Form: Outline

  • NECESSARY, PREFERENTIAL AND LUXURY PROPERTIES OF GOVERNMENT A) NECESSARY PROPERT

    NECESSARY, PREFERENTIAL AND LUXURY PROPERTIES OF GOVERNMENT

    A) NECESSARY PROPERTIES

    The NECESSARY properties of of a government are

    1) provide a means of resolving differences without the use of violence (ie: to create a monopoly of violence within a geography.)

    2) To provide a means of resolving differences requires a definition of property rights.

    3) To prohibit alternative definitions of property rights from being imposed by force, theft or fraud, (or immigration.)

    These are the minimum properties of a government.

    B ) ADVANTAGEOUS PROPERTIES

    In addition to these properties, it may also be possible for a group of people to afford to also have government engage in the following:

    4) To provide a means of investing in commons (human and physical infrastructure) by prohibiting free-riding, privatization, and competition when investing in commons.

    5) To provide a means of cooperation between classes where privatization, free riding, rent seeking and competition prevent cooperation between classes.

    6) To reduce both transaction costs and fraud by implementing weights, measures and currency.

    7) To perform as an insurer of last resort against catastrophes.

    These are advantageous properties of government.

    C) PROPERTIES THAT ARE LUXURIES

    In addition to these properties, it may be possible for a group of people to afford to also have the government engage in the following LUXURIES:

    8 ) Redistribution of all kinds, both in services, and in direct payments.

    9) Inter-temporal redistribution from young to old, rather than saving and lending from old to young. (But this is very fragile.)

    These are LUXURIES that can be provided by some governments under rare circumstances in exceptional periods of time, where malthusian and group selection problems have been temporarily held at bay by technological innovation.

    The government is not the source of the ‘good things’. The courts, under the common law and property rights is the source of ‘good things’.

    The government we have today, has destroyed the common law, the rule of law, and created both corporatism and socialism. And we now suffer between two factions that try to control the government for corporatist or socialist means.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-07 13:43:00 UTC

  • THEORIES FROM INTUITION TO CONVICTION TO UNCONSCIOUS ASSUMPTION when I intuit a

    THEORIES FROM INTUITION TO CONVICTION TO UNCONSCIOUS ASSUMPTION

    when I intuit a ‘problem or opportunity’

    when I intuit a relationship or pattern

    when I think of a theory

    when I speak a theory

    when I write a theory

    when I write a theory in formal language

    when I compose tests of a theory

    when I perform tests of a theory

    when I measure the results of many tests of the theory

    when I attempt to falsify a theory

    when I use the results of the tests to refine the theory

    when I can no longer refine the theory

    when I succeed in expanding the scope of the theory to more instances

    when I distribute this theory (publish in some manner), even just by imitation.

    when all further expansions of the scope increase precision of the theory but fail to refute it in the precision of the context it was created. (newton)

    when the theory is applied in many general circumstances

    when the theory is reduced to behavior adopted as a norm

    when the theory is reduced to as a metaphysical and unconscious assumption.

    when the value of the theory is put into question

    –THE METAPHYSICAL CYCLE–


    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-03 11:05:00 UTC

  • 1) WARRIOR – VIOLENCE – ORDER (soldier, sportsman, duty) 2) CRAFTSMAN – EXCHANGE

    1) WARRIOR – VIOLENCE – ORDER

    (soldier, sportsman, duty)

    2) CRAFTSMAN – EXCHANGE – WEALTH

    (merchant, scientist, engineer, professional, wealth)

    3) PHILOSOPHER – ARGUMENT – WISDOM

    (priest, advisor, mentor, teacher, judge, wisdom)


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-31 04:49:00 UTC

  • The Origins of Property As Increasing Prohibitions on Discounts

    (profound) From Property to Private Property, High Trust Private Property, and Anarchic High Trust Private Property. 1. Community Property is the result of the partial suppression of discounts 1.1 Violence (asymmetry of force) 2. Private property is the result of additional suppression of indirect discounts 2.1 Theft (asymmetry of control) 2.2 Fraud (false information) 2.3 Free Riding (using externalities for self benefit) 3. High Trust Private Property is the RESULT of total Suppression of Personal Discounts. 3.1 Omission (Omitting information) 3.2 Obscurantism (Obscuring information) 3.3 Obstruction (Inhibiting someone else’s transaction) 3.4 Externalization (externalizing costs of any transaction) 3.5 Socializing Losses (externalization to commons) 3.6 Privatizing Gains (appropriation of commons) 4. Anarchic High Trust Private Property is Result of the total suppression of organized discounts 4.1 Rent Seeking (organizational free riding) 4.2 Corruption ( organized rent seeking) 4.3 Conspiracy (organized indirect theft) 4.4 Extortion (Organized direct theft) 4.5 War (organized violence) (Note: almost there. I am trying to tie property rights to trust (velocity) )

