TRANSLATING LEFT SPEECH
by Ely Harman
—“Blah blah blah…”—
Translation: “I’m at the bottom of the ability distribution and I’m worried about being left behind and envious of the people on top. For that reason I will simply disagree, deny, and derail no matter what you say…”
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 19:59:00 UTC
You can learn the three fundamental models of project management, basic accounting, basic contract law, and micro economics (incentives), in a single course in about a year, and be good at all of those in two. If you can write a contract, run a project, manage the finances, and understand incentives of everyone involved you know the plumbing of the entire world system. Everything else is the craft you employ under that model, and your dress, manners, diction, vocabulary, hygiene, and how much of an ass you are (or not). It’s not difficult to be competent.
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 17:58:00 UTC
by Daniel Roland Anderson
You know Curt, as I’ve been ruminating on this issue for the last year (I can’t believe Ive been following you that long already!), and I find myself becoming frustrated and angry at how much different things could be with a Propertarian law school curriculum.
And I’ll bet the results would be highly durable, because the longer you went, the more naturally things would flow.
The civil court case load would drop drastically I think. And the vastly more predictable results would make it much less likely that parties would take their cases to court, because any Propertarian lawyer would be able to tell his client very quickly what is likely to happen.
(CD: made my month … ’cause EXACTLY.)
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 17:33:00 UTC
Can anyone who has Andrew Torba’s (Gab.com http://Gab.com ) personal email PM it to me? Thanks
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 17:20:00 UTC
Curt Doolittle shared a post.
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 17:08:00 UTC
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/45232459_10156748797957264_5780494272054689792_o_10156748797947264.jpg AN EXAMPLE OF RECIPROCITY
by John Mark
A picture/example/illustration of reciprocity, the silver rule (or violation of it)…
CEO of a large corporation in America says “I want more profit. One very easy path to that is more warm bodies entering the USA – more people to buy our company’s product/service, and drives down price of labor too! Huge win! (For me and company shareholders.) I care not who they are, just bring in more people!!! If they are more badly behaved/criminal, if they destroy social cohesion, if they drive working class whites out of their neighborhoods, if they demonize white people…I care not. I am insulated from these problems by my wealth (gated community, private jet, homes around the world). So I will donate to politicians (buy them) who will keep the borders open.”
This CEO is doing unto others what he would *not* have done to himself. He is stealing property (Curt’s accurate expanded definition of property, which includes common property, all those things white working/middle class whites value and have invested in for generations in America). He is violating reciprocity, natural law.
;)Stephen Murrayso thats what Curt means by commons.Nov 1, 2018, 4:33 PMCurt Doolittlehttps://propertarianism.com/2017/03/23/definition-commons-with-links-to-the-core/Nov 1, 2018, 4:35 PMCurt Doolittlehttps://propertarianism.com/2013/01/15/the-complete-definition-of-property-excerpt-from-propertarianism/Nov 1, 2018, 4:35 PMNick DahlheimThe only property I want that CEO to own is a pike and a pyreNov 1, 2018, 4:42 PMLuke WeinhagenTwo fold violation –
1. Doing unto others (violating the silver rule)
2. Insulating (externalizing risks/costs)
He could be just doing 1 while exposing himself to the consequences and it would still be a violation of reciprocity.
