Aug 24, 2016 11:35am The problem is MONOPOLY healthcare. As long as private care and hospitals are available, and the wealthy are paying for time and customer service, they will continue to pay for research and development, and the STATE healthcare can provide commodity services. The problem is not that this arrangement wouldn’t provide better care all around, but that the state cannot bear competition under which state health care would always be considered by the market to be inferior, and therefore pressure higher on the state.
Source: Original Site Post
-
Poetry and Rhyme As Institutions of Normative Law
Aug 24, 2016 11:41am(interesting idea) There is a reason why we want to restore BOTH truthfulness AND Poetry with Rhyme: Just as our ancient ancestors chose our intellectual (druidic / historian) leadership by their abilities to remember, our more recent intellectual leadership was sorted out by their use of poetry and meter. So if we speak testimonially, in rhyme and meter, we will ‘sort’ by speech as did our historical and prehistorical ancestors. And like our ancestors these words, in rhyme and verse, truth to the core, will work their way into the commons vernacular as normative law. ( I will work more on this but I seem to have solved the problem of both truthful speech, and art, poetry, and literature that troubled me so seriously in the early days.)
-
Poetry and Rhyme As Institutions of Normative Law
Aug 24, 2016 11:41am(interesting idea) There is a reason why we want to restore BOTH truthfulness AND Poetry with Rhyme: Just as our ancient ancestors chose our intellectual (druidic / historian) leadership by their abilities to remember, our more recent intellectual leadership was sorted out by their use of poetry and meter. So if we speak testimonially, in rhyme and meter, we will ‘sort’ by speech as did our historical and prehistorical ancestors. And like our ancestors these words, in rhyme and verse, truth to the core, will work their way into the commons vernacular as normative law. ( I will work more on this but I seem to have solved the problem of both truthful speech, and art, poetry, and literature that troubled me so seriously in the early days.)
-
There Is No Reason To Tolerate Burgher (Bourgeoise) Interference in Political Orders
Let’s compare Soros’ activism, with PPPP’s activism against Gawker. The courts can be, if we repair the constitution, a method by which the wealthy can police what the politicians choose not to. This is a good. We have juridical defense in these cases. But why can we not sue Soros for corruption by circumventing the courts, where we have juridical defense? The moment we let the state determine law rahter than terms of contract we surrender to state corruption, and the corruptibility of the state. So far, in the west, we have, at least until the past few generations, been able to preserve the rule of law as sacred natural order beyond which no man may transgress. This is our defense. Not politicians. They are corrupt to the last – because they must be.
-
There Is No Reason To Tolerate Burgher (Bourgeoise) Interference in Political Orders
Let’s compare Soros’ activism, with PPPP’s activism against Gawker. The courts can be, if we repair the constitution, a method by which the wealthy can police what the politicians choose not to. This is a good. We have juridical defense in these cases. But why can we not sue Soros for corruption by circumventing the courts, where we have juridical defense? The moment we let the state determine law rahter than terms of contract we surrender to state corruption, and the corruptibility of the state. So far, in the west, we have, at least until the past few generations, been able to preserve the rule of law as sacred natural order beyond which no man may transgress. This is our defense. Not politicians. They are corrupt to the last – because they must be.
-
Bourgeoise? No. Logistics of War
Aug 24, 2016 12:11pm BOURGEOISE? NO – LOGISTICS OF WAR I get accused of bourgeoise values all the time, and I always think it’s childish, or ignorant. Generals conduct strategy and that means logistics. The last mile, for today, may depend on the character of men. But all the miles behind them, and all the yesterdays and tomorrows depend upon the logistics: production and supply lines. A dangerous, happy, well-fed soldiery capable of defeating an enemy is equipped and supported by a happy, produdtive, well fed, population competitively defeating in economics and intellectual means their competitors, just as the soldiers their competitors. I tend to think of ‘last-mile-ers’ as children: well-intentioned, passionate, but ignorant and naive. My own values are classical, intellectual, and perhaps a bit effete. I do not seek to win the great wars by my values. Nor by the elation of the throng. But by cool headed plans and execution of them, with discipline over many years.
