Form: Question

  • Q&A: “CURT: HOW ARE WE NOT WEALTHIER THAN CAVE MEN?” —“we are not wealthier th

    Q&A: “CURT: HOW ARE WE NOT WEALTHIER THAN CAVE MEN?”

    —“we are not wealthier than cave men, we have made all goods and services infinitely cheaper through cooperation in a division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor and advocacy.”—

    —“I obviously understand how a division of labor leads to higher productivity and more opportunities experienced by people, but I would think that’d still make each of us wealthier than cavemen.”—

    Rhetorical device to draw attention to the fact that our only existential wealth is time. And through cooperation we have radically increased the purchasing power of time, by radically increasing our productivity through a division of knowledge and labor.

    This statement illustrates better than any other that I have found, that we cannot increase the inventory of time (much), but we can dramatically increase the caloric transformation of the universe for our benefit by working in complex cooperative arrangements.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-31 16:18:00 UTC

  • EXAMPLES? —Curt, can you give me some examples of immoral behaviors that would

    EXAMPLES?

    —Curt, can you give me some examples of immoral behaviors that would be permitted under rothbardianism that would be suppressed under propertarianism?—

    Great question.

    The classical example is blackmail – which while voluntary (a) is not productive, (b) incentivizes retaliation, and (c) constitutes a conspiracy against others or the commons.

    In order for cooperation to be rational it must consist of productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer of property en toto, free of imposition of costs against property en toto by externality. Blackmail is objectively immoral (a disincentive to cooperation, and a privatization – theft – of the commons of ‘cooperation’). We don’t tend to think of the stock of trust as an asset but it is one of our most influential in the production of economic velocity and therefore prosperity.

    Cheers

    Curt


    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-31 07:14:00 UTC

  • What are your thoughts on this (when you have time)?

    What are your thoughts on this (when you have time)?


    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-30 20:47:00 UTC

  • “How does one construct a polity around truth telling which is competitive again

    —“How does one construct a polity around truth telling which is competitive against more demagogical ones, given that all populations exhibit variations in predisposition and ability for truth telling, or for scientific thought and speech?”— Eli Harman

    1 – A rule (non parasitism), a book (articulation), a plan (of implementation)

    2 – A minority of males who demand it via violence (use the same strategy the opposition does).

    3 – Raise the cost of the status quo until the demands (rule, book, implementation) are met. (the same strategy the opposition does)

    4 – Crush the Opposition Openly under Truth using social, legal, Political and military means.

    5 – Success of enforced truth telling will spread like any other technology give it’s (obvious) competitive utility.

    **There is NO DIFFERENCE between the evolution of each era from animism to mysticism, from mysticism to religion, from religion to reason and reason rationalism and rationalism to science … and from science to truth. ***

    In every era men have resisted increasing truthfulness, yet in every era they benefit from it.

    This revolution in social science will equal the impact of the revolution in physical science.

    The only question (in any era) is whether there are a surplus of unsatisfied males that would rather fight than fail. I am sort of counting on that peak happening by 2020-2025


    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-25 05:52:00 UTC

  • Kudos, and A Question: “Do You Identify With the Label Alt-Right, or New Right?”

    Hi Curt, I wanted to let you know I discovered you and your work after listening to your appearance on The Right Stuff. Very interesting episode that stands out from the rest. I have never had much interest in libertarianism (I came from a left wing anarchist background) but I find all the material coming out of the propertarian institute to be incredibly lucid, coherent, articulate, and enlightening. I have watched a lot of your videos and read the posts you make and find the arguments you make to be salient in a way that is not typically found in discussions in the alt-right strata, or anywhere else for that matter. I’m curious if you would identify with the label of “alternative or new right” ? — Chris Jones

    [T]hanks Chris. You made my day. And it matters to me a great deal when I get these posts and messages. While in the past year or two I’ve been gaining popularity, and comprehensibility, I worked for many years to develop propertarianism as an amoral scientific language of ethics, morality and politics. And to do it, I worked hard to make enough money that I could afford to do it. And sometimes, when tired, overwhelmed, or subject to passionate criticism I wondered if it was worth it – the cost was my health, my marriage, and most of my wealth. So every compliment you folks give me is something I cherish. Propertarianism should evolve to replace psychology, ethics, sociology, morality, and politics the way reason eclipsed mysticism. I believe I have corrected the pseudosciences of the 19th century, and completed the enlightenment transformation from mysticism to rationalism by the transformation of rationalism to science. Now, as for how I consider myself, I consider myself an Aristocratic Egalitarian, or as we would say in common language “Conservative Libertarian”. What I share with the NRx movement is agreement that the Cathedral Complex has replaced the Aristocracy and Church, and done so at great harm to our people. What I share with the Alt Right is the disdain for the Cathedral Complex’s use of pseudoscience, propaganda, and the institutionalization of lying in its attempt to reinvent christian mysticism as a universal heresy we call democratic socialist secular humanism. What I share with both movements is a recognition that the enlightenment project has failed because it has resulted in the Cathedral Complex and the destruction of western civilization. How I differ is in defining causes, and seeking actionable solutions rather than offering criticisms. I realize that the west never wrote down its philosophy and religion, but practiced it as a tradition – as did our british-drudic ancestors, who were exterminated, and our aristocratic ancestors who were indoctrinated by the church – as did our aristocratic ancestors who have been indoctrinated by the Cathedral complex. And because of these losses we had no means of resistance against the cathedral complex. And the first conquest of the greco-roman west by the first great lie (babylonia/jewish/egyptian mysticism) was only saved by the reintroduction of aristotle (science). Just as in the current era, the second great lie (pseudoscience and lying) – both Jewish inventions. Both propagated by women and slaves (underclasses). And so in both eras jews invented great lies, that appeal to women and spread tot he underclasses as a means of destroying our civilization. The question is, since we cannot return the clock to the past, how do we innovate, rather than regress? We can write a bible of sorts (a canon of law) and we can reform our cult (religion of intergenerational pedagogy) and we can reform our government (means of producing commons) so that THE GREAT LIES can no longer be used by women and slaves (the underclasses) to destroy our civilization. Yarvin is a jewish continental, Hoppe a german rationalist, and I am an anglo empiricist. We all carry our traditions in the physical structures of our brains. But just as the greeks brought us out of ignorance with science, and the british brought us out of mysticism with science, we can bring ourselves out of pseudoscience and deceit with science. And use that science to construct institutions that satisfy the needs of the human animal while limiting our collective desire to harm, lie, cheat, steal, and conspire rather than engage in productive activities. Thank you for the support. And please stay with me on our journey. smile emoticon Hugs Curt

