Peace is an idiot’s obsession.
[T]he only rational pursuit is the positive expression in property rights of the negative prohibition on free riding. Violence toward that end is always rational and moral. Peace is an undesirable pursuit, since it simply justifies whatever level of immorality is currently extant.
People who pursue peace for its own sake are, if necessity, immoralists.
THREE AXIS OF AESTHETIC CRITICISM: 1) CRAFT (Materials and Workmanship) 2) DESIGN (Aesthetic appeal and ‘beauty’) 3) CONTENT (Values, associations and narrative) The comparative quality of all art is objectively ascertainable by recursive triangulation.
THREE AXIS OF AESTHETIC CRITICISM: 1) CRAFT (Materials and Workmanship) 2) DESIGN (Aesthetic appeal and ‘beauty’) 3) CONTENT (Values, associations and narrative) The comparative quality of all art is objectively ascertainable by recursive triangulation.
Critique != Criticism
In Criticism the alternative choice must be defended.
In critique the alternative choice must be obscured.
The purpose of Criticism is to identify truth. The purpose of Critique is obscurantism: complex deception.
Critique is deception. Control by deception using obscurantism.
We forgo our opportunity for violence in exchange for pursuit of the truth.
However if the opposition is not equally engaged in the pursuit of the truth, then we need not forgo the honesty of violence just to tolerate acts if deception.
Critique != Criticism
In Criticism the alternative choice must be defended.
In critique the alternative choice must be obscured.
The purpose of Criticism is to identify truth. The purpose of Critique is obscurantism: complex deception.
Critique is deception. Control by deception using obscurantism.
We forgo our opportunity for violence in exchange for pursuit of the truth.
However if the opposition is not equally engaged in the pursuit of the truth, then we need not forgo the honesty of violence just to tolerate acts if deception.
Trust and Demand for the State
Trust and Demand for the State
WEAPONIZING REPRODUCTION [Y]ou know, I had bought into the ‘equality’ thing pretty deeply. But yet again, I”m overturning my own biases. While patriarchy made possible by property helped to constrain female reproduction rates, and female reproductive parasitism, one of the northern european innovations was to further improve on the suppression of feminine reproductive parasitism, by delaying childbirth as well. Both patriarchy, the absolute nuclear family and manorialism further suppressed female reproductive parasitism. The state by contrast, within just one generation of enfranchisement of women, was used by women to reverse thousands of years of innovations in the institutions of property which controlled female reproduction – particularly in the lower classes. The state has not only been the source of predation but under universalism the sponsor of both dysgenia and suicide. The most paternal cultures are the most successful. The most aggressive males produce the most aggressive paternalism. The most aggressive paternalism produces the most aggressive family structure. We weaponized norms and technology, while other groups of people weaponized reproduction, and yet others weaponized deception. Why then should we abandon truth and violence so that we can be conquered by reproduction and deception? (This was a conclusion I certainly didn’t expect to come to. Especially as a maker of alpha widows. The family is more important than my own demonstrated preferences illustrate.)
WEAPONIZING REPRODUCTION [Y]ou know, I had bought into the ‘equality’ thing pretty deeply. But yet again, I”m overturning my own biases. While patriarchy made possible by property helped to constrain female reproduction rates, and female reproductive parasitism, one of the northern european innovations was to further improve on the suppression of feminine reproductive parasitism, by delaying childbirth as well. Both patriarchy, the absolute nuclear family and manorialism further suppressed female reproductive parasitism. The state by contrast, within just one generation of enfranchisement of women, was used by women to reverse thousands of years of innovations in the institutions of property which controlled female reproduction – particularly in the lower classes. The state has not only been the source of predation but under universalism the sponsor of both dysgenia and suicide. The most paternal cultures are the most successful. The most aggressive males produce the most aggressive paternalism. The most aggressive paternalism produces the most aggressive family structure. We weaponized norms and technology, while other groups of people weaponized reproduction, and yet others weaponized deception. Why then should we abandon truth and violence so that we can be conquered by reproduction and deception? (This was a conclusion I certainly didn’t expect to come to. Especially as a maker of alpha widows. The family is more important than my own demonstrated preferences illustrate.)
POLYMORALISM AND COMMONS
[A]nd of course there are other options: Land can be owned by no one. Land can be owned by one person. Land can be owned by a group of contractual shareholders. Land can be owned by normative shareholders.
The problem of a commons lies in determining use of a resource that CAN be consumed. However not all resources that are are useful can be consumed tragically. Some resources, and perhaps the most valuable resources are those which we agree NOT to consume. As such, those things we prohibit consumption of. All property consists of prohibitions. Commons consist of universal prohibitions. The tragedy of the commons applies ONLY to unelectable consumption, and the cost of administering unelectable consumption.
Shareholder agreements universally construct commons, but disallow consumption of those commons except as distributed under the terms of the agreement. So not only can we produce commons by shareholder agreement, nearly all commons are so produced. The problem is not the production of commons, or the constitution of commons or the existence of commons, but that statists license the consumption of commons, and as hoppe has illustrated, distribute the commons (consume it) rather than save it (as did monarchs).
Parks for example serve as monuments which produce ‘goods’ indefinitely if they are not consumed. We merely need to prevent consumption of the land, in order for the good produced by parks to persist. Of the many kinds of monuments, it is one of the hardest to prevent the consumption of. Because it is the easiest to consume.
Just as property rights, rule of law, and other norms are expensive monuments to construct, and to persist, without consuming them. And they can be consumed, easily, if we do not prevent their consumption.
Many norms require high constant costs of observation. Property as an informal institution does. Property rights are merely a legal definition of the norm of property. But the norm of property is produced as are all commons, by requiring a contribution (sacrifice of opportunity) and teh forcible prevention of consumption by that which is not normatively defined.
This is inescapable since property itself as an institution must be so constructed.
THE “LIBERTINE” LIBERTARIANS
[T]he “Libertines” simply try to license unethical, immoral, and conspiratorial behavior by defining away norms. And while some norms may be arbitrary (signals or rituals), those norms that construct and persist commons are not.
Cosmopolitans just created an elaborate system of pseudo-rationalism to circumvent ethics and morality, in order to justify poly moral in-group-vs out-group morality that renders commons impossible to construct.
However, the Western competitive advantage over the rest of the world was the trust started by the initiatic brotherhood of warriors, which allowed the aristocracy to form, and which all others in society attempted to imitate not only to obtain status as a reproductive improvement, but because trust did in fact, non-symbolically, but functionally, produce consistently higher returns than non-trust.
Game. Set. Match. The end of the pseudoscientific century. Libertinism. Cosmopolitanism. Rothbardiansm. Misesianism are just like socialism and neoconservatism, cosmopolitan systems of pseudoscientific propaganda imitating the framing and overloading of abrahamic authoritarianism. Elaborate verbalisms.
(I have pretty much put a fork in it. Rothbard isn’t just wrong. It’s worse than that.)
Curt