—“I am unwilling and/or unable to pay the cognitive cost of acquiring and producing a rational means of decidability, whereby I enumerate the existentially possible options available to me, the corresponding cost and yield (and therefor profit) of acting acting upon those options, and whereby I identify any externality (cost) that I may impose on man if I so chose to act upon those options in accordance with natural law—and in the absence of the calculable (decidable), rely on intuition instead.”—James Augustus
Source: Original Site Post
-
Fiat Money? It’s A Necessity Not A Preference
Apr 19, 2017 8:15am FIAT MONEY? It’s not that it’s a good thing. It’s that you can’t compete without it. Nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, nitrocellulose, gunpowder, are not ‘a good thing’ in any sense like copper, bronze, iron, and steel are good things. But once extant one must master them or be mastered by them. Fiat money must be mastered or you will be mastered by those who master it. Fiat money is not ‘money’ but a money substitute – a form of token, consisting of tradable shares in the organization we call the state. Just as one used to buy tickets for rides at the amusement park so that the ride-owners would not evade their fees, we buy fiat money so that all commerce in the market is burdened by fees. We cannot chose NO MARKET to participate in (state) so we are left with choosing the markets available. And if we tried to create a libertarian polity without funding that market we would be defeated by any number of forces internal and external.
-
Fiat Money? It’s A Necessity Not A Preference
Apr 19, 2017 8:15am FIAT MONEY? It’s not that it’s a good thing. It’s that you can’t compete without it. Nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, nitrocellulose, gunpowder, are not ‘a good thing’ in any sense like copper, bronze, iron, and steel are good things. But once extant one must master them or be mastered by them. Fiat money must be mastered or you will be mastered by those who master it. Fiat money is not ‘money’ but a money substitute – a form of token, consisting of tradable shares in the organization we call the state. Just as one used to buy tickets for rides at the amusement park so that the ride-owners would not evade their fees, we buy fiat money so that all commerce in the market is burdened by fees. We cannot chose NO MARKET to participate in (state) so we are left with choosing the markets available. And if we tried to create a libertarian polity without funding that market we would be defeated by any number of forces internal and external.
-
Racialism?
—“CURT: DO YOU BELIEVE IN/SUPPORT RACIALISM?— (choice quotes here) (I view this, and all racial questions, as stupid but here is my answer.) I don’t know what that means. I advocate truth is more competitively advantageous than falsehood. In the case of race, people everywhere at all times demonstrate kin selection (except at the margins). In polities, under monarchy, this was not a problem, since one group possessed political power and the state could not be used as a proxy for warfare. Democracy and diversity restored levantine and semitic tribal conflict to european high trust homogenous societies. In creating a high trust competitive polity with a high standard of living, it appears that constructing a kinship order rather than a corporate order, is superior during the majority of history. It appears that corporate orders are means of merely extracting accumulated capital from homogenous peoples, and the emergence of a corporate order is evidence of predation or parasitism within or from without. So as far as I know, it is not possible to survive a test of full accounting under a corporate order, and it is only possible to survive at test of full accounting under a kinship order. Now as far as differences between the Races, Subraces, Tribes, Clans, Families. And As to differences between the Classes, and between the Generations, and as to differences between the Genders, all of these differences exist, and they exist because we demonstrate both attempts to cooperate and attempts to complete or engage in conflict. at every level from gender, to generation, to class, to tribe, to subrace, to race. And while at small interpersonal scale we can reconcile these differnces in the absence of political orders, when we act as groups in family, clan, tribe, nation, subrace, and race, in norms, laws, institutions, traditions, and myths, we ally with our kin – our group. Those who do not (Antifa) are those who are outcast by their own group, and seek other groups. So what we see is two axis of organization and resistance: the classes vs the races, and corporatism vs tribalism. And we see the middle classes and working and laboring classes seeking homogeneity, the underclasses seeking whatever is to their advantage at the time, and the upper classes siezing power by whichever faction is able to exert the most pressure in the political model at hand. The disenfranchised seek the opposite of whatever order is in play.
-
Racialism?
