Source: Facebook

  • “We hold individuals accountable through Law, we hold groups accountable through

    —“We hold individuals accountable through Law, we hold groups accountable through War.”—Bill Anderson


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-21 16:21:00 UTC

  • STOREY TRIES TO PULL THE STAKE FROM THE ROTHBARDIAN VAMPIRE AND FAILS. —“The s

    STOREY TRIES TO PULL THE STAKE FROM THE ROTHBARDIAN VAMPIRE AND FAILS.

    —“The state, being a judicial monopolist, is an irrational system of government because of the self-contradictory violation of private property rights required to establish or maintain it. “—

    That’s illogical (irrational) since no rights can exist until an insurer is brought into material existence to insure them. There exist no property rights until they are constructed. We may NEED possessions, the norm of property, and rights of restitution from an insurer of property, but no rights can be brought into existence without an insurer capable of de-facto insuring them.

    —“Praxeological jurisprudence and the doctrine of dialogical estoppel provide the rational framework to show that, where there is incentive for rational consistency in the law, estopping the activities of state government and, rather, employing private judicial services is the only rationally viable option.”—

    The value of constructing increasingly competitive cooperation requires the suppression of the imposition of costs upon the investments of others so that retaliation is avoided, and all individuals must limit themselves to productive, fully informed, voluntary transfer, free of imposition of costs by externality. Otherwise the incentive of the strong is to prey upon the weak through killing, takings, or serfdom or enslavement rather than cooperation.

    —“rational consistency in the law,”—

    The purpose of rational consistency in the law is to prevent the jurist from favoritism, and to remove incentives to enter into conflict, so that extra-judicial violence and retaliation cycles are prevented.

    —“private judicial services”—

    There is a vast difference between an independent, private, professional judiciary and a polylogical law. All polylogical law societies have failed. They cannot suppress sufficient desires for retaliation to eliminate demand for prior restraint, or the extermination of deviations from norms, or invasion by peoples with lower trust (allowing greater parasitism in law).

    The rest of the article is nonsense as well And here is why:

    1) you rely on praxeology, meaning, through sequential analysis of incentives and choices from them.

    2) you refrain from arguing your point praxeological, and instead do so ideally.

    In other words, your argument is ridiculous because it relies on one logic but demonstrates another. THIS IS HOW THE COSMOPOLITANS learned to lie from the practice of PILPUL (excuse making) in jewish law. The use of excuse making in christian doctrine (hermenutics).

    3) you are relying on the existence of an enforced order (state, normative law, tribal law, cult law) as a prior cause if you even mention the words Estoppel. In other words, you’re just repeating hoppe/what’s-his-name, in that you’re assuming a contract of cooperation at the point of negotiation (legal argument) when a state or equivalent must exist to construct the institution of property or demand rational discourse, or truth. Instead, we start with the permanent opportunity for predation, flight, or cooperation, and there exists no promise of truth or non-contradiction, or even rationality of argument – only a negotiation of demands, one of which is that if the negotiation fails, is violence.

    So your argument starts out with a pyramid of some combination of lie, error, and falsehood, as such all that yo produce from false premises is merely error.

    In other words. it’s a circular argument. A bit of sophomoric nonsense sold by rabbis, rothbard, hoppe and the like to simpletons indoctrinated into abrahamic fictionalism so deeply that they cannot but fall victim to it themselves.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev Ukraine

    (Ps: libertinism is just common-property marxism. Another abrahamic fiction constructed of Pilpul (lies). Time to grow up. Marxism, Libertinism, Neoconservativsm are dead, and we are in the process of killing postmodernism.)


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-21 16:17:00 UTC

  • PETERSON’S POSTMODERNISM Peterson is in part a postmodernist because he relies u

    PETERSON’S POSTMODERNISM

    Peterson is in part a postmodernist because he relies upon a postmodern (utilitarian) definition of truth – as if the purpose of truth was choice of good or preference when we are cooperating, rather than decidability in matters of conflict when cooperation fails.

    The more complex the division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, negotiation, and advocacy, the greater requirement for decidability.

    Peterson (I assume) preserves this postmodernism, in order to preserve his fondness for literature, idealism, and supernaturalism, and especially conflationary idealism and supernaturalism (Fictionalism).

    I can understand why he needs this ‘crutch’ because the monomyth, the list of plots, the archetypes, and the virtues provide our best historical (empirically devolved) and most enduring analysis of psychology, and method of pedagogy.