By doing 2 as well he undermines natural law’s inherent capacity for corrections against violations (personal wealth gets destroyed, business fails, etc… natural consequences eliminating problem 1).Nov 1, 2018, 4:45 PMStephen Murrayneed I ask what the golden rule is?Nov 1, 2018, 4:53 PMCurt DoolittleI”m not gonna google that for you…. ;)Nov 1, 2018, 4:59 PMCurt Doolittle“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”Nov 1, 2018, 4:59 PMCurt Doolittle^the communist version.Nov 1, 2018, 5:00 PMStephen Murrayis that not the silver rule?Nov 1, 2018, 5:00 PMAndrew ClaytonThe golden rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
The silver rule: Give, and you can benefit. Take, and you will pay.Nov 1, 2018, 5:02 PMStephen MurraygreatNov 1, 2018, 5:03 PMSteve PenderIs it the pressure of quarterly earnings?Nov 1, 2018, 5:05 PMAndrew ClaytonCombined with a severed connection to social moresNov 1, 2018, 5:06 PMJennifer DeanIn a public company, for sure. I’ve seen a lot of that. They do things to generate short-term profit at the expense of longer-term or further reaching consequences.Nov 1, 2018, 5:07 PMYiannis KontinopoulosStephen Murray the silver rule is “Don’t do to them what they wouldn’t want to have done onto themselves”Nov 1, 2018, 5:07 PMJennifer DeanWally world is a treasure trove of examples of violation of reciprocity.Nov 1, 2018, 5:09 PMStephen ThomasAbolish the Government institution of “corporations”.
Solves a lot of parasitic behaviorNov 1, 2018, 5:38 PMCurt Doolittlewell, a corporation in the sense you mean it, is one that is granted limited liability by the insurer of last resort (the government).
A corporation in the sense that it is a contract for the production of commons is something else.
The qestion is, will corporations form without the insurer of last resort granting them limited liability? no I don’t think so. they didn’t at any useful scale.Nov 1, 2018, 5:52 PMCurt Doolittlethe problem isn’t the corporation its that you can’t sue them for impositon upon the commons.Nov 1, 2018, 5:53 PMStephen ThomasCorrect.
The idea of a corporation or incorporation is fine, wonderful even.Nov 1, 2018, 6:10 PMJohn MarkIf the law mandated the Golden Rule, it would produce Dysgenic Communism. If the law mandated the Silver Rule, it would produce Eugenic Propertarianism.Nov 1, 2018, 6:33 PMJohn MarkIn the current system, there is zero incentive for CEOs to give up profits to preserve societal (commons) wealth (of various forms). Each CEO (or any other corporate employee) knows that if he refuses to plunder the commons thus giving up profit opportunity, the board will replace him with someone who will plunder the commons for profit, and nothing will change. So, “it might as well be me that gets richer.”Nov 1, 2018, 6:42 PMJohn MarkGood distinction.Nov 1, 2018, 6:43 PMJohn MarkTook me a while to get that too when I first started following Curt.Nov 1, 2018, 6:45 PMAndrew StrachanI would love to know how these CEOs/shareholders/directors make their money because I’m all of the above and I pay tax through my nose! I live in a 3 bedroom house in the East of England and I drive a 30 year old car! I’m subject to the same tax laws as everyone else in this country! Maybe there’s some con that I’m not onto? But as far as I’m concerned the whole CEO, company director conspiracy theory is just that!, a conspiracy! 😏Nov 1, 2018, 8:24 PMMicah Pezdirtzbrings to mind the broken window fallacyNov 3, 2018, 5:51 PMNick DahlheimBigger CEOs up the food chain stuff their money in offshore tax havens while also flooding your country with Muslim shitholersNov 3, 2018, 6:09 PMAN EXAMPLE OF RECIPROCITY
by John Mark
A picture/example/illustration of reciprocity, the silver rule (or violation of it)…
CEO of a large corporation in America says “I want more profit. One very easy path to that is more warm bodies entering the USA – more people to buy our company’s product/service, and drives down price of labor too! Huge win! (For me and company shareholders.) I care not who they are, just bring in more people!!! If they are more badly behaved/criminal, if they destroy social cohesion, if they drive working class whites out of their neighborhoods, if they demonize white people…I care not. I am insulated from these problems by my wealth (gated community, private jet, homes around the world). So I will donate to politicians (buy them) who will keep the borders open.”
This CEO is doing unto others what he would *not* have done to himself. He is stealing property (Curt’s accurate expanded definition of property, which includes common property, all those things white working/middle class whites value and have invested in for generations in America). He is violating reciprocity, natural law.