—“CURT: DO YOU BELIEVE IN/SUPPORT RACIALISM?— (choice quotes here) (I view this, and all racial questions, as stupid but here is my answer.) I don’t know what that means. I advocate truth is more competitively advantageous than falsehood. In the case of race, people everywhere at all times demonstrate kin selection (except at the margins). In polities, under monarchy, this was not a problem, since one group possessed political power and the state could not be used as a proxy for warfare. Democracy and diversity restored levantine and semitic tribal conflict to european high trust homogenous societies. In creating a high trust competitive polity with a high standard of living, it appears that constructing a kinship order rather than a corporate order, is superior during the majority of history. It appears that corporate orders are means of merely extracting accumulated capital from homogenous peoples, and the emergence of a corporate order is evidence of predation or parasitism within or from without. So as far as I know, it is not possible to survive a test of full accounting under a corporate order, and it is only possible to survive at test of full accounting under a kinship order. Now as far as differences between the Races, Subraces, Tribes, Clans, Families. And As to differences between the Classes, and between the Generations, and as to differences between the Genders, all of these differences exist, and they exist because we demonstrate both attempts to cooperate and attempts to complete or engage in conflict. at every level from gender, to generation, to class, to tribe, to subrace, to race. And while at small interpersonal scale we can reconcile these differnces in the absence of political orders, when we act as groups in family, clan, tribe, nation, subrace, and race, in norms, laws, institutions, traditions, and myths, we ally with our kin – our group. Those who do not (Antifa) are those who are outcast by their own group, and seek other groups. So what we see is two axis of organization and resistance: the classes vs the races, and corporatism vs tribalism. And we see the middle classes and working and laboring classes seeking homogeneity, the underclasses seeking whatever is to their advantage at the time, and the upper classes siezing power by whichever faction is able to exert the most pressure in the political model at hand. The disenfranchised seek the opposite of whatever order is in play.
-
Full Accounting of Political Orders
FULL ACCOUNTING OF POLITICAL ORDERS (read it and weep) ***Democracy and diversity restored levantine and semitic tribal conflict to european high trust homogenous societies. In creating a high trust competitive polity with a high standard of living, it appears that constructing a kinship order rather than a corporate order, is superior during the majority of history. It appears that corporate orders are means of merely extracting accumulated capital from homogenous peoples, and the emergence of a corporate order is evidence of predation or parasitism within or from without. So as far as I know, it is not possible to survive a test of full accounting under a corporate order, and it is only possible to survive at test of full accounting under a kinship order.***
-
Full Accounting of Political Orders
FULL ACCOUNTING OF POLITICAL ORDERS (read it and weep) ***Democracy and diversity restored levantine and semitic tribal conflict to european high trust homogenous societies. In creating a high trust competitive polity with a high standard of living, it appears that constructing a kinship order rather than a corporate order, is superior during the majority of history. It appears that corporate orders are means of merely extracting accumulated capital from homogenous peoples, and the emergence of a corporate order is evidence of predation or parasitism within or from without. So as far as I know, it is not possible to survive a test of full accounting under a corporate order, and it is only possible to survive at test of full accounting under a kinship order.***
-
The American Generations For Ignorant Alt-Righters
THE AMERICAN GENERATIONS FOR IGNORANT ALT-RIGHTERS THE DEPRESSION ERA Born: 1912-1921 Coming of Age: 1930-1939 Age in 2004: 83 to 92 Current Population: 11-12 million (and declining rapidly) Depression era individuals tend to be conservative, compulsive savers, maintain low debt and use more secure financial products like CDs versus stocks. These individuals tend to feel a responsibility to leave a legacy to their children. Tend to be patriotic, oriented toward work before pleasure, respect for authority, have a sense of moral obligation. WORLD WAR II Born: 1922 to 1927 Coming of Age: 1940-1945 Age in 2004: 77-82 Current Population: 11 million (in quickening decline) People in this cohort shared in a common goal of defeating the Axis powers. There was an accepted sense of “deferment” among this group, contrasted with the emphasis on “me” in more recent (i.e. Gen X) cohorts. POST-WAR COHORT Born: 1928-1945 Coming of Age: 1946-1963 Age in 2004: 59 to 76 Current Population: 41 million (declining) This generation had significant opportunities in jobs and education as the War ended and a post-war economic boom struck America. However, the