Theme: Coercion

  • Similar criticism. Self defense internally vs offense against others externally.

    Similar criticism. Self defense internally vs offense against others externally. Implied but unstated quid pro quo (coercion). Attempt to harm individuals and interfere in elections (Clinton/Obama/DNC Method) via coercion vs self defense by interference. Material difference? No.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-24 17:23:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176547731554361344

    Reply addressees: @karlbykarlsmith

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176472981368922113


    IN REPLY TO:

    @thesubtledoctor

    Lots of people and betting markets are telling me Ukraine is fundamentally different than Mueller. Someone walk me through this please, bc they look similiar to me.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176472981368922113

  • “Ending the False Promise of the NAP”

    “Ending the False Promise of the NAP”
    https://propertarianism.com/2019/05/26/ending-the-false-promise-of-the-nap/


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-24 16:59:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176541645136904193

    Reply addressees: @BrendanVlass @MynameisMud9 @StefanMolyneux

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176533746817724416


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176533746817724416

  • Um. Duels are only used for the solution of interpersonal disputes that cannot b

    Um. Duels are only used for the solution of interpersonal disputes that cannot be settled by the court (ie: dependent upon testimony alone). People who are problematic for the GROUP are just eliminated by the group. It’s numbers of opposition that keep men moral.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-24 16:11:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176529660643106818

    Reply addressees: @Gyeff

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176526763549175810


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176526763549175810

  • That’s not quite honest. The unions have been the primary funding sources of agi

    That’s not quite honest. The unions have been the primary funding sources of agitation against rule of law, and the body politic behind world socialism. The anglo world fought the unions by moving industry out of its hands. The union disease was real. The cure almost as bad.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-24 03:05:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176331839675535360

    Reply addressees: @Lord_Keynes2

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176325591185772545


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176325591185772545

  • The question is not why are men bad, but why are we not able to defend against b

    The question is not why are men bad, but why are we not able to defend against bad men – except that we invent means of defending ourselves more slowly than others of attacking us?


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-24 01:38:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176309895836176384

    Reply addressees: @YashPunia4 @AEI

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176309761849069568


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @YashPunia4 @AEI Why is it than indian elites can move to american or canada or the UK and prosper? What is wrong at home? What needs fixing?

    I have this same question of most african nations that talk to me. Europeans are nothing compared to muslims. Romans nothing next to chinese.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1176309761849069568


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @YashPunia4 @AEI Why is it than indian elites can move to american or canada or the UK and prosper? What is wrong at home? What needs fixing?

    I have this same question of most african nations that talk to me. Europeans are nothing compared to muslims. Romans nothing next to chinese.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1176309761849069568

  • Rule of Law vs Government – Deconflation

    [R]ule of Law is Rule of Law ( prohibitions, via-negativa ) regardless of the form of Government (actions, requirements, via-positiva). The only necessary function of law is the resolution of disputes. The only necessary function of government is the production of commons. In a democracy individuals vote on those commons recommended by whom? A king? A bureaucracy? Any proposed by anyone? In a republic, individuals vote for representatives who then vote on those commons. Dictator/Monarchy, Cabinet, (Representatives) Bureaucracy, People. European Parliaments like thangs and juries were originally juries, where the monarchy would petition local landowners (businesspeople) if they wished to tax them for some purpose or not. The battle over via negativa control Rule of Law vs Rule by DIscretion), and the limits of exception on rule of law vs rule by discretion, and the distribution of via-positiva rule between monarch(nation)/dictator(empire), oligarchy/parliament (intermediary between state and people), and the people, has continued. As far as I know the form of government is dependent upon the demographic distribution of the people (relative sizes of the classes), their state of development (size of the middle classes), scale of territory, and hostility and competitiveness of neighbors. If we want an ideal government – at least, the one possible by man – we probably had it: small homogenous nation states, rule of law by the natural (necessary) law of reciprocity (tort, trespass), an hereditary monarch as judge of last resort, a cabinet of professionals acting largely as venture capitalists, a small professional bureaucracy, preferably trained in the aristocratic (private secular), church or confucian model from youth. Via Negativa voting by the people in matters of taxation. And (what is causing most of our 19th-20thc problems) universal standing before the court in matters of the commons. This creates a political market for commons, a productive market for goods services and information, and a juridical market for prosecution of ir-reciprocity regardless of whether private or public.

