Mar 22, 2020, 1:42 AM by Luke Weinhagen P often looks like a competing interpretation of philosophy or a competing ideology. When what is really offers is fidelity and disambiguity to the underlying concepts of all philosophy and ideology (at differing costs to each). In the case of UPB this clarity comes from discovery of a superior definition of property. In the case of NAP this clarity comes in the form of identification of full-accounting. So, counter-reaction is usually misaligned nuance I think. The nuance is in being able to see these simply as improved inputs and not as just making the original work wrong.
Form: Short Note
-
Reciprocity functions as the explanation of the preservation of demonstrated int
Reciprocity functions as the explanation of the preservation of demonstrated interest https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/reciprocity-functions-as-the-explanation-of-the-preservation-of-demonstrated-interest/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 20:28:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266104088913215488
-
The Military’s Job in A Crisis Is to Preserve the Government
The Military’s Job in A Crisis Is to Preserve the Government https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/the-militarys-job-in-a-crisis-is-to-preserve-the-government/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 20:19:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266101824416878592
-
The Military’s Job in A Crisis Is to Preserve the Government
Mar 22, 2020, 1:26 PM You see, the military’s job in a crisis is to preserve the government, in an effort to preserve order. Defense is harder than offense. It requires concentration of forces. The military is small in number. The country is vast. So if you aren’t trying to take over the government by force but to demand the use of the crisis as an opportunity for change, and you’re asking the military to step up and make sure it happens or conditions will degrade….
-
The Military’s Job in A Crisis Is to Preserve the Government
Mar 22, 2020, 1:26 PM You see, the military’s job in a crisis is to preserve the government, in an effort to preserve order. Defense is harder than offense. It requires concentration of forces. The military is small in number. The country is vast. So if you aren’t trying to take over the government by force but to demand the use of the crisis as an opportunity for change, and you’re asking the military to step up and make sure it happens or conditions will degrade….
-
Why They Emphasize Intersubjectively Verifiable Property
Why They Emphasize Intersubjectively Verifiable Property https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/why-they-emphasize-intersubjectively-verifiable-property/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 20:03:36 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266097815819882502
-
Why They Emphasize Intersubjectively Verifiable Property
Mar 22, 2020, 1:43 PM I can’t always come into possession (exclusive control) over those things in which I’ve demonstrated an interest (by bearing a cost so that I can demonstrate an interest). Just because I have invested doesn’t mean I can come into possession of what I’ve invested in. Awareness > opportunity > resources > demonstrated Interest > (common share > contractual share > possession in fact) This is why reductio analysis fails. And it’s why the jewish libertarians emphasize reductio analysis to bait you into hazard. And why they emphasize intersubjectively verifiable property (physical) rather than demonstrated interests in property in toto, in order to bait you into hazard.
-
Why They Emphasize Intersubjectively Verifiable Property
Mar 22, 2020, 1:43 PM I can’t always come into possession (exclusive control) over those things in which I’ve demonstrated an interest (by bearing a cost so that I can demonstrate an interest). Just because I have invested doesn’t mean I can come into possession of what I’ve invested in. Awareness > opportunity > resources > demonstrated Interest > (common share > contractual share > possession in fact) This is why reductio analysis fails. And it’s why the jewish libertarians emphasize reductio analysis to bait you into hazard. And why they emphasize intersubjectively verifiable property (physical) rather than demonstrated interests in property in toto, in order to bait you into hazard.
-
Balance Sheet Thinking 😉
Mar 22, 2020, 1:45 PM
—“Hm. If I exchange demonstrated interest, then I will be bearing a cost on that which other has already born a cost to demonstrate an interest, won’t I?”—
Yes, but it’s a voluntary exchange, and if productive, the net is an increase. I other words, the transaction (full accounting again) increases the balance sheet of the individual or group or the individual or group wouldn’t have voluntarily done so.
-
Balance Sheet Thinking 😉
Mar 22, 2020, 1:45 PM
—“Hm. If I exchange demonstrated interest, then I will be bearing a cost on that which other has already born a cost to demonstrate an interest, won’t I?”—
Yes, but it’s a voluntary exchange, and if productive, the net is an increase. I other words, the transaction (full accounting again) increases the balance sheet of the individual or group or the individual or group wouldn’t have voluntarily done so.