—“The left uses violence to escape contract and resist rule (domestication).
The right uses violence to enforce contract and establish rule.
The difference between immoral and moral violence, respectively.
Everything else is merely noise.”— James Augustus Berens
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-05 19:25:00 UTC
When leftists show up in numbers we call that a protest. When the right shows up in numbers, we call that a revolution. WE ARE COMING!
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-05 18:45:00 UTC
Ask us! In fierce TEMPEST are we coming. In THUNDER, and in EARTHQUAKE like a JOVE! This is our claim, our threatening, and my word. #Trump
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-05 18:44:00 UTC
‘Cause I have people I care about and the only way to help them and help me is to ‘get it done’. It’s just a lot of work to get it done. Good thing I love working…..
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-05 17:47:00 UTC
—“The Left’s foundation has always been murder and violence because it cannot and will not engage in voluntary economic and social exchanges.”— James Santagata
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-05 17:46:00 UTC
#Trump Sure, take it to the courts. But if necessary just ask. We will make D.C. quake if you ask us to. -the silent majority of moral men.
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-05 16:23:00 UTC
WHY DO WE NOT PURSUE THE TRUTH?
(Note: for followers, pls note the use of these series/sequences/spectrum of decidability)(Q:how would the argument differ without them, if I relied on advocacy for testimonialism as an ideal type, instead of illustration by spectrum? )
—“If [propertarianism and testimonialism] were attractive would it not pull us from philosophy? (convince us?) “— A Friend
Would not religion pull us from superstition?
Would not philosophy pull us from religion?
Would not science pull us from philosophy?
Would not testimonialism (complete science) pull us from science?
Or, is religion all that is possible for some of certain limited abilities, philosophy only possible for some others of certain limited abilities, science only possible for some of certain limited abilities, and Testimonialism only possible for some of certain limited abilities?
If not everyone is pulled forward by each technological advancement in decidability, then why do we see both the retention of superstition, religion, philosophy, and science, and why we see innovations in superstition, pseudorationalism, pseudoscience, and (in the near future) pseudotestimonialism?
We do not choose what is true for our means of decidability. We choose what is useful. If superstition, religion, pseudorationalism, philosophy, pseudoscience, science, pseudotestimonialism, and testimonialism are useful for different groups for different purposes, because of what we can ‘get away with’ in each discipline given its lack of precision, or openness to fraud, then we should expect people to seek what is beneficial to them with each technology of decidability.
And that is what we see.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-05 14:46:00 UTC
When the Chinese philosopher (Confucius) failed to solve the problem of politics (truthful debate and property and jury) he directed all men into a vast hierarchical family administered by a hierarchical bureaucracy with decidability provided by his version of morality “order/non-conflict”. While this retained the extended Chinese clan/tribe ( family), it caused the eventual stagnation of the polity, economy, bureaucracy and civilization. However, while we in the west solved the problem of politics, we failed to solve the problem of family/clan/polity. Whether in Rome, in the roman church, and in England we failed. Only in Germany – surrounded on three sides – did they grasp the importance of family/clan/tribe/nation as a limit on corporatism.
And we conquered them for it.
(sigh)
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-05 11:57:00 UTC
https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/828277640435998720/photo/1?utm_source=fb&utm_medium=fb&utm_campaign=curtdoolittle&utm_content=828277640435998720THREE STEPS TO THE RESTORATION OF THE WEST
#Conservative #Libertarian #NewRight #Trump https://t.co/4ag7hKjxSX
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-05 11:22:00 UTC
THE INCREMENTAL EXPANSION OF PROPERTY INTERESTS IN CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE INCREMENTAL SUPPRESSION OF PARASITISM
0 – Possession (self insurance at the limit of one’s abilities)
1 – Property by agreement (self insurance by in-group members)
2 – Property by norm (group insurance – non specialization in insurance by in-group members)
3 – Property by law (institutional insurance – specialization in insurance by in-group members)
4 – Property by military (universal institutional insurance against out-group members)
But since investment in insurance itself is unavoidably a form of property in toto, then the scale of the polity and the method of insurance determines whether the scope of property is limited to agreement, norm, law, and borders.
This is as it is and it cannot be otherwise.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-05 11:04:00 UTC