  • The Origins of Property As Increasing Prohibitions on Discounts

    (profound) From Property to Private Property, High Trust Private Property, and Anarchic High Trust Private Property. 1. Community Property is the result of the partial suppression of discounts 1.1 Violence (asymmetry of force) 2. Private property is the result of additional suppression of indirect discounts 2.1 Theft (asymmetry of control) 2.2 Fraud (false information) 2.3 Free Riding (using externalities for self benefit) 3. High Trust Private Property is the RESULT of total Suppression of Personal Discounts. 3.1 Omission (Omitting information) 3.2 Obscurantism (Obscuring information) 3.3 Obstruction (Inhibiting someone else’s transaction) 3.4 Externalization (externalizing costs of any transaction) 3.5 Socializing Losses (externalization to commons) 3.6 Privatizing Gains (appropriation of commons) 4. Anarchic High Trust Private Property is Result of the total suppression of organized discounts 4.1 Rent Seeking (organizational free riding) 4.2 Corruption ( organized rent seeking) 4.3 Conspiracy (organized indirect theft) 4.4 Extortion (Organized direct theft) 4.5 War (organized violence) (Note: almost there. I am trying to tie property rights to trust (velocity) )

  • “LET THE PEOPLE DIVIDE. LET OUR PEOPLE GO” (1. The error of the monotheism – equ

    “LET THE PEOPLE DIVIDE. LET OUR PEOPLE GO”

    (1. The error of the monotheism – equality and unity)

    (2. The error of the enlightenment: equality and universal aristocracy)

    (3. The truth of property, contract, and prices)

    LET THE PEOPLE DIVIDE. LET OUR PEOPLE GO.

    Rather than prosecute the false argument that ‘We’ have much in common: LET THE PEOPLE DIVIDE.

    Rulers take advantage of the false argument of the RELIGIOUS ERA: if we make claims of group interest, we can fool people into acting as if they are extended family.

    I should work on this argument a bit, because the enlightenment error of universalism, equality, and an aristocracy of everyone, is also dependent upon the monotheistic error of ‘a family of everyone’.

    Neither of these are true.

    Polytheism is superior to monotheism.

    Micro Polystatism is super to Macro-Monostatism.

    The problem of human cooperation is not moral or ethical or any other form of emotionally misleading, and intellectually false group membership.We do not need to create conceptual or moral homogeneity and equality in order to live happily and peacefully and prosperously together.

    The problem of human cooperation is technical, not preferential: PROPERTY, MONEY, and VOLUNTARY EXCHANGE.

    One cannot reason without logic.

    One cannot describe cause and consequence without narrative.

    One cannot create record and transport knowledge without writing.

    One cannot count and compare units without numbers,

    One cannot measure and compare spaces without operations and units.

    One cannot cooperate without property

    One cannot plan production, without prices.

    The market allows us to cooperate on means despite diverse ends.

    Government is just an organization for the purpose of providing decision making where no other technology exists for the purpose of decision making (direct voting).

    Legitimate government creates contracts : rights and obligations,

    Illegitimate government creates commands, and fraudulently markets them as ‘laws’.

    Government can facilitate cooperation in the market, or it facilitate rents on the market.

    A government that does other than:

    1) enforce contracts, where contracts are not constructible, or enforceable without property rights.

    2) facilitate exchanges via trade policy between classes in cases impossible to construct in the market without such trade facilitation of trade policy.

    3) Provide a means of insurance

    …obtains legitimacy by:

    4) Violence for the self preservation of the privilege of te bureaucracy.

    5) Justification under the religious era’s error of unity of interest

    6) Justification under the enlightenment’s error of equality, universalism, and

    However, this is a continuation of the technique of using repetition, obscurantism, complexity, and our natural cognitive biases, to deny us our ability and desire, to function as families, extended families and tribes, all of whom cooperate via the market.

    but instead of micro-governemtns for families, extended families and tribes, pooling interests for trade policy, insurance, and enforceability of contracts, we are forced under macro government, to give up our opportunity to trade and instead, forced to seek rents and free riding and our own freedom from the state.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-24 04:53:00 UTC

  • TRUST VS THE STATE 1) The lower the trust, the more demand for the state. 2) The

    TRUST VS THE STATE

    1) The lower the trust, the more demand for the state.

