[T]echnically speaking, market demand for the production of a commons(institution) that creates natural rights of appeal for defense before an insurer of some sort (court), demonstrably exist. The market demand exists. Sure. Like any commons, markets succeed or fail at producing them. As far as I know, the only natural right that is possible is reciprocal insurance of sovereignty against trespass(imposition of costs upon our demonstrated interests), in life(mind, body, family), liberty (privacy, movement, action, word, display, association, cooperation, production), estate (demonstrated interest, several property, share property, common property, capital), and defense (security, of life, liberty, estate). So Natural Rights: “Reciprocity in Sovereignty, Life, Liberty, Property, and Defense” created by “An insurer to whom one can appeal for restitution, prevention, punishment of offenders.” Lock didn’t get it right unfortunately. We can further enumerate each of these rights in order to prevent others from attempts to usurp them through sophistry and deceit. The declaration of human rights contains a lot of nonsense like ‘dignity’, mostly duplication, and at the end, impossible aspirations that cannot be construed as rights,
Source: Original Site Post
-
Natural Rights
[T]echnically speaking, market demand for the production of a commons(institution) that creates natural rights of appeal for defense before an insurer of some sort (court), demonstrably exist. The market demand exists. Sure. Like any commons, markets succeed or fail at producing them. As far as I know, the only natural right that is possible is reciprocal insurance of sovereignty against trespass(imposition of costs upon our demonstrated interests), in life(mind, body, family), liberty (privacy, movement, action, word, display, association, cooperation, production), estate (demonstrated interest, several property, share property, common property, capital), and defense (security, of life, liberty, estate). So Natural Rights: “Reciprocity in Sovereignty, Life, Liberty, Property, and Defense” created by “An insurer to whom one can appeal for restitution, prevention, punishment of offenders.” Lock didn’t get it right unfortunately. We can further enumerate each of these rights in order to prevent others from attempts to usurp them through sophistry and deceit. The declaration of human rights contains a lot of nonsense like ‘dignity’, mostly duplication, and at the end, impossible aspirations that cannot be construed as rights,
-
Reciprocity and Irreciprocity
RECIPROCITY AND IRRECIPROCITYReciprocity: productive, fully informed, voluntary transfer, of demonstrated interests, free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others by externality, and warranted, within the limits of restitutability. Irreciprocity: Failing any one of the criteria for Reciprocity. MORAL(ETHICAL) SPECTRUM … … … … Evil – interpersonal, extrapersonal, irreciprocity without gain (harm for harm’s sake) … … … Immoral – extrapersonal irreciprocity at gain … … Unethical – interpersonal irreciprocity at gain … Criminal – direct irreciprocity at gain Amoral – no affect on others at gain. … Recirpocal – direct reciprocity at gain … … Ethical – interpersonal reciprocity at gain … … … Moral – extrapersonal reciprocity at gain … … … … Good – interpersonal, extrapersonal, reciprocity without gain (investment, for investment’s sake) The constant relation in the spectrum is reciprocity by distance self, direct, indirect Reciprocity: productive, fully informed, voluntary transfer, of demonstrated interests, free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others by externality, and warranted, within the limits of restitutability. Irreciprocity: Failing any one of the criteria for Reciprocity.
-
Reciprocity and Irreciprocity
RECIPROCITY AND IRRECIPROCITYReciprocity: productive, fully informed, voluntary transfer, of demonstrated interests, free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others by externality, and warranted, within the limits of restitutability. Irreciprocity: Failing any one of the criteria for Reciprocity. MORAL(ETHICAL) SPECTRUM … … … … Evil – interpersonal, extrapersonal, irreciprocity without gain (harm for harm’s sake) … … … Immoral – extrapersonal irreciprocity at gain … … Unethical – interpersonal irreciprocity at gain … Criminal – direct irreciprocity at gain Amoral – no affect on others at gain. … Recirpocal – direct reciprocity at gain … … Ethical – interpersonal reciprocity at gain … … … Moral – extrapersonal reciprocity at gain … … … … Good – interpersonal, extrapersonal, reciprocity without gain (investment, for investment’s sake) The constant relation in the spectrum is reciprocity by distance self, direct, indirect Reciprocity: productive, fully informed, voluntary transfer, of demonstrated interests, free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others by externality, and warranted, within the limits of restitutability. Irreciprocity: Failing any one of the criteria for Reciprocity.
-
Causality
by Brandon Hayes
—“The Conflict’s not so much race, but agency, resulting class, class size, and resulting subculture. Race is just a convenient low resolution proxy that obscures the problem.” – Curt Doolittle
The claim isn’t that it’s a proxy for agency but it’s a proxy for this sequencing of phenomena: “agency, resulting class, class size, and resulting subculture” And replacing that higher resolution chain with “race” dilutes the information to be gleaned. LESS re-ordering is most expedient. Where tooling and training will do separation and conflict can be avoided.