growth in Cold War tensions, the potential for nuclear war and other never before seen threats led to levels of discomfort and uncertainty throughout the generation. Members of this group value security, comfort, and familiar, known activities and environments. BOOMERS I OR THE BABY BOOMERS Born: 1946-1954 Coming of Age: 1963-1972 Age in 2004: 50-58 Current Population: 33 million For a long time the Baby Boomers were defined as those born between 1945 and 1964. That would make the generation huge (71 million) and encompass people who were 20 years apart in age. It didn’t compute to have those born in 1964 compared with those born in 1946. Life experiences were completely different. Attitudes, behaviors and society were vastly different. In effect, all the elements that help to define a cohort were violated by the broad span of years originally included in the concept of the Baby Boomers. The first Boomer segment is bounded by the Kennedy and Martin Luther King assassinations, the Civil Rights movements and the Vietnam War. Boomers I were in or protested the War. Boomers 2 or the Jones Generation missed the whole thing. Boomers I had good economic opportunities and were largely optimistic about the potential for America and their own lives, the Vietnam War notwithstanding. BOOMERS II OR GENERATION JONES Born: 1955-1965 Coming of Age: 1973-1983 Age in 2004: 39 to 49 Current Population: 49 million This first post-Watergate generation lost much of its trust in government and optimistic views the Boomers I maintained. Economic struggles including the oil embargo of 1979 reinforced a sense of “I’m out for me” and narcissism and a focus on self-help and skepticism over media and institutions is representative of attitudes of this cohort. While Boomers I had Vietnam, Boomers II had AIDS as part of their rites of passage. The youngest members of the Boomer II generation in fact did not have the benefits of the Boomer I class as many of the best jobs, opportunities, housing etc. were taken by the larger and earlier group. Both Gen X and Boomer II s suffer from this long shadow cast by Boomers I. GENERATION X Born: 1966-1976 Coming of Age: 1988-1994 Age in 2004: 28 to 38 Current Population: 41 million Sometimes referred to as the “lost” generation, this was the first generation of “latchkey” kids, exposed to lots of daycare and divorce. Known as the generation with the lowest voting participation rate of any generation, Gen Xers were quoted by Newsweek as “the generation that dropped out without ever turning on the news or tuning in to the social issues around them.” Gen X is often characterized by high levels of skepticism, “what’s in it for me” attitudes and a reputation for some of the worst music to ever gain popularity. Now, moving into adulthood William Morrow (Generations) cited the childhood divorce of many Gen Xers as “one of the most decisive experiences influencing how Gen Xers will shape their own families”. Gen Xers are arguably the best educated generation with 29% obtaining a bachelor’s degree or higher (6% higher than the previous cohort). And, with that education and a growing maturity they are starting to form families with a higher level of caution and pragmatism than their parents demonstrated. Concerns run high over avoiding broken homes, kids growing up without a parent around and financial planning. GENERATION Y, ECHO BOOMERS, OR MILLENNIALS Born: 1977-1994 Coming of Age: 1998-2006 Age in 2004: 10 to 22 Current Population: 71 million The largest cohort since the Baby Boomers, their high numbers reflect their births as that of their parent generation. The last of the Boomer Is and most of the Boomer II s. Gen Y kids are known as incredibly sophisticated, technology wise, immune to most traditional marketing and sales pitches…as they not only grew up with it all, they’ve seen it all and been exposed to it all since early childhood. Gen Y members are much more racially and ethnically diverse and they are much more segmented as an audience aided by the rapid expansion in Cable TV channels, satellite radio, the Internet, e-zines, etc. Gen Y are less brand loyal and the speed of the Internet has led the cohort to be similarly flexible and changing in its fashion, style consciousness and where and how it is communicated with. Gen Y kids often raised in dual income or single parent families have been more involved in family purchases…everything from groceries to new cars. One in nine Gen Yers has a credit card co-signed by a parent. GENERATION Z Born: 1995-2012 Coming of Age: 2013-2020 Age in 2004: 0-9 Current Population: 23 million and growing rapidly While we don’t know much about Gen Z yet…we know a lot about the environment they are growing up in. This highly diverse environment will make the grade schools of the next generation the most diverse ever. Higher levels of technology will make significant inroads in academics allowing for customized instruction, data mining of student histories to enable pinpoint diagnostics and remediation or accelerated achievement opportunities. Gen Z kids will grow up with a highly sophisticated media and computer environment and will be more Internet savvy and expert than their Gen Y forerunners. More to come on Gen Z…stay tuned.