😉
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 16:28:00 UTC
PROPERTARIAN GOVERNMENT
LIBERTY, RULE OF LAW, AND THE OPTIONS FOR GOVERNANCE: PRODUCTION OF COMMONS
Liberty as far as I know refers to the condition produced by rule of law rather than rule by man.
The principal problem with rule of law has been the means of decidability as to the scope of the law. This is why libertarianism failed – it does not define the scope of the law objectively and empirically rather than subjectively and preferentially.
In the west this refers to reciprocity both between members, between members and the government, and between governments(international).
However, commons must be produced since it is by commons the west outpaced (rapidly) the rest, in the bronze, iron and finally steel ages.
We invented the corporation precisely because we have been practicing it for thousands of years – particularly since 700ad under bipartite manorialism (the agrarian corporation).
Once the question of the limit of law is defined as reciprocity, the only question then refers to who and how the polity decides to choose which commons to produce that is in the interest of everyone in the hierarchy.
A judge of last resort can choose the commons (monarchy). The monarch can choose the commons and then have another ‘house’ approve or not the appropriation of funds. Or a house can choose the commons and the people approve the appropriations, and the monarch (judge of last resort) hold veto. Or the people can choose the commons and then approve the appropriations for those commons, with a house, monarch, or judiciary veto those commons and appropriations.
History appears to suggest that monarchs that must obtain permission from industry and the public in order to appropriate the necessary funds, produces the superior set of outcomes.
And this is the lesson of the 20th century, and the reason for the systemic failure of democracy – even in the west. Not that we needed to repeat the lesson since it has been known since the ancient era, that democracy was the worst of all possible options.
But because democracy coincided with the returns on the second industrial revolution (germany), from which our 20th century wealth arose, the state, academy, media complex has claimed this was due to democracy rather than democracy has brought that wealth to an end through redistribution of reproduction, destroying what that industrial revolution depended upon: the ‘white’ laboring, working, and middle classes – which are the only high trust such classes in the world outside of japan and korea.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 16:26:00 UTC
Curt Doolittle shared a post.
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 14:13:00 UTC
BRITON VS GERMANY
(how germany made use of second mover advantage: england betamax, germany vhs)
By Aaron Kahland
I’ll start by addressing education. Let’s take the metric of universities. Germany had more than ten before 16th century concluded whilst England’s third university was first founded in 1824 and Oxbridge were largely confined to theology and law.
The protestant reformation led to compulsory education in Germany well before it was commonplace in England.
The pietist movement in Germany led to the concept of ‘Bildung’ or a general education in the humanities which led to a revival of the study of the Classics. By the 19th century, whilst the Britons were busying themselves with superficial comparisons between Victorian and Roman periods, Germans were discovering places like Troy.
By 1933, Germany had more Nobel Prize winners than all English speakers on the planet combined.
But that is actually a poor metric considering that Germany invented the modern university and it became the model for the rest of the world and, importantly, the United States.
I want to emphasize that i am not entirely convinced that the general education of the average German was better than that of the average Briton. Perhaps it was, perhaps it was not – I really don’t know. A good indicator might be book sales and what books were being sold in the 19th century.
However, I would argue that by the 19th century, the upper 5% of Germans were better educated than Britons – and this is reflected in the fact that the Second Industrial Revolution occurred not in Britain but Germany. Whilst Britain was the origin of the Scientific Revolution – the Germans scholars absolutely embraced it and built their deucational institutions using the scientific method as a foundation. In fact I might argue that German philosophy was a response / reaction to that tremendous pace of scientific advance.
By the 19th century in both France and Briton – Germany became synonymous with science and France had entirely given up hope of ever competing. It came to be understood, in Europe, that there was something peculiar about German civilization that provided it a technological advantage over others.
It was this second Industrial Revolution – the fact that Germany now completely dominated electrics, machine tools, chemicals, pharamaceuticals that, in my view, was the cause of this civilizational conflict. By the late 19th Century the British ruling classes were determined to build a global Empire that would be run by a global English-speaking elite – the Rhodes Scholarship was established precisely for the purpose of selecting this elite on merit. Germany however, was the obstacle to achieving this because of her scientific advancement.