-
Bourgeoise? No. Logistics of War
Aug 24, 2016 12:11pm BOURGEOISE? NO – LOGISTICS OF WAR I get accused of bourgeoise values all the time, and I always think it’s childish, or ignorant. Generals conduct strategy and that means logistics. The last mile, for today, may depend on the character of men. But all the miles behind them, and all the yesterdays and tomorrows depend upon the logistics: production and supply lines. A dangerous, happy, well-fed soldiery capable of defeating an enemy is equipped and supported by a happy, produdtive, well fed, population competitively defeating in economics and intellectual means their competitors, just as the soldiers their competitors. I tend to think of ‘last-mile-ers’ as children: well-intentioned, passionate, but ignorant and naive. My own values are classical, intellectual, and perhaps a bit effete. I do not seek to win the great wars by my values. Nor by the elation of the throng. But by cool headed plans and execution of them, with discipline over many years.
-
Absent Juridical Defense, We Must Return To Violence.
As Sovereign men we create juridical defense to keep peace among equals. We appeal to the MARKET OF PEERS (JURY) FOR resolution of the disputes. Thus submitting to the peers, and asking for equal treatment as is due all peers: insurance against the imposition of costs. But if we lack juridical defense, or are prevented from juridical defense, then there is no reason by which we can seek insurance by the group, and instead, must self-insure, by restitution, punishment, and if necessary death, of those who impose upon us. As far as I know we can kill Soros.
-
Absent Juridical Defense, We Must Return To Violence.
As Sovereign men we create juridical defense to keep peace among equals. We appeal to the MARKET OF PEERS (JURY) FOR resolution of the disputes. Thus submitting to the peers, and asking for equal treatment as is due all peers: insurance against the imposition of costs. But if we lack juridical defense, or are prevented from juridical defense, then there is no reason by which we can seek insurance by the group, and instead, must self-insure, by restitution, punishment, and if necessary death, of those who impose upon us. As far as I know we can kill Soros.
-
Forcing People To Come To The Table To Trade
Aug 24, 2016 1:01pm If you don’t understand what I’m doing, then, of course you’ll make the mistake of classifying me as right wing fascist – but it’s not true at all. Like my predecessors in sovereignty under judge-discovered, common, natural law, I am trying to limit people to fully informed, productive, voluntary exchanges, free of externalities of the same. So I advocate for the use of natural law, to incrementally suppress, parasitism by all means, through the use of common, judge discovered, empirical law. Strictly constructed from the first principle of natural law (NPP), consisting of whereas (problem), whereas (objective), therefore (prohibition), by (these means), claim (proof), warranty (judge).This creates (a) a market for reproduction: family, (b) a market for production of goods and services(consumption), and (c) a market for commons (investments). The only anywhere near-fascist part of my proposition is paying people who lack demonstrated ability to create the moral hazard of producing offspring, to not force their costs upon us, and to be punished if they do, like any other criminal. I do not understand why a person has some natural right to reproduction any more than the natural right to murder, violence, theft, and fraud in its many incarnations. They do not and cannot. And it was just as strange to our ancestors who passionately objected to our forcible prohibition on intertribal warfare, and inter-kinship feuds, and punishment of petty thefts, and standard of weights and measures, and prohibitions against frauds, and requirements against warranty. None of us wants constraints on our parasitism of others, because it increases the costs and effort we must bear if we are to persist. But that is what has been and will forever remain, good for mankind: the incremental suppression of parasitism by each means until there remains no possible method of parasitism available, and we have no other choice for survival than cooperation by engaging in fully informed, productive, voluntary exchange, limited to externality of the same criteria. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine [1] NPP refers to Non Parasitism Principle: the requirement for fully informed, productive, warrantied, voluntary transfer, limited to externality of the same criteria.