Source: Facebook

  • IS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LIBERTY AND CAPITALISM. um…. you know. Pick one or

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-relationship-between-liberty-and-capitalism/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=ae621cfcWHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LIBERTY AND CAPITALISM.

    um…. you know. Pick one or the other and don’t conflate them.

    **Sovereignty** in fact exists or it does not. One has sufficient force in himself or his reciprocally insured allies to prevent his subjugation or not.

    **Liberty** is given by permission of the Sovereign, and refers to those who are self sufficient but whose rights can be imposed upon. Although liberty originally referred to the right of a people to preserve local law and custom in their own matters, and is therefore a political grant from the sovereigns, we tend to conflate it with Freedom.

    **Freedom** is given by permission of someone or some people capable of depriving you of it, and refers to those who might have been candidates for slavery, but have earned their freedom by some means, or at least, not lost it by other means. The common libertarian advocacy of a cuneiform term, says literally ‘return to the mother’, which means that one’s required service to the ruler for the term has been fulfilled.

    **Capitalism** refers to the use of contract, money, prices, and accounts, the elimination of rents on territorial resources, by its allocation to individuals, along with the distribution to individuals of discretion on the use of one’s physical energy, time, and possessions obtained by voluntary exchange. In other words, the voluntary organization of production, distribution, and trade using incentives made possible by individual calculation of the most beneficial options available to him. What is usually lost in this discourse is that the individualization of property prohibits local rents, allowing the centralization of rents that we consider taxation, and that this centralization of rents is one of the primary causes of the reduction of opportunity and transaction costs that makes a voluntarily organized economy possible at the expense of those who would live parasitically of the local collection of rents. In other words, capitalism converts subservience to ‘mafia’ at various local scales which impede production, to subservience to a single central ‘mafia’ in exchange for eliminating those rents that impeded production.

    **Liberty AND Capitalism**

    1. Therefore the relationship between **capitalism** and **liberty** is, precisely, that the sovereign will not interfere in the voluntary organization of production other than to create it in the first place, resolve conflicts as they arise by demand for reciprocity of obligation and rights in the contracts between parties, and to prevent the externalization of costs to the commons or the privatization of commons in the course of private transactions.

    2. However the problem of the degree of taxation (commission), the maximum calculation of which is the favorite hobby of economists, is not answered by this question. Nor is the use of those taxes (commissions), to produce commons within or without of the private economy.

    3. Therefore we **colloquially** use the term ‘**capitalism**’, to refer to the policy bias in favor of minimum taxation, competition, and interference in the market, and we use social democracy or the more pejorative ‘socialism’ to refer to the policy bias in favor of maximum taxation, egalitarianism, and interference in the market for the production of goods, services and information. The central conflcit being that the state does not insure the risk of capital and its losses but takes income regardless of that risk and those losses. And on the other hand, the combination of scale, wealth (capital), and credit, is such a more powerful competitive advantage that those with mere labor can compete with or even seek to participate in.

    4. Therefore liberty and capitalism can only exist when political questions are decidable because costs and returns are calculable, because coincidences of want are marginal, and consequences are perceivable. (Yeah, I know but once you read that a few times you’ll get it, and its important.)

    The net of this is that unless you possess sovereignty the best you can possess is liberty, and both liberty and property exist only as matters of degree in the balance between the impossibility of pure capitalism except between powerful states, and the impossibility of pure communism except within the family. And instead the useful point of demarcation between more capitalism less capitalism and least capitalism, depending upon whether we are in a mode of territorial or economic expansion requiring private risk(capitalism), a mode of relative calm requiring the production of commons (mixed economy), or at war (nationalized and centralized economy).


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 21:56:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    https://quoraconservatives.quora.com/Opposition-to-the-Affordable-Care-Act-ACA-often-breaks-down-into-one-or-many-of-the-following-concerns?share=570b6024&srid=u4Qv

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 20:57:00 UTC

  • Someone the other day said that women never admit they’re wrong, or that they’ve

    Someone the other day said that women never admit they’re wrong, or that they’ve screwed up. And that’s been bothering me, because I didn’t realize that I subconsciously recognize that when I’m dealing with a woman, that unless she’s asking me a question, she will never admit anything. And so I just don’t work that hard and dismiss her.

