Shot a looooong video with Don today. I’m going to edit my notes and post them here before hand. Don’s fantastic. We had a good time. And the pack of beautiful women in the audience drinking champagne and eating fruit and cheese were not a distraction.
Source date (UTC): 2015-08-14 13:59:00 UTC
(Reddit is an idiot magnet. I prefer fb. Harder to be anonymous and easier to ban.)
Source date (UTC): 2015-08-14 13:56:00 UTC
—“We ensure Truth by insuring truthful speech, by the aggressive application of common law, by requiring a warranty of due diligence for concepts entered into the informational commons.”—
(from elsewhere)
Source date (UTC): 2015-08-14 07:40:00 UTC
Arkan Nathanael groks Propertarianism!!!!
Slowly we are getting there.
Welcome to the revolution.
Source date (UTC): 2015-08-14 06:39:00 UTC
Looks like later today we are going to shoot a video. Subject is uniting christian civilization into a division of labor, now that the enlightenment efforts have all failed. Meaning how to repair american idealism and russian nihilism.
Source date (UTC): 2015-08-14 05:45:00 UTC
(Middle of august in Estonia and I’m wearing a jacket to keep warm.)
Source date (UTC): 2015-08-14 05:43:00 UTC
WHY A MONOPOLY FORM OF COMMONS?
All we need is monopoly Rule. Defense (military), Rule (rule of law), Government (market production of commons), Market (market production of goods and services).
Why, instead of debating over whether to institute a universal socialist(consumptive), libertarian(productive), or conservative(accumulative), social(normative), economic(productive), and political(commons) order, do we not institute universal rule of law affirming property-en-toto, and let people choose the social, economic, and political order that they will ‘join’, and then use houses of government to conduct contractual trades between those classes? Why can’t socialists redistribute to one another, libertarians invest in production, and conservatives accumulate capital, and we conduct trades with one another in order to achieve our common ends? Why is monopoly necessary?
We have technology today that can enforce these contracts. Why? Because we have electronic money, and the ability to issue multiple currencies for multiple purposes. In essence, creating trade policy internally between classes as well as trade policy externally between polities.
Good government isn’t a problem.
We can do it.
Curt Doolittle
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2015-08-13 07:13:00 UTC
—“autosomal DNA does not favor intruders, while cultural artifacts do”—
Source date (UTC): 2015-08-12 11:47:00 UTC
LOVE YOUR WORKING CLASS
“Noblesse Oblige”
Those yummy white collar jobs? Calculating? Organizing Incentives? Managing Credit and Debt? Moving information? They are ultimately dependent upon those people who have blue collar jobs, and service jobs. That does not mean that they have some claim to the fruits of your labor, but it does mean that outside of the fruits of your labor, that advancing policy that creates work for them is in your interests.
The voluntary organization of production that we call capitalism is constructed by all our efforts to forgo consumption and respect property in order to create a market for the production distribution trade and consumption of goods and services.
Take care of the little people who try. Get rid of the little people who complain.
Source date (UTC): 2015-08-12 11:05:00 UTC
WHY ARE ALL BOOKS ON COSMOPOLITAN LIBERTINISM INTRODUCTORY?
There is a reason that all works on libertarianism are introductions and so very few are advanced, as are works in economics, capital, public choice, democracy, social democracy, marxism and even neo-conservatism.
We really have what, Hayek on classical liberal law, and Garrison and Reissman in classical economics? But advanced works on libertarianism don’t exist other than rothbard’s revisionist history and his works on banking. Criticisms (man economy and state) are not the same as advocacy of actionable production of institutions that can survive competition from opposing preferences.
The reason people rely upon catchphrases is because there is very little else to rely upon. And those other things we can rely upon (the business cycle, capital formation) are not special to us, but matters of mainstream argument.
As an empirical measure, why is it that largely intro works exist? Why is it that the near near propaganda level advocacy of Mises, Rothbard and Hoppe fails to include the critics? Why is it that of the scholars in the field only David Friedman survives – and he survives precisely because he makes preferential rather than rational or empirical arguments?
Curt Doolittle
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2015-08-12 10:23:00 UTC