-
The American Generations For Ignorant Alt-Righters
THE AMERICAN GENERATIONS FOR IGNORANT ALT-RIGHTERS THE DEPRESSION ERA Born: 1912-1921 Coming of Age: 1930-1939 Age in 2004: 83 to 92 Current Population: 11-12 million (and declining rapidly) Depression era individuals tend to be conservative, compulsive savers, maintain low debt and use more secure financial products like CDs versus stocks. These individuals tend to feel a responsibility to leave a legacy to their children. Tend to be patriotic, oriented toward work before pleasure, respect for authority, have a sense of moral obligation. WORLD WAR II Born: 1922 to 1927 Coming of Age: 1940-1945 Age in 2004: 77-82 Current Population: 11 million (in quickening decline) People in this cohort shared in a common goal of defeating the Axis powers. There was an accepted sense of “deferment” among this group, contrasted with the emphasis on “me” in more recent (i.e. Gen X) cohorts. POST-WAR COHORT Born: 1928-1945 Coming of Age: 1946-1963 Age in 2004: 59 to 76 Current Population: 41 million (declining) This generation had significant opportunities in jobs and education as the War ended and a post-war economic boom struck America. However, the growth in Cold War tensions, the potential for nuclear war and other never before seen threats led to levels of discomfort and uncertainty throughout the generation. Members of this group value security, comfort, and familiar, known activities and environments. BOOMERS I OR THE BABY BOOMERS Born: 1946-1954 Coming of Age: 1963-1972 Age in 2004: 50-58 Current Population: 33 million For a long time the Baby Boomers were defined as those born between 1945 and 1964. That would make the generation huge (71 million) and encompass people who were 20 years apart in age. It didn’t compute to have those born in 1964 compared with those born in 1946. Life experiences were completely different. Attitudes, behaviors and society were vastly different. In effect, all the elements that help to define a cohort were violated by the broad span of years originally included in the concept of the Baby Boomers. The first Boomer segment is bounded by the Kennedy and Martin Luther King assassinations, the Civil Rights movements and the Vietnam War. Boomers I were in or protested the War. Boomers 2 or the Jones Generation missed the whole thing. Boomers I had good economic opportunities and were largely optimistic about the potential for America and their own lives, the Vietnam War notwithstanding. BOOMERS II OR GENERATION JONES Born: 1955-1965 Coming of Age: 1973-1983 Age in 2004: 39 to 49 Current Population: 49 million This first post-Watergate generation lost much of its trust in government and optimistic views the Boomers I maintained. Economic struggles including the oil embargo of 1979 reinforced a sense of “I’m out for me” and narcissism and a focus on self-help and skepticism over media and institutions is representative of attitudes of this cohort. While Boomers I had Vietnam, Boomers II had AIDS as part of their rites of passage. The youngest members of the Boomer II generation in fact did not have the benefits of the Boomer I class as many of the best jobs, opportunities, housing etc. were taken by the larger and earlier group. Both Gen X and Boomer II s suffer from this long shadow cast by Boomers I. GENERATION X Born: 1966-1976 Coming of Age: 1988-1994 Age in 2004: 28 to 38 Current Population: 41 million Sometimes referred to as the “lost” generation, this was the first generation of “latchkey” kids, exposed to lots of daycare and divorce. Known as the generation with the lowest voting participation rate of any generation, Gen Xers were quoted by Newsweek as “the generation that dropped out without ever turning on the news or tuning in to the social issues around them.” Gen X is often characterized by high levels of skepticism, “what’s in it for me” attitudes and a reputation for some of the worst music to ever gain popularity. Now, moving into adulthood William Morrow (Generations) cited the childhood divorce of many Gen Xers as “one of the most decisive experiences influencing how Gen Xers will shape their own families”. Gen Xers are arguably the best educated generation with 29% obtaining a bachelor’s degree or higher (6% higher than the previous cohort). And, with that education and a growing maturity they are starting to form families with a higher level of caution and pragmatism than their parents demonstrated. Concerns run high over avoiding broken homes, kids growing up without a parent around and financial planning. GENERATION Y, ECHO BOOMERS, OR MILLENNIALS Born: 1977-1994 Coming of Age: 1998-2006 Age in 2004: 10 to 22 Current Population: 71 million The largest cohort since the Baby Boomers, their high numbers reflect their births as that of their parent generation. The last of the Boomer Is and most of the Boomer II s. Gen Y kids are known as incredibly sophisticated, technology wise, immune to most traditional marketing and sales pitches…as they not only grew up with it all, they’ve seen it all and been exposed to it all since early childhood. Gen Y members are much more racially and ethnically diverse and they are much more segmented as an audience aided by the rapid expansion in Cable TV channels, satellite radio, the Internet, e-zines, etc. Gen Y are less brand loyal and the speed of the Internet has led the cohort to be similarly flexible and changing in its fashion, style consciousness and where and how it is communicated with. Gen Y kids often raised in dual income or single parent families have been more involved in family purchases…everything from groceries to new cars. One in nine Gen Yers has a credit card co-signed by a parent. GENERATION Z Born: 1995-2012 Coming of Age: 2013-2020 Age in 2004: 0-9 Current Population: 23 million and growing rapidly While we don’t know much about Gen Z yet…we know a lot about the environment they are growing up in. This highly diverse environment will make the grade schools of the next generation the most diverse ever. Higher levels of technology will make significant inroads in academics allowing for customized instruction, data mining of student histories to enable pinpoint diagnostics and remediation or accelerated achievement opportunities. Gen Z kids will grow up with a highly sophisticated media and computer environment and will be more Internet savvy and expert than their Gen Y forerunners. More to come on Gen Z…stay tuned.
