(worth repeating)
—“I see myself as rescuing ALL of the Misesian/Hoppeian program from the fruitcake fringe: by laundering German, Jewish and British enlightenment fallacies – the attempt to universalize local evolutionary strategy – rather than simply adopt scientific epistemology (operationalism) as the only neutral tool for the use of studying group evolutionary strategies.”—
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-18 06:06:00 UTC
AN AMERICAN PRESIDENT IS JUDGED AS GENERAL FIRST AND ALL ELSE SECOND.
—“looking at the timing of [Obama’s] decline, the only intruding event that might have had that impact was the rise of the Islamic State and a sense, even in his own party, that he did not have an effective response to it. Historically, extended wars that the president did not appear to have a strategy for fighting have been devastating to the presidency.”—
This is true of all other presidencies. All other rulers.
I predict, using similar logic, that the martial caste, that has been forced from office under american hegemony will be restored world wide as it has been under Putin.
A king is first a general. After that he is merely the moral voice of his people. After moral voice he is mere bureaucrat. And we all hate bureaucrats.
re-nationalize liberty.
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-18 06:04:00 UTC
GEORGE FRIEDMAN (STRATFOR) ON FAILED PRESIDENCY
(Note: prior to reading this, keep in mind that this is an artifact of majority rule, and the necessity of the two party system that must evolve under majority rule.)
—“[U]nderneath all of the churning, about 40 percent of the electorate is committed to each party. Twenty percent is uncommitted, with half of those being indifferent to the outcome of politics and the other half being genuinely interested and undecided. In most normal conditions, the real battle between the parties — and by presidents — is to hold their own bases and take as much of the center as possible.
So long as a president is fighting for the center, his ability to govern remains intact. Thus, it is normal for a president to have a popularity rating that is less than 60 percent but more than 40 percent. When a president’s popularity rating falls substantially below 40 percent and remains there for an extended period of time, the dynamics of politics shift. The president is no longer battling for the center but is fighting to hold on to his own supporters — and he is failing to do so.
When the president’s support has fragmented to the point that he is fighting to recover his base, I considered that a failed presidency — particularly when Congress is in the hands of the opposition. His energy cannot be directed toward new initiatives. It is directed toward recovering his base. And presidents who have fallen into this condition near the end of their presidencies have not been likely to recover and regain the center.
Historically, when the president’s popularity rating has dipped to about 37 percent, his position has been unrecoverable. This is what happened to George W. Bush in 2006. It happened to Richard Nixon in 1974 when the Watergate crisis resulted in his resignation, and to Lyndon Johnson in 1967 during the Vietnam War. It also happened to Harry Truman in 1951, primarily because of the Korean War, and to Herbert Hoover before World War II because of the Great Depression.”–
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-18 06:01:00 UTC
EVOLUTION OF POLITICAL ORDERS
How we evolve classical liberalism from Anarcho-Capitalism, and Anarcho-
Capitalism from Nomocracy, and Nomocracy from Capitalism. You can’t do it any other way you know. 😉
1) Capitalism (property rights) = Voluntary Organization of Production
2) Nomocracy (Rule of Law) = Organic Evolution of Law
3) Anarcho-… (anarchy) A Covenential Prohibition on Government.
…….. Removal of All Political Liberty.
4) Voluntary Contractual Covenants (Formation of a polity )
…….. Removal of Some Liberty on use of Property
5) Mandatory Contractual Covenants (Perpetuation of a Polity)
…….. Example: Removal of Liberty of Association and Disassociation
6) Mandatory Contractual Covenants for the Production of Commons (Government).
…….. Removal of Anarchic Prohibition in exchange for the construction of commons.
THIS DESCRIBES CLASSICAL LIBERALISM, NOT ANARCHO-CAPITALISM.
(Reminder: A Covenant is a Constitution without provision for government.)
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-18 02:09:00 UTC
TRIBAL VERSUS CONTRACTUAL RELATIONS
–“A condition of liberty is not forcefully removing anyone from your tribe and starting interventionist wars with socialists.”–
I tribe is an involuntary genetic relation.
A contract is a voluntary legal association.
If you remove someone from a tribe, that has nothing to do with voluntary legal association, just as removing someone from the property of a voluntary legal association has nothing to do with their tribal membership.
It is a condition of liberty to remove people from your property.
It is an impossibility to construct a voluntary relation from an involuntary relation and visa versa.
If behavior is prohibited it is.
Mothers evolved dysgenic behaviors as a consequence of producing an irrational sacrificial redistributive moral intuition necessary for the development of highly dependent offspring. Female reproductive strategy is to bear offspring, to further their interests at the expense of the tribe. And to place the burden of their upkeep upon the tribe as frequently as possible – by seeking redistributions, rents and privileges. This intuition is not meaningful except in that circumstance. Even in that circumstance mothers of serial killers, career criminals, socially and reproductive undesirable, as well as unproductive and imbecilic offspring, all demonstrate suspension of disbelief in the merits of their children, and often in the merits of the children of others. This is non-sentient behavior. Conversely, retention of such individuals is a luxury – not a good – by which we satisfy the emotions of such pre-sentient humans. Taken to the extreme, it is dangerous to allow those who would abandon all care-taking of the infirmed in and less able or worse – engage in disregard for the experience of such individuals. Not because these individuals are valuable to mankind, but because people who are careless of others present a risk to us all, and an abrogation of the contract for mutual insurance we demonstrate to all kin out of cooperative necessity.
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-18 02:08:00 UTC
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0706/p09s01-coop.htmlITS REALLY EASY – ITS BEEN DONE
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-18 01:40:00 UTC
**It’s very hard to produce commons if you’re producing offspring who have no alternative but to parasite upon those commons.**
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-18 01:38:00 UTC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWu_JDL1DbQVIDEO: PROPERTARIANISM – ON ANCESTRAL LANDS (SHORT VERSION)
(please share)
CONTENTS
Historical Context with Roman Skaskiw.
Extension of Locke’s Criteria.
The (Demanding) Criteria for Repossession of Ancestral Lands
Fuzzy Terms Corrected: “Rights” and “Corporation”
Government as producer of commons unavailable for privatization.
The Obligation To Restore Ancestral Lands
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-17 15:43:00 UTC
Gods exist as numbers exist and formulae exist and narratives exist.
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-17 15:05:00 UTC
http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/2014/11/undermining-private-property.html
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-17 14:09:00 UTC