-
Causality
by Brandon Hayes
—“The Conflict’s not so much race, but agency, resulting class, class size, and resulting subculture. Race is just a convenient low resolution proxy that obscures the problem.” – Curt Doolittle
The claim isn’t that it’s a proxy for agency but it’s a proxy for this sequencing of phenomena: “agency, resulting class, class size, and resulting subculture” And replacing that higher resolution chain with “race” dilutes the information to be gleaned. LESS re-ordering is most expedient. Where tooling and training will do separation and conflict can be avoided.
-
The Left and The Right Have Common Interests and The Financial and State Sector Is Our Mutual Enemy
I don’t think the Finance / Media / Academy / State “Cathedral” complex understands: The left and right agree that the finance and state complex is counter to our interests. That’s simply true. Otherwise we just want to sort into heterogeneous consumptive quantity (left), and homogenous conservative quality (right), The totalitarian state is preventing us from achieving our desired means of self determination. Without the federal government’s unconstitutional dominion over the social organization of the states, we could, as did the original colonies, and the many many states of the holy roman empire (german empire’s historical european organization) go our own way, and have diversity of states to suit the diversity of our interests. We aren’t proposing that anyone win the monopoly. We’re proposing the restoration of local control of self determination that is the origin of the constitution, the British empire, the Holy Roman Empire, and all of European history: small homogenous states with different cultures competing for population, production, and trade by the production of different commons. So you know, both left and right win by burning the financial and State sectors at the virtual stake so to speak, and then we return to what we seem to demand: a loosely federated states of european civilization with a material judicial ‘priesthood’ of the constitution, instead of a supernatural religious priesthood of the church. So you know, between the right and the left and the rewards of peaceful life and choice for the center, the only loser of this revolutionary reformation restoring the constitutional structure to its original intent as a federation of states combining arms into a single military for continental defense, and a supreme court to resolve conflicts over property and trade. Between the left in the cities and the right in the ‘red sea’ those who have abused us by financialization will easily pay the price. And propertarianism tells them how.
-
The Left and The Right Have Common Interests and The Financial and State Sector Is Our Mutual Enemy
I don’t think the Finance / Media / Academy / State “Cathedral” complex understands: The left and right agree that the finance and state complex is counter to our interests. That’s simply true. Otherwise we just want to sort into heterogeneous consumptive quantity (left), and homogenous conservative quality (right), The totalitarian state is preventing us from achieving our desired means of self determination. Without the federal government’s unconstitutional dominion over the social organization of the states, we could, as did the original colonies, and the many many states of the holy roman empire (german empire’s historical european organization) go our own way, and have diversity of states to suit the diversity of our interests. We aren’t proposing that anyone win the monopoly. We’re proposing the restoration of local control of self determination that is the origin of the constitution, the British empire, the Holy Roman Empire, and all of European history: small homogenous states with different cultures competing for population, production, and trade by the production of different commons. So you know, both left and right win by burning the financial and State sectors at the virtual stake so to speak, and then we return to what we seem to demand: a loosely federated states of european civilization with a material judicial ‘priesthood’ of the constitution, instead of a supernatural religious priesthood of the church. So you know, between the right and the left and the rewards of peaceful life and choice for the center, the only loser of this revolutionary reformation restoring the constitutional structure to its original intent as a federation of states combining arms into a single military for continental defense, and a supreme court to resolve conflicts over property and trade. Between the left in the cities and the right in the ‘red sea’ those who have abused us by financialization will easily pay the price. And propertarianism tells them how.
-
The Future of Macro City States
by Francesco Principi Love you Curt. Free cities have always represented the enemy of the tyrant state. Within a few years, world politics will be dominated by macro-cities – the influential megacities. And they are so connected to each other that they no longer have to bend to the concept of state and border. City-states are efficient on the model of the old ones: therefore not necessarily independent but with an autonomy such as to be able to engage in global relationships from which the surrounding area will benefit. I am sure this is the future. CD: Of course, although my understanding is that these macro states will crash with the bottom, and that the middle will escape them. So I just see a future of city-ghettos, and suburban and rural manor-states. In other words, the current wealth of cities is due to population migration made possible by financialization that was only sustainable until the end of the 20th century.
-
The Future of Macro City States
by Francesco Principi Love you Curt. Free cities have always represented the enemy of the tyrant state. Within a few years, world politics will be dominated by macro-cities – the influential megacities. And they are so connected to each other that they no longer have to bend to the concept of state and border. City-states are efficient on the model of the old ones: therefore not necessarily independent but with an autonomy such as to be able to engage in global relationships from which the surrounding area will benefit. I am sure this is the future. CD: Of course, although my understanding is that these macro states will crash with the bottom, and that the middle will escape them. So I just see a future of city-ghettos, and suburban and rural manor-states. In other words, the current wealth of cities is due to population migration made possible by financialization that was only sustainable until the end of the 20th century.