—“For Russians a true free will (volya) is enjoyed either by Tsar, an absolute monarch, or by free roaming cossack, vagabond, criminal, who does not have to take the wishes of other people into consideration and either goes into unsettled land where he may continue to live unattached, or to go underground into criminal world, or to become a Tsar. Stalin embodied both criminal and Tsar russian archetypes.”—Igor Rogov The origin of our differences: Limited to Reciprocity vs Unlimited by Reciprocity.
Source: Original Site Post
-
“For Russians a true free will (volya) is enjoyed either by Tsar, an absolute mo
—“For Russians a true free will (volya) is enjoyed either by Tsar, an absolute monarch, or by free roaming cossack, vagabond, criminal, who does not have to take the wishes of other people into consideration and either goes into unsettled land where he may continue to live unattached, or to go underground into criminal world, or to become a Tsar. Stalin embodied both criminal and Tsar russian archetypes.”—Igor Rogov The origin of our differences: Limited to Reciprocity vs Unlimited by Reciprocity.
-
Argumentative Weaponry
—“I know it’s public, but I thought it’d still be polite if I asked. Would it bother you if I used a specific comment you made on one of your statuses in a conversation? You make some really good points.”— A Friend Look. Here is how this deal works. I get to use the public as a testing ground, and in exchange (a) you get to learn how to argue, and (b) you get to use my work products as you see fit. My job, our job, is to create argumentative weaponry in order to provide libertarians and aristocrats (conservatives) a post-moralizing (and therefore scientific) means of argument against the pseudoscience, pseudorationalism, and outright lying of leftists. It’s a good deal for both of us. 😉
-
Argumentative Weaponry
—“I know it’s public, but I thought it’d still be polite if I asked. Would it bother you if I used a specific comment you made on one of your statuses in a conversation? You make some really good points.”— A Friend Look. Here is how this deal works. I get to use the public as a testing ground, and in exchange (a) you get to learn how to argue, and (b) you get to use my work products as you see fit. My job, our job, is to create argumentative weaponry in order to provide libertarians and aristocrats (conservatives) a post-moralizing (and therefore scientific) means of argument against the pseudoscience, pseudorationalism, and outright lying of leftists. It’s a good deal for both of us. 😉
-
Money and Monetary Aggregates: Malincentives All Around
Yes, I work from the Misesian premise of full accounting when referring to money and its substitutes, and the totality of monetary aggregates. However, the problem with the Austrian model is (as has always been stated) it’s overly respectful of lenders (asset holders) without accounting for the moral hazard most money lenders profit from. This is ‘unsaid’ in the literature of both sides. It’s this competition between the moral premises of consumer vs lenders vs the judiciary (state) that over the priority to which we must grant the malincientives of either party and therefore the rewards of either party. I tend to err on the side of lender beware almost always, and the lender and borrower beware of the state at all possible times. All parties: state, lender, and borrower have malincentives. -
Money and Monetary Aggregates: Malincentives All Around
Yes, I work from the Misesian premise of full accounting when referring to money and its substitutes, and the totality of monetary aggregates. However, the problem with the Austrian model is (as has always been stated) it’s overly respectful of lenders (asset holders) without accounting for the moral hazard most money lenders profit from. This is ‘unsaid’ in the literature of both sides. It’s this competition between the moral premises of consumer vs lenders vs the judiciary (state) that over the priority to which we must grant the malincientives of either party and therefore the rewards of either party. I tend to err on the side of lender beware almost always, and the lender and borrower beware of the state at all possible times. All parties: state, lender, and borrower have malincentives. -
Evolutionary Dominance an Extension of Axelrod’s Work
I’ve had Axelrod’s evolution of cooperation on my recommended reading list for years. If you want a book length treatment of the subject of modeling cooperation so that you have an even better grasp of The Evolutionary Dominance of Ethnocentrism, then after you read the paper below, get Axelrod from our digital library (free). https://www.amazon.com/Evolution-Cooperation-Robert-Axelrod/dp/0465021220/
-
Evolutionary Dominance an Extension of Axelrod’s Work
I’ve had Axelrod’s evolution of cooperation on my recommended reading list for years. If you want a book length treatment of the subject of modeling cooperation so that you have an even better grasp of The Evolutionary Dominance of Ethnocentrism, then after you read the paper below, get Axelrod from our digital library (free). https://www.amazon.com/Evolution-Cooperation-Robert-Axelrod/dp/0465021220/
-
Originalism and Textualism
Originalism requires that the legislature alter the law and that the court not alter the law, only reject bad law. The constitution was an attempt to codify natural law (reciprocity). Our law is natural law and has been for 3500 years. The weakness in our system of government is: 1) There is no requirement that a law pass the court before it’s enacted. 2) There is no way for the court to compel the state to repair a law other than to invalidate a provision or all of it. 3) Statement of natural law of reciprocity, Originalism, Textualism, and Strict Construction from natural law of reciprocity were not stated as part of the document. Law can and must be algorithmic
-
Originalism and Textualism
Originalism requires that the legislature alter the law and that the court not alter the law, only reject bad law. The constitution was an attempt to codify natural law (reciprocity). Our law is natural law and has been for 3500 years. The weakness in our system of government is: 1) There is no requirement that a law pass the court before it’s enacted. 2) There is no way for the court to compel the state to repair a law other than to invalidate a provision or all of it. 3) Statement of natural law of reciprocity, Originalism, Textualism, and Strict Construction from natural law of reciprocity were not stated as part of the document. Law can and must be algorithmic