    This is not true of all women, but it’s true of the kind of woman that can’t exit her solipsism (emotionalism) and rationally determine the truth or falsehood of an argument independent of her feelings about it.

    it must be very hard for women to manage their emotions. I can only for a millisecond a few times a year imagine what it is like to think like a woman and it terrifies me. I would feel totally out of control.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 20:55:00 UTC

  • WHO INVENTED PATRIARCHY? —“The [female] archaeologist Marija Gimbutas found th

    WHO INVENTED PATRIARCHY?

    —“The [female] archaeologist Marija Gimbutas found that the early agricultural cultures of Old Europe in the Aegean, Balkans and southern Italy gender relations were remarkably egalitarian. She suggests that it was the result of waves of kurgan building invaders from the Ukrainian steppes that changed these gender relationships and instituted male hierarchies that led to the rise of patriarchy.[20]”—

    in other words, the “Yamna”, the ‘Aryans’, The Europeans, (us) invented it. And with it we conquered the entire world.

    So please stop giving religion credit for anything other than imposing ignorance on our people. Greece was brilliant, Rome was practical, and the church imposed abrahamism, and between the church and the muslims we had the second great dark age in recorded history.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 20:48:00 UTC

  • Someone wanna tell me where the new army of newbs are comin’ from? Jeez….. Mos

    Someone wanna tell me where the new army of newbs are comin’ from? Jeez….. Mostly good people this phase..


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 20:21:00 UTC

  • OUR PURPOSE, FOR THE PAST 3500 YEARS HAS BEEN TO RULE AND BY DOING SO DRAG MANKI

    OUR PURPOSE, FOR THE PAST 3500 YEARS HAS BEEN TO RULE AND BY DOING SO DRAG MANKIND FROM ANIMAL TO GODHOOD.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 20:12:00 UTC

  • “THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A GENETIC MIDDLE CLASS” –An Idiot Apparently (a) you

    —“THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A GENETIC MIDDLE CLASS” –An Idiot

    Apparently (a) you don’t read much about genetics (b) don’t know much about the relationship between IQ and occupations, (c) don’t know much about economic history. (d) certainly don’t know much about bipartite manorialism, or the hajnal line, and the relationship between crops and family structure and inheritance patterns. (e) and haven’t read ‘the Son Also Rises’ nor the research it was based upon.

    Try not to be stupid in my presence. My time is really valuable. And while I’m generous with it, I take exception to having it wasted.

    There are people who are deserving all the time.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 20:03:00 UTC

  • THE NATURAL LAW REGARDING TRADEMARKS, COPYRIGHTS, AND PATENTS Abstract, or so ca

    THE NATURAL LAW REGARDING TRADEMARKS, COPYRIGHTS, AND PATENTS

    Abstract, or so called, “Intellectual Property”.

    There are three forms of ‘abstract property’ if we speak operationally:

    1) Trademarks. A trademark serves as a weight and measure preventing fraud, as well as seizing and unearned opportunity, by fraudulent representation. The test of trademark is quite simple. If in three seconds a randomly selected group of jurors can confuse the two, it is a trademark violation. Otherwise not. This is simply empirical. Trademarks are necessary for the prevention of fraud, and violation of the requirement for productive fully informed warrantied exchange. (BTW: lots of research on this subject from different disciplines.)

    2) Copyrights. A copyright serves as a means of preventing the unearned profits from the works of others, and the taxes earned from it to pay for enforcement. Copyright both violates natural law by providing subsidy rather than just preventing unearned gains (violation of reciprocity for productivity), and by externality violates natural law, through the creation of moral hazard, and the financing of literature that violates natural law. For this reason, the Copyright can and should be replaced by trademark, which will not prevent copying for personal use, but will prevent unreciprocated earnings. Ergo, the current Creative Commons license serves as a trademark that must be licensed in order to perform reciprocity. As a side benefit, when combined with the requirement for testimonial truth in the commons (market), this will defund the entertainment industry, the advertising industry, the publishing industry, the privatization of research performed via public funds.