    2) The higher the trust, the lower the demand for the state.

    3) The more diverse, the lower the trust.

    4) Diversity creates demand for the state.

    Just how it is.

    DIVERSITY SPECTRUM

    ——————

    Self

    —Offspring

    —Family

    Desirability for Mating

    —Status Distance

    —Genetic Fitness

    —Genetic Distance

    Desirability for Cooperation

    —Reproductive Structure Distance (Family Type)

    —Normative Distance (culture, manners, ethics, morals, myths, traditions, rituals)

    —Resource Distance

    —Legal Distance

    Risk

    —Normative Competitor

    —Material Competitor

    —Material Displacer

    Danger

    —Destroyer

    —Conqueror

    —Murderer

    AN HOMOGENOUS EXTENDED FAMILY WITH LOW DIFFERENCE IN APPEARANCE, ABILITY, NORMS AND RESOURCES = HIGH TRUST.

    Everything from that point onward decreases trust in a population.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-12 10:15:00 UTC

  • FROM TRUTH TO LIE: IMPROVEMENTS TO ANALYSIS OF ARGUMENT AND DEBATE This spectrum

    FROM TRUTH TO LIE: IMPROVEMENTS TO ANALYSIS OF ARGUMENT AND DEBATE

    This spectrum covers the categories of argument used to make honest statements or to deceive.

    I – HONEST (SCIENTIFIC) STATEMENTS

    1 – Operational language (as observable actions)

    2 – Unloaded language (absent verb ‘to-be’) (Unprimed / E-Prime)

    II – LOADED STATEMENTS

    3 – Loaded Language (with verb ‘to be’)

    4 – Shaming and Rallying Language (morally loaded language)

    III – OBSTRUCTIVE STATEMENTS

    5 – Obscurant Language

    6 – Analogistic language

    IV – DECEPTIVE STATEMENTS

    7 – Lying by Omission

    8 – Lying by Misrepresentation

    V – COMBINED DECEPTIVE STATEMENTS

    9 – combinations of types II,III,IV.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-12 04:50:00 UTC

  • WHO INNOVATES POLITICAL THEORY TODAY? MARXISTS (nothing new here) CORPORATISTS (

    WHO INNOVATES POLITICAL THEORY TODAY?

    MARXISTS (nothing new here)

    CORPORATISTS (chinese – state and neo-corporatism)

    POSTMODERNISTS (totalitarian humanism – nothing new)

    PUBLIC CHOICE THEORISTS (democratic socialist game theory – nope)

    ECONOMISTS (center – maybe, MMT etc.)

    CONSERVATIVES (classical liberalism – nothing new here)

    LIBERTARIANS (Hoppe’s polycentric insurance)

    So who really has made any innovation in political theory?

    Everyone in the west is trapped in the paradigm of monopoly democracy. The Chinese have made state corporatism the movement of the 21st century. That seems to be everyone’s direction. And, I guess, compared to Corporatism, that neo-Corporatism is a minor invention. But It’s been around for a long time.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-08 15:05:00 UTC

  • Propertarianism: Arguments to Necessity not Preference Propertarianism is a desc

    Propertarianism: Arguments to Necessity not Preference

    Propertarianism is a descriptive system of universal ethics, determined by necessity, not preference.

    –PRINCIPLES–

    0) Memory and Time = consciousness experience of differences in state

    1) The structure of reproduction

    2) The crimes of reproduction: violence, free riding.

    3) The necessity of the signaling economy for learning and reproduction

    4) The necessity of calculation for action

    5) The necessity of cooperation for scale

    6) The necessity of property in all its forms

    7) The crimes of property: theft, fraud, fraud by omission

    8 ) The structure of production (division of knowledge and labor)

    9) The necessity and properties of naturalism and instrumentalism

    10 ) The properties of language and the problem of obscurantism

    11) The three weapons of influence and the emergent class tripartite structure of the classes

    12) The properties of number, money, prices, contract, and law.

    13) The institutions of cooperation at scale: rules and commons.

    14) The development of the social capital of trust: the problem of diversity vs outbreeding.

    15) The crimes of cooperation at scale: Rent seeking, Privatization, Socialization, Corruption, Extortion, Usurpation, War.

    16) The Institutions of competition at scale : heterogeneous polities.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-07 06:16:00 UTC