    However, there is a very great difference between the teaching of meaning so that we may discover and seize opportunities in reality, and the teaching of law so that we may decide conflicts without provoking retaliation cycles.

    So while Peterson COULD say “truth is truth” and “wisdom is wisdom”, and while we can CHOOSE with wisdom, we can only DECIDE with Truth – he doesn’t. Instead, he conflates the personally preferable the common good and the necessarily true.

    Otherwise, Peterson is on the way to restoring our ancient literary ‘Religion’, but he seems bent on preserving the ‘fictionalism’ (lies) of Abrahamism.

    My question is, why preserve the lies of Abrahamism, if is is the use of the techniques of Abrahamism – fictionalism as a means of deception by suggestion – that the marxists (pseudo-science) and postmodernists (pseudorationalism) used to defeat the west in both the ancient (Forcible christianization) and modern (forcible marxism and postmodernism) eras.

    Once Peterson resolves this one question I think he’s not just telling the conservatives what they want to hear. Until then, that’s all he is doing.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    ===RESPONSE TO CRITICISM===

    —“You seem to equate fictionalism, i.e. system that deals in fictitious, imaginary semi-abstract universe and the lies….”—

    No. FIction vs Fictionalism. Fictionalism is a technical term. It means misrepresenting a fiction as existential or true.

    a) Historicize: deflate myth into history and literature for the purpose of decidability in matters of dispute.

    b) Fictionalize: convert into monomyth, plot, archetype, virtues for the purpose of meaning for the self.

    c) Fictionalism: conflate myth, history, literature, law, science, real and ideal for the purpose of deception for political ends.

    Compare 1) Science(measurements that remove error,bias,deceit), Common Law: empirical evidence of disputes. Economics: empirical record of demonstrated preferences. History (narrative of cause and effect), Literature(Fiction), Myth (hyperbole), under anthropomorphic gods, demigods, heroes all subject to the laws of the universe, who represent portfolios of virtues and sins for personal ends with 2) idealism supernaturalism, and conflation: supernatural authoritarianism, for the purpose of communicating POLITICAL ends, in which history, myth, laws, archetypes, ideals, utopias, and false promises of paradise in the present or after death are conflated. The most common examples are monotheistic religion (pseudo-myth) and mathematical platonism, marxist pseudoscience, and postmodern pseudo-rationalism.

    There is a difference between use of deflation by monomyth, plot, archetype and virtue, and use of conflation in matters of wisdom of the self, and the use of deceit in politics. Virtues assist us in maximizing opportunities while limiting negative consequences to ourselves and the polity. The individual can enact his own compromises and exchanges, but politics is not but a proxy for violence and is not a matter of wisdom but DECIDABILITY. If not, then it is not a matter for politics which can only be decidable if it is empirical.

    THis is how the left works: to circumvent the compromises of exchange necessary for the political to consist of moral actions (non parasitism).

    —“The fairy tale – is it a lie to be exterminated? It seems to be an idea so grotesque, that only the complete anti-humanist would dwell on it.”—

    A fairy tale consists of fiction (myth) not fictionalism (virgin birth of a savior).

    —“Well, it does. Because decidability in real world situation has nothing to do in general with verifiable truth in Popperian sense nor with falsifiability of the hypothetical proposition.”–

    Personal decidability does not, But POLITICAL decidability DOES. Because personal choice requires non-imposition, and political decidability requires imposition..

    There is a very good reason why the west, using common law, deflationary truth, deflated institutions, maintained the separation of religion(wisdom) and state(law). And that reason is largely responsible for western rates of development versus their nearest competitor the chinese who also avoided conflation.

    —“Now, I totally open to the idea that the scientific truth one day may tell me a good answer to that dilemma, but I am dealing with not a fictional proposal of a complete ULTIMATE science, but with a real and extremely limited science that does not know much about how an individual functions, nor how the society functions in a sense relevant to a question at hand.”—

    The fact that you cannot imagine that it is possible to create tests of dimensions in natural language the same way we create tests of dimensions in mathematical language is simply due to the very recent solutions to questions of language in philosophy, the development of algorithmic language in computer science, and the scientific method’s inversion of justificationism (intent) with criticism (darwinian survival of ideas in the market for application), and the very recent confirmation of stoic acquisitionism, which I’ve expressed as propertarianism. In other words, locke was close to the stoics: we can in fact reduce not only all moral action to statements of property, but all of psychology and sociology as statements of property – thus, providing the social sciences with the final unit of commensurability: property.

    So the fact that you don’t know those things is simply because it’s taken us from 300AD to the present to vacate enough of Abrahamic Fictionalism to restore our thought to it’s deflationary state 1700 years ago.

    Now if that loss of 1700 years, and the rather obvious fact that by Archimedes greece had started the industrial revolution, is not enough of a criticism of immigration of non-european underclasses, and the cancer of abrahamic fictionalism, I don’t know what is.

    We lost four great civilizations to Abrahamism in the form of judaism, christianity, and islam, and we are currently in the process of being forced into another migratory dark age by the fact that Abrahamic deceptions are so appealing to women and the underclasses.

    Is there a greater moral crime in all of history than Abrahamic Fictionalism? I don’t think anything comes close. Abrahamic fictionalism has no equivalent. It destroyed the ancient world, and it is in the process of destroying the modern.

    1) Zoroastrianism > Judaism > Christianity > Islamism defeated Greek and Roman Reason and destroyed north african, levantine, persian, byzantine and roman civilizations, and brought about the dark age through continuous raiding of the west.

    2) German Rationalism > Jewish Marxism > French Postmodernism > Puritan Feminism are defeating the anglo germanic enlightenment. The same process is being repeated. The only people to resist the abrahamic deceits were the north sea peoples who ‘saved themselves’ from Christianity, and the Chinese who built a wall to keep out the barbarians and preserved their kinship purity even at economic cost to them.

    So there is a very great difference between decidable literature of history, law, and science, and wisdom literature in the form of fiction, and fictionalism, in the form of abrahamic conflation and deception by suggestion.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-21 15:51:00 UTC

  • PETERSON’S POSTMODERNISM Peterson is in part a postmodernist because he relies u

    PETERSON’S POSTMODERNISM

    Peterson is in part a postmodernist because he relies upon a postmodern (utilitarian) definition of truth – as if the purpose of truth was choice of good or preference when we are cooperating, rather than decidability in matters of conflict when cooperation fails.

    The more complex the division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, negotiation, and advocacy, the greater requirement for decidability.

    Peterson (I assume) preserves this postmodernism, in order to preserve his fondness for literature, idealism, and supernaturalism, and especially conflationary idealism and supernaturalism (Fictionalism).

    I can understand why he needs this ‘crutch’ because the monomyth, the list of plots, the archetypes, and the virtues provide our best historical (empirically devolved) and most enduring analysis of psychology, and method of pedagogy.

    However, there is a very great difference between the teaching of meaning so that we may discover and seize opportunities in reality, and the teaching of law so that we may decide conflicts without provoking retaliation cycles.

    So while Peterson COULD say “truth is truth” and “wisdom is wisdom”, and while we can CHOOSE with wisdom, we can only DECIDE with Truth.

    Otherwise, Peterson is on the way to restoring our ancient literary ‘Religion’, but he seems bent on preserving the ‘fictionalism’ (lies) of Abrahamism.

    My question is, why preserve the lies of Abrahamism, if is is the use of the techniques of Abrahamism – fictionalism as a means of deception by suggestion – that the marxists (pseudo-science) and postmodernists (pseudo-rationalism) used to defeat the west in both the ancient (Forcible christianization) and modern (forcible marxism and postmodernism) eras.

    Once Peterson resolves this one question I think he’s not just telling the conservatives what they want to hear. Until then, that’s all he is doing.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    ===RESPONSE TO CRITICISM===

    —“You seem to equate fictionalism, i.e. system that deals in fictitious, imaginary semi-abstract universe and the lies….”—

    No. FIction vs Fictionalism. Fictionalism is a technical term. It means misrepresenting a fiction as existential or true.

    a) Historicize: deflate myth into history and literature for the purpose of decidability in matters of dispute.

    b) Fictionalize: convert into monomyth, plot, archetype, virtues for the purpose of meaning for the self.

    c) Fictionalism: conflate myth, history, literature, law, science, real and ideal for the purpose of deception for political ends.

    Compare 1) Science(measurements that remove error,bias,deceit), Common Law: empirical evidence of disputes. Economics: empirical record of demonstrated preferences. History (narrative of cause and effect), Literature(Fiction), Myth (hyperbole), under anthropomorphic gods, demigods, heroes all subject to the laws of the universe, who represent portfolios of virtues and sins for personal ends with 2) idealism supernaturalism, and conflation: supernatural authoritarianism, for the purpose of communicating POLITICAL ends, in which history, myth, laws, archetypes, ideals, utopias, and false promises of paradise in the present or after death are conflated. The most common examples are monotheistic religion (pseudo-myth) and mathematical platonism, marxist pseudoscience, and postmodern pseudo-rationalism.

    There is a difference between use of deflation by monomyth, plot, archetype and virtue, and use of conflation in matters of wisdom of the self, and the use of deceit in politics. Virtues assist us in maximizing opportunities while limiting negative consequences to ourselves and the polity. The individual can enact his own compromises and exchanges, but politics is not but a proxy for violence and is not a matter of wisdom but DECIDABILITY. If not, then it is not a matter for politics which can only be decidable if it is empirical.

    THis is how the left works: to circumvent the compromises of exchange necessary for the political to consist of moral actions (non parasitism).

    —“The fairy tale – is it a lie to be exterminated? It seems to be an idea so grotesque, that only the complete anti-humanist would dwell on it.”—

    A fairy tale consists of fiction (myth) not fictionalism (virgin birth of a savior).

    —“Well, it does. Because decidability in real world situation has nothing to do in general with verifiable truth in Popperian sense nor with falsifiability of the hypothetical proposition.”–

    Personal decidability does not, But POLITICAL decidability DOES. Because personal choice requires non-imposition, and political decidability requires imposition..

    There is a very good reason why the west, using common law, deflationary truth, deflated institutions, maintained the separation of religion(wisdom) and state(law). And that reason is largely responsible for western rates of development versus their nearest competitor the chinese who also avoided conflation.

    —“Now, I totally open to the idea that the scientific truth one day may tell me a good answer to that dilemma, but I am dealing with not a fictional proposal of a complete ULTIMATE science, but with a real and extremely limited science that does not know much about how an individual functions, nor how the society functions in a sense relevant to a question at hand.”—

    The fact that you cannot imagine that it is possible to create tests of dimensions in natural language the same way we create tests of dimensions in mathematical language is simply due to the very recent solutions to questions of language in philosophy, the development of algorithmic language in computer science, and the scientific method’s inversion of justificationism (intent) with criticism (darwinian survival of ideas in the market for application), and the very recent confirmation of stoic acquisitionism, which I’ve expressed as propertarianism. In other words, locke was close to the stoics: we can in fact reduce not only all moral action to statements of property, but all of psychology and sociology as statements of property – thus, providing the social sciences with the final unit of commensurability: property.

    So the fact that you don’t know those things is simply because it’s taken us from 300AD to the present to vacate enough of Abrahamic Fictionalism to restore our thought to it’s deflationary state 1700 years ago.

    Now if that loss of 1700 years, and the rather obvious fact that by Archimedes greece had started the industrial revolution, is not enough of a criticism of immigration of non-european underclasses, and the cancer of abrahamic fictionalism, I don’t know what is.

    We lost four great civilizations to Abrahamism in the form of judaism, christianity, and islam, and we are currently in the process of being forced into another migratory dark age by the fact that Abrahamic deceptions are so appealing to women and the underclasses.

    Is there a greater moral crime in all of history than Abrahamic Fictionalism? I don’t think anything comes close. Abrahamic fictionalism has no equivalent. It destroyed the ancient world, and it is in the process of destroying the modern.

    1) Zoroastrianism > Judaism > Christianity > Islamism defeated Greek and Roman Reason and destroyed north african, levantine, persian, byzantine and roman civilizations, and brought about the dark age through continuous raiding of the west.

    2) German Rationalism > Jewish Marxism > French Postmodernism > Puritan Feminism are defeating the anglo germanic enlightenment. The same process is being repeated. The only people to resist the abrahamic deceits were the north sea peoples who ‘saved themselves’ from Christianity, and the Chinese who built a wall to keep out the barbarians and preserved their kinship purity even at economic cost to them.

    So there is a very great difference between decidable literature of history, law, and science, and wisdom literature in the form of fiction, and fictionalism, in the form of abrahamic conflation and deception by suggestion.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-21 15:51:00 UTC

  • We can choose preferences by whatever means we can construct an excuse for that

    We can choose preferences by whatever means we can construct an excuse for that choice, but we can only resolve conflicts by materialist meas.

