons Directly.
Dec 25, 2019, 2:41 PM Millennials quoting Millennials studying Curt Doolittle. All will be well. Heimdallr Aldafaðir I believe one of the ways America and the West have lost their way. We started to prioritize “profits” over Commons. Jobs over communities. Nomadic capitalism over ” generational roots”. The Socialists aren’t wrong about the dangers of Capitalism. Their solution is mostly moronic. But the danger exists. From what I gather of History and Economics. The only or best way to safeguard the Commons (society, families, countries, people, etc.) is to temper the profit motive with a strong incentive to invest in the Commons. Which is one of the things America (especially) has lost over the centuries. Corporate Charters should return to mortality. They should also require investment in the Commons directly or face termination entirely. Only by showing a direct causal link to the betterment of the Commons should they be allowed to maintain legality and operation. Prove to US how you benefit US. Endless (or functionally endless) Charters are parasitic and enable almost exclusively free riders. No. More. Free. Rides.
- Stephen Thomas
-
The Propertarian Constitution Solves One Problem
Dec 26, 2019, 9:54 AM The propertarian constitution solves one problem – the problem of the abrahamic conquests made possible by roman imperial administration and law combined with and greek literacy and reason, and the problem of the 20th century made possible by the industrial and technical revolutions: the institutionalization of deception made possible by mass media, and fiat credit. We solve that problem by demanding Truth and Reciprocity in all aspects of commerce and commons to end (a) false promise (b) baiting into hazard, and (c) rent-seeking (gains without contribution to the risk of productivity). So we require full reciprocity: 1. Productive (prohibition on rents and free riding) 2. fully informed ( prohibition on false promise, obscurantism) 3. voluntary transfer (prohibition on takings of demonstrated interests) 4. including by externality (including others indirectly) 5. warrantied (liability for productivity, fully informed, voluntary transfer. Where all speech in such matters is treated as legal testimony, meaning it must meet the criteria of consistency in the dimensions 1. categorical, 2. logical, 3. operational, 4. empirical, 5. rational, 6. reciprocal 7. complete within limits, and the consequences of which are 8. within one’s ability to perform restitution. And the propertarian constitution institutes: 1. Reformations to institutions and processes thereby eliminating all means of parasitism. 2. Restitutions to those who have been harmed. 3. Punishments for those who have done harm. 4. Preventions: Changes in the constitution and the law creating a continuous market for profiting from the punishment of these forms of parasitism, once again forcing us into the market for voluntary cooperation in oder to survive, prosper, and flourish. So the propertarian constitution is structured as the prosecution of a crime by entire classes of people, and the restitutions, punishments, and preventions under law. This will be the greatest boon to western civilization since the industrial revolution, and will effectively outlaw the entire leftist program, prosecute, impoverish, ostracize, or imprison (or worse) those who have perpetrated this crime against our people. And hopefully it will end the abrahamic program forever.