(I baited Aaron Kahland into this post. He didn’t bit. So I just outright asked him. This is the result. lol -hugs )
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 13:17:00 UTC
https://arktos.com/2018/10/31/alain-de-benoist-paganism-and-the-neo-christian-west/WESTERN HEROISM, SEMITIC SUBMISSION THE MASCULINE VERSUS THE FEMININE ACROSS 3500 YEARS OF HISTORY
(thanks to whomever asked me to comment)
It’s a very simple difference. Agency vs Submission.
Heathens (Pagans in the pejorative) in western civilization are imagined heroes in competition with the spirits(dead), non-humans(green man, primitive man), demigods(powerful but mortal), and gods (powerful and immortal), and can, by effort and cunning outwit them – or – negotiate (bribe) them. This is a universal artifact of the conquest and replacement of european peoples by the westward expansion of the indo-europeans (Yaman, Corded ware et al) and their Militaristic, Expansionist, Sky Worshipping, Metalsmithing, business of profiting from the domestication of animal man, with horse, bronze, wheel and their very visible power over nature. It is a religion of agency not submission.
Demand for a “religion of empires” increases with the distribution of peoples under rule, and the group strategies of those people under rule, and the compatibilities of those group’s strategies under such a universal rule. The semitic methodology of INVERTING the aristocratic (western) ethos by converting the bible of greco roman civilization (iliad of homer) which occupied the vast majority of writings in the greco roman period, with a ‘hero’ of ‘submission and resistance’ was an interesting strategy by which the vast underclasses of the old european (byzantine), and greco-anatolian, syrian levantine world could create a resistance movement by the cultural destruction of their superiors, Just as the Marxists (Marx, Boas, Freud, Cantor, Mises, Adorno et al, Rothbard, and the neocons) repeated 1700 years later (monopoly marxism of private property, monopoly marxism of common property, monopoly marxism of identity-property (culture)).
The Semitic method of undermining was as successful in the Modern world (undermining colonialism) as it was in the ancient world (undermining colonialism). False promise of salvation after death. False promise of economic salvation. False promise of cultural (identity) salvation. The method of using sophism (false promise + sophism (Pilpul) + Straw Manning (Critique) is in fact a successful method of undermining a civilization that is overwhelmed by overextension, and profiting from overextension through commerce, and the dependence of commerce at international scales on trust.
Christianity succeeded because trade collapsed in europe after (a) undermining by jewish-christian vanguard, (b) enforcement by byzantine (old world, greek) defeat of rome, and (c) collapse of world trade under arab-muslim expansion, (d) and the eventual consumption of all capital of the great civilizations of the ancient world, and the destruction of all those civilizations as a consequence.
So, as trade and knowledge increased, europeans gradually (expectedly) extracted themselves from Semitic superstition, the church’s’ monopoly on information and literacy, the 50% of dead capital in europe under the church. and the corruption of the church as a monopoly federal government selling false receipts of salvation the way the current academy sells false diplomas.
Given that the remains of Christianity are what leave us vulnerable to Semiticism (abrahamic monotheism, marxism-socialism-postmodernism-feminism, and the use of false promise, sophism, straw-manning, and the discount on disapproval, shaming, ridicule, moralizing, rallying as a substitute for truthful (scientific, rational) argument. It is only logical that the aristocratic right in Europe (using literary philosophy, moralism, and history) and aristocratic right in the States (using law and, economics, and science) should produce arguments to restore our native religion of the hearth to one that is heroic and expansionary rather than submissive and assisting in our surrender.
Nothing in human behavior or history is difficult. It’s all simple. Once you understand that nearly all use of language is simply means of lying in order to obtain discounts on the acquisition of the power to alter the probability of outcomes in one’s favor. And all we do is search for narratives to echo (script).
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
https://arktos.com/2018/10/31/alain-de-benoist-paganism-and-the-neo-christian-west/
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 13:10:00 UTC