-
Deep States
DEEP STATES AND HOW TO DEAL WITH THEM Asking forgiveness for analytic exposition in advance….. THE HIERARCHY OF MODELS: 1) Michels-ian View (Evolutionary): Deep state – a deterministic and necessary consequence of all human orders, because of the value and need for synthesis of information and provision of decidability necessary to concentrate forces of coercion (persuasion) – necessities that cannot be rectified. 2) Economists View (Systematizing): Deep state – a conspiracy of common interests – interests that must be rectified by the correct incentives. 3) Common Folk’s view (Intentional-izing): Deep state – a deliberate conspiracy of common interests – indicating immoral people with immoral interests that must be punished or replaced. 4) Ancient Folk’s View (anthropomorphism): The gods intend it so…. We are the Victims of the vicissitudes of the gods, and nothing can be done except to fight or submit to them. THEORIES 1) The Chinese Proposition: the state is the most profitable and important industry and should be run as an industry, by the best people, selected from the best universities, and professionally trained with increasing responsibility from the local to the regional to the national level. 2) Fukuyama’s Theory: (German Model) That the professionalization of a bureaucracy prior to democracy, under continental law will create a deep state that uses prior restraint, and serves the public interest out of tradition and self interest. 3) The Anglo Saxon Theory (Classical Liberalism): That patronage leadership of the bureaucracies should provide a means of correcting and cleansing the bureaucracies. But as Fukuyama has shown, this leads to the opposite effect. 4) The American Theory (minimalism): the only means of preventing endemic corruption, and providing maximum quality of goods services and information is maximum privatization of all services despite the resistance by the bureaucracy (monopoly). 5) The Science: States that produce monopoly services as investor of last resort (or monopoly investor in the commons) can produce industries, and retreat into the german, anglo saxon, or american theory depending upon the degree of trust in the judiciary to resolve disputes between the citizenry and the service organizations. In other words, the problem is the degree of trust and trustworthiness present in the culture – which in and of itself is created by those courts. GENERAL LAWS: 1) Iron Law of Oligarchy : oligarchies whether formal, patronage, kin, ‘specialized knowledge’, or ‘social networks” will evolve because decisions that concentrate resources (forces of coercion) cannot be created otherwise, and the organization cannot survive competition. 2) “Cthulu Swims Left”: any organization without a formal logic (law) to bind it, will exploit all opportunities for discretion to expand to the point of maximum rent seeking – until met by shock which it lacks the free resources to use in re-creating incentives necessary to reorganize under the new conditions. 3) Law of Maximizing of Rents: All organizations whether public or private will seek to maximize rents while providing the minimum returns to customers, creditors, and investors that customers, creditors, and investors will tolerate. THE SCIENCE Either we implement a strictly constructed, exceptionless, constitution of natural law (reciprocity) requiring markets in every aspect of life (association, cooperation, reproduction, production, production of commons (government), production of polities) with universal standing, universal application (rule of law), an insurer of last resort (Singapore Model), or we will continue (as we have) to deliver a private economy for association and reproduction, a mixed economy for the production of goods, services, and information, and a majoritarian monopoly economy, for the provision of commons whether goods, services, and information, and an absolute monopoly for insurer of last resort. You can evolve a population through rule of law, if you can evolve a court through rule of law, but you cannot evolve a court through rule of law, if your system of law is discretionary rather than one of rule of law. In other words, it is not possible to produce a non-discretionary rule of law, and therefore a government of low corruption, unless you produce first a law that is not open to interpretation and ‘fudging’. All societies require a system of government equal to their degree of imposition of rule of law. The problem is demographics, the percentage of people in a legally bound economy (the size of the middle class). As such we should expect to see small homogenous societies with strong rule of law and heavy redistribution on one end, and large heterogeneous societies with heavy corruption on the other. And that is what we see. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine