Source: Facebook

REGARDING: https://www.facebook.com/ProducerPetersen/posts/878432462215735

Austin,

I agree, which is why I produce the philosophical work I do. But then, the central issue is not technology. It is that the moral and ethical basis of the rothbardian libertine movement is antithetical to the conservative, and classical liberal tradition. And it is antithetical to western civilization.

So if you mean ‘libertarian’ in the sense that Hayek meant it: as a classical liberal ‘aristocracy of everyone’, then it is possible. If you mean ‘libertarian’ in the sense that rothbard appropriated the term just as progressives appropriated the term ‘liberal’, and where there is no prohibition on fraud, deceit, free riding. Where blackmail is considered a voluntary exchange. And where is there no provision for the production of commons. Where, in fact, libertinism is an outright attack on the commons. Then, no such reconciliation, or pairing of interests is possible. The conservative aristocratic egalitarian ethic requires the production of commons. That is our western competitive advantage.

THE WESTERN GROUP EVOLUTIONARY STRATEGY: TRUTH TELLING

All groups are unaware of their first-order strategies – what we call metaphysical value judgements. And we are unaware of ours.

The west *outpaced* the rest for very simple reasons.

1) Being poor and small in number, self financed warriors, reliant on technology and coordinated tactics to fight.

2) Truth Telling necessary for coordinating tactics.

3) Heroism, and Sovereignty that resulted from the demonstration of it.

4) Property rights that resulted from heroism and sovereignty.

5) The production of truth-telling as a normative commons, the total prohibition of involuntary transfer of every possible kind, as a normative commons, and all defended through the jury.

7) The jury and common law system out of property, truth telling, and the development of truth as a necessary commons.

6) The production of material commons, as a result of the total suppression of free riding.

The status we all sought, and the Aristocracy we all sought to join, held that every man is his own sovereign, and therefore his own legislator. Retaliation against wrongdoing is his choice. And civility arises from the use of the common law to resolve conflicts between individuals by objective means: property.

Our rate of evolution is in no small part because the common law and jury can outlaw new forms of theft faster than any state, and therefore eliminate means of rent seeking. This reduces risk.

Our rate of evolution is in no small part because we are the only people that tell the truth – on earth. Where truth means correspondent with reality, and absent of imaginary content. And where the central purpose of courts is to identify people who are not telling the truth, and prosecuting them for it.

Our rate of evolution is in no small part because we invented truth, and because we invented truth, we invented the jury, the rule of law, reason, science, and all the advantages that western civilization has brought to the world both in the classical and modern eras.

Economic velocity is determined largely by the elimination of risk. The elimination of risk is determined by the degree of suppression of free riding: meaning non-productive actions: (violence, theft, fraud, fraud by omission, involuntary transfer by externality, privatizing the commons, socializing losses, rent seeking, corruption, conspiracy, and conquest).

Demand for the state increases whenever there is a discrepancy between the means of resolving conflicts that incite retaliation, and the means of producing conflicts. As cooperation evolves in complexity so do our means of parasitism and predation. Demand for the state decreases whenever the means of dispute resolution in lie of retaliation are provided.

Our truth telling evolved as a necessary competitive advantage. And all our western advantage over other groups evolved from the value of truth telling – despite the fact that telling the truth is a high tax for all of us to pay. And it is a tax we are all reluctant to pay. And one many seek to avoid.

THE SUICIDAL IMMORALITY OF ROTHBARDIAN ETHICS

The west did not succeed on libertine (rothbardian) morality – no one can. Any group demonstrating rothbardian ethics will be defeated and punished by neighbors the same way we punish piracy and white collar crime – and recently, various forms of monetary fraud. The west succeeded in outpacing all others because of the sheer breadth of our morality, which forces all people into material production by denying them (rapidly) from all forms of non-productive sustenance (free riding).

(This is what the socialists have sought to reverse: they wish to return us to parasitism. Because it is profitable for administrators, and desirable by the unproductive, and uncompetitive.)

And rothbard intentionally – for reasons that are obvious in retrospect – left open deceit. Liberty is not possible under deceit. Because deceit increases demand for the state as an arbiter of differences, and destroys the use of the jury.

UNITING CONSERVATIVES AND LIBERTARIANS

I set out to produce the intellectual framework for doing so. Because conservatives lack a rational language for advocating their ideas. No conservative has produced either a rational or ratio-scientific framework as have the marxists and the Rothbardians.

And with that rational framework, conservatives are able to make arguments like those I make here, and defend their aristocratic, egalitarian, high trust, highly moral society, as the only one that can possibly construct liberty. And the only one that ever has constructed liberty.

Conservatives flee into moral allegory because they lack the rational, scientific and economic basis upon which to construct an argument for their moral biases.

Libertarians flee into rothbardian libertinism because they lack the philosophical basis to rationally argue against the intellectual errors of the enlightenment.

IN THE END THE WESTERN ADVANTAGE IS TRUTH TELLING

So rather than a less moral society, we require a more moral society. We must purge the state of free riding and deceit. Re-institutionalize the requirement for truthful speech. And re-institutionalize the universal prohibition on convenient falsehoods.

It is perhaps useful to convey that the germans since Kant have tried repeatedly to develop an honest dishonesty, culminating in Heidegger. That he jewish authors: Marx, Freud, Cantor, Mises and Rothbard created pseudosciences. And that Americans have, using the soviet-financed Frankfurt school, created postmodernism, feminism, and political correctness. All of which are systemic deceits the purpose of which is to overthrow western truth telling.

Truth matters. Liberty will be predicated upon truth. Or there shall be no liberty. And Rothbard intentionally preserved and justified deceit in his writings.

There is no room for cunning in a moral society. Libertinism is a cunning plan. It is also an immoral one.

I’ll try to explain why good people can be fooled by immoral argument in another comment at another time. But libertarians are just as easily fooled as any other dimension of the political triangle.

Curt Doolittle

The Propertarian Institute

Kiev, Ukraine