    This is the difference. Idealists and supernaturalists only see the head of the coin not the tail: a great deal of cooperation between people who have material responsibilities fails.

    People who avoid the materialist rarely if ever have any responsibilities of consequence.

    Their folly is an example of conspicuous consumption: a luxury good mad possible by materialists.

    Or put simply: “silly women can believe silly things, but men who may die in war, hunt, and labor, have no luxury of folly.”


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-21 15:39:00 UTC

  • What ever led us to believe that AGENCY was a universal ability rather than the

    What ever led us to believe that AGENCY was a universal ability rather than the result of a coincidence of necessary goods, the lack of any one which prevents agency; and that very few people possess agency over their most trivial impulses?


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-21 10:55:00 UTC

  • THE ONLY ‘LIBERALS’ ARE THE STRICT CONSTRUCTIONISTS by Chuck Bonner Liberals at

    THE ONLY ‘LIBERALS’ ARE THE STRICT CONSTRUCTIONISTS

    by Chuck Bonner

    Liberals at the time our Constitution was ratified were strict constructionists / right-wingers, they advocated for the very liberal federal system of government, rather than the limited monarchy they were subject to as citizens of the British crown.

    The federal system gave control of the economy to the people, through the people’s authority to tax and regulate industry at the state and local level. Preferably, the local level.

    The liberals at the time the Constitution was ratified, believed that the more decentralized the economy was, the more difficult it would be for the ruling class to gain control of the economy of the entire nation, and enslave the people through economic policies administered by said central, or national government.

    If oligarchs gained control of the economy of a state or local community, the people had the right to vote with their feet, and move to another community or different state, where the people still had representation. The people could then regroup, and go after the oligarchs.

    Conservatives at the time our Constitution was ratified, were represented by the Federalist Party. The Federalists Party advocated for a loose constructionist interpretation of our Constitution and wanted a National form of government, which is akin to a monarchy. Many in the Federalist Party wanted to make George Washington King. Note that progressive-left-wingers today, are loose constructionists and are therefore the true conservatives / Nationalists.

    The main point of my post is this. Strict constructionists / right-wingers are the true liberals, who advocate for the federal system as defined by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. The federal system as defined by Jefferson and Madison limited the role of the central government to a list of enumerated powers. The federal governments primary role was dealing with “external objects” such as war, peace negotiations; commerce with other nations and treaties. That was it. The state governments were sovereign in all areas except those enumerated in Article 1, Section 8, of the Constitution.

    When the progressive left expanded the role of our central government beyond its Constitutional limitations with the Federal Reserve Act, and the 16th and 17th Amendments to the Constitution, it changed the very nature of our government from a federal system where the people were sovereign and had self determination, to a complete fascist-totalitarian state where the people have no rights at all. FDR’s New Deal was when the USA became a National Socialist / Nazi state.

    So as you can see, Nazis are clearly left-wing in the united States where we have a federal system of government. Nazis may be right-wing in Europe, but they are left-wing in the good ol united States of America.

    Now, the ruling class and their stooges in the progressive-left / fascist-totalitarian movement, in both the Democratic and Republican parties want us to continue to equate a National form of government with our federal system of government. That way the ruling class, can continue to equate National Socialism, with true American liberalism. We classical liberals are no longer going to allow the ruling class and their minions in the progressive left movement, to get away with this big-lie.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-21 10:52:00 UTC

  • Patience, Compromise, Exchange Failed. Enfranchisement without demonstrated meri

    Patience, Compromise, Exchange Failed. Enfranchisement without demonstrated merit has failed. Property, Family, Industry Required.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-21 10:13:00 UTC

  • DEEP INFANTILISM: THAT THAT LIFE IS NOT COMPLICATED DUE TO CAUSAL DENSITY AND TH

    DEEP INFANTILISM: THAT THAT LIFE IS NOT COMPLICATED DUE TO CAUSAL DENSITY AND THEREFORE MANY DECISIONS ARE UNCLEAR COMPROMISES.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-21 07:26:00 UTC

  • THE EXPERIMENT IN CORPORATE RATHER THAN PRIVATE GOVERNMENT HAS EMPIRICALLY FAILE

    THE EXPERIMENT IN CORPORATE RATHER THAN PRIVATE GOVERNMENT HAS EMPIRICALLY FAILED. CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY IS SUPERIOR.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-21 07:21:00 UTC