    3) Patents. Assuming a patent is applied for and issued as a means of producing goods that cannot be produced by market means otherwise, an exclusive license to recoup investments and produce multiples of returns is a useful means by which the population can encourage research and development using off-book financing. However, production in the normal course of business, and research and development are very different things. Therefore patents should only be granted in exchange for shares in the product producing returns for the population. And patents should be granted only for those goods that have some such public function. And a patent cannot be used to deny a product or service or information from the market, nor to control the prices of products and services and information on the market.

    In other words, a trademark functions as a weight and measure. A copyright as a trademark. and a few patents as contracts with the common people for assisting in the research and development of those goods, services, and information, that cannot be produced because of great expense and low chances of success.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 19:39:00 UTC

  • PROPOSED FINAL DEFINITION OF NATURAL LAW The One Law of Reciprocity. (Natural La

    PROPOSED FINAL DEFINITION OF NATURAL LAW

    The One Law of Reciprocity. (Natural Law)

    Thou shalt not, by word, deed, absence of word or deed, impose or allow the the imposition of, costs upon the demonstrated interests of others (property-in-toto), either directly or indirectly, where those interests were obtained by settlement (conversion, or first use) or productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange without such imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others. Therefore thou shalt limit thy words and deeds, and the words and deeds of others, to the productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange of interests (property in toto), free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others either directly or indirectly.

    NOTE:

    Fully understanding this one law may also require:

    1) the knowledge that when we come together in proximity, we decrease opportunity costs, and therefore create opportunities, and that opportunities must be homesteaded (settled/converted/first use), and put into production, in order to demonstrate an interest.

    2) the definition of the three synonyms: demonstrated interest, demonstrated property, or property-in-toto, as that which people empirically retaliate for impositions against *and* have demonstrated an interest.

    3) The use of the common law (of torts) as the means by which we incrementally and immediately suppress new innovations in parasitism that violate the Natural Law of Reciprocity.

    4) The use of Testimonialism (warranty of due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism, and deceit) as an involuntary warranty on public speech in matters of the commons, just as we currently force involuntary warranty of due diligence on products, services, and our words regarding products and services.

    If you understand the one law, and these criteria, nearly all questions of conflict, ethics, morality, politics, and group competition are decidable. (really).

    This solves the libertarian fallacy of non-aggression by specifically stating the scope of property that we must refrain from imposing costs upon; the cause of that scope (retaliation), the empirical means of determining that scope(demonstrate action), and the means by which violations of that law are discovered, recorded, and evolve.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 19:16:00 UTC

  • WHY I AM A CHRISTIAN, AND AN ARYAN (ARISTOCRATIC EGALITARIAN) I am a Christian b

    WHY I AM A CHRISTIAN, AND AN ARYAN (ARISTOCRATIC EGALITARIAN)

    I am a Christian because, as I understand it, to ‘be a Christian’ requires:

    (a) That the law of “God” meaning the Universe, is Natural Law, and that I am bound to both obey and force others to obey this law.

    (b) That the philosopher Jesus advised us – albeit in primitive language – to extend kinship love to non kin because it was the optimum prisoner’s dilemma strategy, and led to greater prosperity. Particularly in the west where markets and meritocracy were imposed as an inexpensive means of profitable rule by the Aristocracy. And even more so when combined with the exclusively western tolerance for climbing the dominance hierarchy via truth telling, even at status-cost to all involved. (heroism).

    (c) That we retain a dying, archaic, but psychologically necessary institution called the Church with gorgeous architecture, that served as a House of Feminine Familial Commons that divided labor with the Aristocracy’s House of Masculine Material Commons, but that, along with the church’s academy, has been (((occupied))) by those intent on destroying the West this time even more so than in the ancient world,

    (d) That we have retained a bunch of unnecessary archaic mumbo-jumbo invented for the inexpensive subjugation ignorant and stupid people, but that I can look past that to our ancestral past, and in those aristocratic myths and traditions find superior lessons for the more sophisticated people of today than those taught to the lowly in the past – before the rediscovery and reconquest of the west by the literature of the Aristocracy.

    (e) And that I made a promise to my god that I would do something about this catastrophe and save my people from a second conquest by more insidious forms of Abrahamism than the first. And that I have pursued this promise when quite young and have pursued it at great personal cost in each phase of my life.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 18:44:00 UTC