  • Rule of Law vs Government – Deconflation

    [R]ule of Law is Rule of Law ( prohibitions, via-negativa ) regardless of the form of Government (actions, requirements, via-positiva). The only necessary function of law is the resolution of disputes. The only necessary function of government is the production of commons. In a democracy individuals vote on those commons recommended by whom? A king? A bureaucracy? Any proposed by anyone? In a republic, individuals vote for representatives who then vote on those commons. Dictator/Monarchy, Cabinet, (Representatives) Bureaucracy, People. European Parliaments like thangs and juries were originally juries, where the monarchy would petition local landowners (businesspeople) if they wished to tax them for some purpose or not. The battle over via negativa control Rule of Law vs Rule by DIscretion), and the limits of exception on rule of law vs rule by discretion, and the distribution of via-positiva rule between monarch(nation)/dictator(empire), oligarchy/parliament (intermediary between state and people), and the people, has continued. As far as I know the form of government is dependent upon the demographic distribution of the people (relative sizes of the classes), their state of development (size of the middle classes), scale of territory, and hostility and competitiveness of neighbors. If we want an ideal government – at least, the one possible by man – we probably had it: small homogenous nation states, rule of law by the natural (necessary) law of reciprocity (tort, trespass), an hereditary monarch as judge of last resort, a cabinet of professionals acting largely as venture capitalists, a small professional bureaucracy, preferably trained in the aristocratic (private secular), church or confucian model from youth. Via Negativa voting by the people in matters of taxation. And (what is causing most of our 19th-20thc problems) universal standing before the court in matters of the commons. This creates a political market for commons, a productive market for goods services and information, and a juridical market for prosecution of ir-reciprocity regardless of whether private or public.

  • José Francisco Mayora In spite of development of firearms since XVI century, the

    https://youtu.be/l2KWTEhyVX8by José Francisco Mayora

    In spite of development of firearms since XVI century, the duel as an ancestral western method to resolve conflicts, stayed unaltered until very recent years (early XX century), with fencing and boxing till death as a “non plus ultra” example of eugenics in justice and law enforcement.

    Since the firearms “democratised” war as equalizers between highly skilled and strong knights vrs vulgar peasants who could easily kill them on those conditions, the art of fencing was indeed used as a procedure for summary (instantaneous) trials between getlements where skills, strength and honor were the values to determine reason through fair, regulated and witnessed exercise of violence to reivindicate rights inter pairs (gentlemen only) in an unnappealable way for the loser.

    Legally backed Dueling was indeed a great guarantee of justice: it repealed a lot of conflicts rather than fomenting them just by the consequences -transaction costs of self defense of rights were very low- of lying, slander and defamation, severely punished with virtual death penalty thanks to the institution of dueling. Economically powerful but morally indecent individuals could be faced fairly by a man with the truth, physical strength and courage on his side, regardless of artificial laws to foment pillage and corruption between pairs. Banning duels, true justice was taken from free men, enslaving them to the tyranny of corruptible judges.

    Once dueling was banned from western civilization, prevarication became the new justice.

    A DUEL WAS REAL AND VINDICATIVE JUSTICE.

    https://youtu.be/l2KWTEhyVX8Updated Sep 21, 2019, 4:08 PM


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-21 16:08:00 UTC

  • EUROPEAN MARTIAL ART? IT’S WAR AND THE DUEL Hand to hand is for poor people who

    EUROPEAN MARTIAL ART? IT’S WAR AND THE DUEL

    Hand to hand is for poor people who have been disarmed by the state. Europeans use WEAPONS. Boxing is european because it evolved from the Duel…. https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=469870926943136&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-21 14:18:31 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1175414005185359874

  • EUROPEAN MARTIAL ART? IT’S WAR AND THE DUEL Hand to hand is for poor people who

    EUROPEAN MARTIAL ART? IT’S WAR AND THE DUEL

    Hand to hand is for poor people who have been disarmed by the state. Europeans use WEAPONS. Boxing is european because it evolved from the Duel. Research the ‘ethics’ (rules) of the duel and its obvious. Same for white ‘fighting’ vs black fighting. We duel (honor, commons) they fight. This is a problem. You must fight the enemy on their terms, no matter what the scale. This leads to continuous devolution.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-21 10:18:00 UTC