(priceless)
–“The problem is you view rule of law as some sort of imposition – and this to some extent understandable due to all the clearly unjust impositions pretending to be law over last six decades.”– Martin Stepan @AutistocratMS
Martin is terribly funny even when he’s…
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-04 02:24:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1742731182142263349
(priceless)
–“The problem is you view rule of law as some sort of imposition – and this to some extent understandable due to all the clearly unjust impositions pretending to be law over last six decades.”– Martin Stepan @AutistocratMS
Martin is terribly funny even when he’s completely serious. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-04 02:24:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1742731182054207488
THere aren’t sufficient peers, and what we discover is that any such polity devolves into a haven for remote free riders on other economies, pirates, scammers, thieves and terrorists….
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-04 02:00:49 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1742727755630846259
Reply addressees: @ket74384019 @AutistocratMS @BOB37702515
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1742707669272592762
Quotable
—“Libertarians will claim you can’t enforce morality, thus revealing they want to license some types of immorality.”—Martin Štěpán @AutistocratMS
.
As I’ve said since I ‘diverged’ from the Libertarian movement, the purpose of rothbardian libertarianism, as a heresy… https://twitter.com/AutistocratMS/status/1742670937143603638
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-03 22:33:07 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1742675484599615587
Christianity was imposed on the western empire because it was intolerant.
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-02 01:47:19 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1741999582140137548
DEFINITION: Imposition of Costs
|Severity|: Aggress <- Impose <- Infringe
The words “aggress,” “impose,” and “infringe” have distinct meanings but can sometimes be related in the context of actions that overstep boundaries.
– “aggress” focuses on initiating conflict,
– “impose” on causing unwelcome burdens (costs), and
– “infringe” on violating rules or rights (opportunities).
Here’s a comparison and contrast of these terms:
Aggress
Meaning: To “aggress” means to make a first attack or take the initiative in a conflict. It implies initiating hostility or confrontation.
Usage: This term is often used in contexts of physical or military conflict, but it can also apply to social or verbal confrontations.
Connotation: “Aggress” generally has a negative connotation, suggesting unwarranted or unprovoked offensive actions.
Focus: The focus is on the initiation of an action that is hostile or confrontational.
Impose
Meaning: To “impose” means to forcibly put a burden, duty, rule, or penalty on someone or something. It can also mean to force one’s ideas or beliefs on others.
Usage: This term is commonly used in social, legal, and personal contexts, such as imposing a tax, a penalty, or one’s views.
Connotation: “Impose” often carries a negative connotation, implying a lack of consent or agreement from those affected.
Focus: The focus is on the act of placing a burden or requirement on others, often without their consent.
Infringe
Meaning: To “infringe” means to actively break the terms of a law or agreement or to violate someone’s rights or property.
Usage: This term is frequently used in legal contexts, such as infringing on copyrights, patents, or personal freedoms.
Connotation: “Infringe” has a negative connotation, as it involves the violation of laws, rights, or agreements.
Focus: The focus is on the act of violating boundaries, rules, or rights that are legally or morally established.
Comparison and Contrast
Aggression vs. Imposition: While “aggress” involves initiating a conflict or attack, “impose” is more about putting something unwelcome onto others. Aggression is about starting a hostile action, whereas imposition is about burdening others with something.
Imposition vs. Infringement: Both “impose” and “infringe” can involve overstepping boundaries, but imposition is more about enforcing something unwanted, while infringement is about violating established rules or rights.
Aggression vs. Infringement: “Aggress” is about initiating conflict, often actively and overtly, while “infringe” is specifically about breaking rules or encroaching on rights, which can be a more subtle form of overstepping.
Summary
In summary, while all three terms involve actions that overstep boundaries or norms, “aggress” focuses on initiating conflict, “impose” on enforcing unwelcome burdens, and “infringe” on violating rules or rights.
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-31 12:02:51 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1741429708489732096
I don’t quite get this argument but would like to hear you explain it. A dictatorship utilizing all resources of a state for total war is a military advantage over a loose alliance. But I”m not sure that tells us anything about ‘deserving’ to live or die.
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-30 15:21:26 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1741117298012741799
Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS @erikbrus25 @sauniere
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1741100587406545216
–“the North never made slavery the issue upon which to rally public opinion in support of the war. Quite the opposite was true, as Lincoln made clear himself that the goal was to maintain the union, and that he had no desire to end the institution of slavery. In fact, even though anti-slavery sentiments had become more common among northerners, such views were still held by a small enough percentage of the population that appeals against slavery would never have been successful in gaining support for the war effort. This is an argument that is designed to appeal to modern sentiments (and ignorance), but depends on the complete denial of historic fact.”—Chris Calton, Phd, The Indpendent Institute
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-30 01:26:04 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1740907070524649475
The only solution is 2M men in DC for 3+ weeks.
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-29 18:33:28 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1740803236154814678
Reply addressees: @FuryForth @JeffYoungerShow @UScrimeReview @Matt_Bracken48 @Michael_Yon
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1740799758430802199
Research taxes.
Prior to the American Civil War, the Southern states contributed a significant portion (most) of federal tax revenue, despite that the North had a free population of about 22 million and the South a free population of about 5.5 million, primarily due to the nature of the economy and the tax structure at the time. So a tax of 4 or 5 to 1.
The key reasons for this include:
Tariffs: The primary source of federal revenue before the Civil War was tariffs, which are taxes on imported goods. The Southern states, with their agrarian economies, relied heavily on importing goods from Europe. In contrast, the Northern states were more industrialized and produced many goods domestically. Therefore, the South ended up paying a larger share of tariffs.
Export Economy: The Southern economy was heavily based on agriculture, particularly the export of cash crops like cotton, tobacco, and rice. These exports were crucial not only to the U.S. economy but also to the global market, especially in Europe. While the export itself was not directly taxed, the goods and services needed to support this export economy were often imported and thus subject to tariffs.
Lack of Industrialization: The North’s industrial economy meant it was less reliant on imports than the agrarian South. Northern industries also benefited from protective tariffs that made imported goods more expensive, thus protecting domestic manufacturers from foreign competition. This situation was a source of tension, as the South felt that the tariff policy unfairly favored Northern interests.
Limited Federal Taxation Methods: Before the 16th Amendment (1913), which allowed the federal government to levy an income tax, the U.S. government’s ability to raise revenue was limited mostly to tariffs and excise taxes. There was no federal income tax that could diversify the tax burden across different sectors and regions of the economy.
Political Disputes Over Tariffs: The issue of tariffs was a major point of contention between the North and the South. Southern states argued that the tariff system was inequitable and favored Northern industrial interests.
This dispute over tariffs and the perception of an unfair economic advantage contributed to the growing sectional tensions leading up to the Civil War.
(Ergo I am correct (as usual))
Reply addressees: @Duke_of_angels @chrisdier @NikkiHaley
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-28 14:57:52 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1740386590940106752
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1740381336546967820