Source: Facebook

  • WHO INNOVATES POLITICAL THEORY TODAY? MARXISTS (nothing new here) CORPORATISTS (

    WHO INNOVATES POLITICAL THEORY TODAY?

    MARXISTS (nothing new here)

    CORPORATISTS (chinese – state and neo-corporatism)

    POSTMODERNISTS (totalitarian humanism – nothing new)

    PUBLIC CHOICE THEORISTS (democratic socialist game theory – nope)

    ECONOMISTS (center – maybe, MMT etc.)

    CONSERVATIVES (classical liberalism – nothing new here)

    LIBERTARIANS (Hoppe’s polycentric insurance)

    So who really has made any innovation in political theory?

    Everyone in the west is trapped in the paradigm of monopoly democracy. The Chinese have made state corporatism the movement of the 21st century. That seems to be everyone’s direction. And, I guess, compared to Corporatism, that neo-Corporatism is a minor invention. But It’s been around for a long time.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-08 15:05:00 UTC

  • I really want to do more analysis on Bitcoin. It’s actually really interesting.

    I really want to do more analysis on Bitcoin. It’s actually really interesting. …. I might give it more time tonight if I can…. Hmmm.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-08 14:50:00 UTC

  • FORCING ALL IMMORAL ACTION INTO THE MARKET? I guess one of the things that I don

    FORCING ALL IMMORAL ACTION INTO THE MARKET?

    I guess one of the things that I don’t repeat often enough, is that human impulses can be redirected, but not suppressed.

    With extraordinary training those impulses for near term reward can be redirected to longer term rewards. This just requires a hormonal education (training), so that the individual perceives certain suppressions as kicks or highs, the way some of us perceive saving or investing over the experience of consuming something less complex than an ‘idea’.

    All of us have a frustration budget. Some of us have a love of frustration for some reason, so we love to play with problems and are actually unhappy if we dont have any to work on. But most people have a pretty low budget because MOST of their ideas and ambitions are frustrated.

    So when we suppress free riding, and push competition, we must realize how much of the majority’s frustration budget is expended by doing so.

    Now, look at all the types of immoral, involuntary transfers:

    1-DIRECT INDIVIDUAL

    Murder

    Violence

    Destruction

    Theft

    Theft by Fraud

    Theft by Fraud by omission

    2 – INDIRECT INDIVIDUAL

    Theft by Impediment

    Theft by Externalization

    3 – INDIRECT COLLECTIVE

    Theft by Free riding

    Theft by privatization

    Theft by socialization

    4 – ORGANIZATIONAL COLLECTIVE

    Theft by Rent seeking

    Theft by Complexity, Rule, Process or Obscurantism

    Theft by Extortion

    Murder, Destruction and Theft by War

    FORCING ALL IMMORALITY INTO THE MARKET

    While believe it or not, in-family competition, that produces a material ‘loser’ is considered immoral. And as such, most humans intuit competition on PRICE as immoral even if they don’t consider competition on QUALITY immoral.

    But we have discovered that the market, conducted outside of the family, produces a virtuous cycle, since as long as there are two sellers and one buyer, while one seller loses on opportunity the buyer gains, and both sellers LEARN, and are forced to constantly innovate.

    And that the civil society is produced by allowing ONLY the market as a means of fulfililng wants and needs.

    Since we are unequally capable in the market, this is frustrating to many, and rewarding to the few. Even though all benefit, the inability to rest from the competition turns most of us into slaves who will be passed by if we do not stay in the race.

    The only problem I see with this system is that redistribution increases the rates of breeding in the lower classes while rates of innovation make the lower classes increasingly unemployable.

    We have not yet solved this problem.

    As far as I can tell, the only solution is to pay the lower classes not to breed.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-08 12:46:00 UTC

  • PROPERTY RIGHTS CAN ONLY ORIGINATE IN A CONTRACTUAL EXCHANGE – therefor there ar

    PROPERTY RIGHTS CAN ONLY ORIGINATE IN A CONTRACTUAL EXCHANGE – therefor there are limits to those rights.

    If you fail to state the limits of those rights in that contract, then it is quite possible to abuse them. But the moral use of property – meaning the ban on involuntary transfers – does not include such uses as rent seeking on property rights THEMSELVES. That would mean a contradiction.