  • Kudos, and A Question: “Do You Identify With the Label Alt-Right, or New Right?”

    Hi Curt, I wanted to let you know I discovered you and your work after listening to your appearance on The Right Stuff. Very interesting episode that stands out from the rest. I have never had much interest in libertarianism (I came from a left wing anarchist background) but I find all the material coming out of the propertarian institute to be incredibly lucid, coherent, articulate, and enlightening. I have watched a lot of your videos and read the posts you make and find the arguments you make to be salient in a way that is not typically found in discussions in the alt-right strata, or anywhere else for that matter. I’m curious if you would identify with the label of “alternative or new right” ? — Chris Jones

    [T]hanks Chris. You made my day. And it matters to me a great deal when I get these posts and messages. While in the past year or two I’ve been gaining popularity, and comprehensibility, I worked for many years to develop propertarianism as an amoral scientific language of ethics, morality and politics. And to do it, I worked hard to make enough money that I could afford to do it. And sometimes, when tired, overwhelmed, or subject to passionate criticism I wondered if it was worth it – the cost was my health, my marriage, and most of my wealth. So every compliment you folks give me is something I cherish. Propertarianism should evolve to replace psychology, ethics, sociology, morality, and politics the way reason eclipsed mysticism. I believe I have corrected the pseudosciences of the 19th century, and completed the enlightenment transformation from mysticism to rationalism by the transformation of rationalism to science. Now, as for how I consider myself, I consider myself an Aristocratic Egalitarian, or as we would say in common language “Conservative Libertarian”. What I share with the NRx movement is agreement that the Cathedral Complex has replaced the Aristocracy and Church, and done so at great harm to our people. What I share with the Alt Right is the disdain for the Cathedral Complex’s use of pseudoscience, propaganda, and the institutionalization of lying in its attempt to reinvent christian mysticism as a universal heresy we call democratic socialist secular humanism. What I share with both movements is a recognition that the enlightenment project has failed because it has resulted in the Cathedral Complex and the destruction of western civilization. How I differ is in defining causes, and seeking actionable solutions rather than offering criticisms. I realize that the west never wrote down its philosophy and religion, but practiced it as a tradition – as did our british-drudic ancestors, who were exterminated, and our aristocratic ancestors who were indoctrinated by the church – as did our aristocratic ancestors who have been indoctrinated by the Cathedral complex. And because of these losses we had no means of resistance against the cathedral complex. And the first conquest of the greco-roman west by the first great lie (babylonia/jewish/egyptian mysticism) was only saved by the reintroduction of aristotle (science). Just as in the current era, the second great lie (pseudoscience and lying) – both Jewish inventions. Both propagated by women and slaves (underclasses). And so in both eras jews invented great lies, that appeal to women and spread tot he underclasses as a means of destroying our civilization. The question is, since we cannot return the clock to the past, how do we innovate, rather than regress? We can write a bible of sorts (a canon of law) and we can reform our cult (religion of intergenerational pedagogy) and we can reform our government (means of producing commons) so that THE GREAT LIES can no longer be used by women and slaves (the underclasses) to destroy our civilization. Yarvin is a jewish continental, Hoppe a german rationalist, and I am an anglo empiricist. We all carry our traditions in the physical structures of our brains. But just as the greeks brought us out of ignorance with science, and the british brought us out of mysticism with science, we can bring ourselves out of pseudoscience and deceit with science. And use that science to construct institutions that satisfy the needs of the human animal while limiting our collective desire to harm, lie, cheat, steal, and conspire rather than engage in productive activities. Thank you for the support. And please stay with me on our journey. smile emoticon Hugs Curt

  • Why Do We Treat Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto any differently than we

    Why Do We Treat Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto any differently than we treat Mein Kampf? I mean, communism did far more damage to the world than the Nazis ever dreamed of. Yet nobody talks about banning those books? I’ve read them all and if you know a little economics there isn’t much to either of them. One is a sentimental journey, the other is pseudoscience.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-23 10:28:00 UTC

  • WE CAN LOOK AT IT BOTH WAYS Have we failed to create equality through forcible r

    WE CAN LOOK AT IT BOTH WAYS

    Have we failed to create equality through forcible redistribution? Or have we failed to constrain reproduction of the unproductive?


    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-22 06:32:00 UTC

  • Why is Skype so bad and Viber so Good?

    Why is Skype so bad and Viber so Good?


    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-21 08:21:00 UTC

  • I am sorry. I’m confused. How is “gods chosen people” any different from “master

    I am sorry. I’m confused. How is “gods chosen people” any different from “master race”? ‘Cause I don’t think there is any. So I must be confused.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-20 14:13:00 UTC