    I hope that logic is as clear as it is to me. Maybe not.

    Human moral code illustrates that we expect that if you profit, that you profit by contributing something to the agreement.

    This intuition is what confused us over interest. Interest is a necessary property of inter-temporal production. It’s not a convenience. Its a necessity. We can’t function without it.

    And it is moral, because interest is an opportunity cost paid for by the lender, to the borrower.

    However, that does not mean that you can take advantage of human suffering as a lender. That violates the principle of involuntary transfer.

    This topic is exceptionally rich turf for libertarian reformation. Because by solving it, we solve the problem of placing limits on property rights such that they are acceptable to high trust societies.

    Profound if you grasp it.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-08 12:37:00 UTC

  • ARISTOCRACY WANTS PROPERTY RIGHTS – FOR THEM. “…The Family (capital F) is gett

    http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/news-analysis-a-television-news-breakthrough-333200.htmlTHE ARISTOCRACY WANTS PROPERTY RIGHTS – FOR THEM.

    “…The Family (capital F) is getting out of control; and the oligarchs want to restore exactly the types of property rights [that] they so readily tread upon…”

    -Roman Skaskiw

    (repost to capture roman’s quote.)


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-08 11:53:00 UTC

  • WHY DOES THE MONOPOLY STATE FEAR COMPETITION? All conflicts are resolvable if pr

    WHY DOES THE MONOPOLY STATE FEAR COMPETITION?

    All conflicts are resolvable if private property rights are respected. So why can’t groups with different sets of property rights join different groups (unions, parties) and made contracts with one another?

    There isn’t any reason that they can’t.

    Except that the state, and democracy, and bureaucracies, are a monopoly.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-08 09:46:00 UTC

  • LIBERTY IS A FORM OF GOVERNMENT TOO Active, violent, institution of property rig

    LIBERTY IS A FORM OF GOVERNMENT TOO

    Active, violent, institution of property rights, against the will of free-riders and rent seekers, as well as against the will of the violent and fraudulent.

    Natural rights are a logical prison for libertarians.

    We can’t possibly desire to be left alone in our natural state of freedom, because that is not man’s natural state: free riding is. Community property is.

    We can only logically desire to forcibly implement property rights against the will of the majority.

    This is liberty’s prison.

    Natural rights libertarianism, is a convenient excuse to feel morally superior while taking no active action to alter the course of events.

    Liberty is made by violence.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-08 09:40:00 UTC

  • THE POSTMODERN PERVERSION “My own field has certainly not been immune to the pos

    THE POSTMODERN PERVERSION

    “My own field has certainly not been immune to the postmodern perversion; and some might argue that it was actually psychiatry and psychology which unleashed the “therapeutic psychobabble” that has become the predominant vehicle of postmodern rhetoric, with its emphasis on self-esteem, feelings, multiculturalism, political correctness, and the eternal entitlement of endless victimhood.

    In the postmodern world, reason, truth and reality are mere subjective constructs and nothing is absolute; what happened in the past is to be interpreted only by the standards of the moment; and morality is also relative, except when you are a member of an approved victimhood group and are automatically granted absolute moral authority (except in certain cases, apparently).”

    – Victor Davis Hanson


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-08 09:08:00 UTC

  • DO YOUR WORK OUTSIDE OF ACADEMIA “It is not an accident that a David McCullough

    DO YOUR WORK OUTSIDE OF ACADEMIA

    “It is not an accident that a David McCullough or John Keegan or Martin Gilbert now writes outside the campus. Vibrant military history has gone on despite, or perhaps even because of the failure of the academia.”

    – Victor Davis Hanson

    ITS NOT AN ACCIDENT YOU CAN’T GET A PHD IN LIBERTARIAN PHILOSOPHY. 🙂


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-08 09:05:00 UTC

  • YOU TELL WHAT TRIBES THESE STRANGERS ARE FROM?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2268040/Francois-Brunelle-portraits-Photographer-sets-shoot-200-fascinating-portraits-strangers-look-like-TWINS.htmlCAN YOU TELL WHAT TRIBES THESE STRANGERS ARE FROM?


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-08 08:58:00 UTC