Theme: Coercion

  • POSTMODERNISM: KILL THE INCOME STREAM AND KILL THE IDEA (defund the left) 1) The

    POSTMODERNISM: KILL THE INCOME STREAM AND KILL THE IDEA

    (defund the left)

    1) The Easy Part.

    – End Copyright – Convert to Creative Commons.

    – Restore fighting – (Duel) restore retaliation on gossip, and ridicule

    – Defamation – restore all defamation, including speculation.

    – Truthfulness – defense of informational commons.

    – University bears Responsibility for Student Loans

    This will destroy the left’s ability to exist. Because the left requires parasitism and lying to persist.

    2) Providing Incentive for People to Vote for it.

    – Interest on Fiat Credit – Eliminate consumer interest. Convert all interest to state revenue.

    3) Then the difficult part:

    Direct Democracy – Proportional or Not. Require Majority of Genders, Majority of Tribes. As families with one vote we had common interests the differences between which were resolved external to government: in the family. As individuals we must restore the un-commonality of interests by increasing the houses for genders and tribes, as we split the interests of classes and regions.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-06 07:03:00 UTC

  • Postmodernism: Kill The Income Stream And Kill The Idea

    (defund the left) 1) The Easy Part. – End Copyright – Convert to Creative Commons. – Restore fighting – (Duel) restore retaliation on gossip, and ridicule – Defamation – restore all defamation, including speculation. – Truthfulness – defense of informational commons. – University bears Responsibility for Student Loans This will destroy the left’s ability to exist. Because the left requires parasitism and lying to persist. 2) Providing Incentive for People to Vote for it. – Interest on Fiat Credit – Eliminate consumer interest. Convert all interest to state revenue. 3) Then the difficult part: Direct Democracy – Proportional or Not. Require Majority of Genders, Majority of Tribes. As families with one vote we had common interests the differences between which were resolved external to government: in the family. As individuals we must restore the un-commonality of interests by increasing the houses for genders and tribes, as we split the interests of classes and regions.
  • Postmodernism: Kill The Income Stream And Kill The Idea

    (defund the left) 1) The Easy Part. – End Copyright – Convert to Creative Commons. – Restore fighting – (Duel) restore retaliation on gossip, and ridicule – Defamation – restore all defamation, including speculation. – Truthfulness – defense of informational commons. – University bears Responsibility for Student Loans This will destroy the left’s ability to exist. Because the left requires parasitism and lying to persist. 2) Providing Incentive for People to Vote for it. – Interest on Fiat Credit – Eliminate consumer interest. Convert all interest to state revenue. 3) Then the difficult part: Direct Democracy – Proportional or Not. Require Majority of Genders, Majority of Tribes. As families with one vote we had common interests the differences between which were resolved external to government: in the family. As individuals we must restore the un-commonality of interests by increasing the houses for genders and tribes, as we split the interests of classes and regions.
  • We need to TAKE BACK OUR RIGHTS BY VIOLENCE if not returned to us by courts. The

    We need to TAKE BACK OUR RIGHTS BY VIOLENCE if not returned to us by courts. There is only one law: Natural Law. The rest is Command. Rebel.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-04 16:30:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/871403682075750400

    Reply addressees: @realDonaldTrump

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/871143765473406976


    IN REPLY TO:

    @realDonaldTrump

    We need to be smart, vigilant and tough. We need the courts to give us back our rights. We need the Travel Ban as an extra level of safety!

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/871143765473406976

  • SOME ‘ANARCHO PROPERTARIANISM’ AND FREE RIDING ON THE BRAND. Well, um. Some Ques

    SOME ‘ANARCHO PROPERTARIANISM’ AND FREE RIDING ON THE BRAND.

    Well, um.

    Some Questions:

    1) How does anarcho-propertarianism differ from Hoppe’s anarcho capitalism? Hoppe and rothbard use anarcho capitalism. The Propertarians disagree with Hoppe and define the scope of property concretely. Yet I see nothing in your discourse that differs from Anarcho Capitalism.

    2) Define property, since this is the test of whether someone has an understanding of what he speaks. The failure of the ancap movement over the past 40 years has been because of the inability to define the scope of property, and the fact that the majority runs away from the philosophy once it is defined.

    3) What will people use violence and fight over that is not covered by your definition of property? Given what people will fight over, wont people generate demand for an ‘insurer’ or what we call a ‘state’ in order to insure that which they will fight for, if it is not covered by your definition of property?

    4) Here are some good examples:

    a – Lets take slander, libel, or ridicule for example.

    b – Lets take blackmail for example.

    c – Lets take interference in a marriage for example.

    People all over the world kill over these matters. So are they addressed by your definition of property?

    5) Now if given a choice between living in a social democracy and living in your ideal polity, why would people rationally choose to live there versus the social democracy? Why don’t all sorts of libertarians move to remote regions and form new societies there? What has happened to all groups that have tried to live by anarcho capitalist ethics or law in the past? Where are they today? What have the more regulated societies done to those polities that HAVE tried to enact ancap-style lifestyles? Why? Who actually moved there other than criminals?

    Now, if you can’t answer these questions, or you answer them dishonestly, or incompetently, then how can you make a claim to hold to a philosophy that is possible rather than a cult or religion that is not possible?


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 22:28:00 UTC

  • IS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LIBERTY AND CAPITALISM. um…. you know. Pick one or

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-relationship-between-liberty-and-capitalism/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=ae621cfcWHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LIBERTY AND CAPITALISM.

    um…. you know. Pick one or the other and don’t conflate them.

    **Sovereignty** in fact exists or it does not. One has sufficient force in himself or his reciprocally insured allies to prevent his subjugation or not.

    **Liberty** is given by permission of the Sovereign, and refers to those who are self sufficient but whose rights can be imposed upon. Although liberty originally referred to the right of a people to preserve local law and custom in their own matters, and is therefore a political grant from the sovereigns, we tend to conflate it with Freedom.

    **Freedom** is given by permission of someone or some people capable of depriving you of it, and refers to those who might have been candidates for slavery, but have earned their freedom by some means, or at least, not lost it by other means. The common libertarian advocacy of a cuneiform term, says literally ‘return to the mother’, which means that one’s required service to the ruler for the term has been fulfilled.

    **Capitalism** refers to the use of contract, money, prices, and accounts, the elimination of rents on territorial resources, by its allocation to individuals, along with the distribution to individuals of discretion on the use of one’s physical energy, time, and possessions obtained by voluntary exchange. In other words, the voluntary organization of production, distribution, and trade using incentives made possible by individual calculation of the most beneficial options available to him. What is usually lost in this discourse is that the individualization of property prohibits local rents, allowing the centralization of rents that we consider taxation, and that this centralization of rents is one of the primary causes of the reduction of opportunity and transaction costs that makes a voluntarily organized economy possible at the expense of those who would live parasitically of the local collection of rents. In other words, capitalism converts subservience to ‘mafia’ at various local scales which impede production, to subservience to a single central ‘mafia’ in exchange for eliminating those rents that impeded production.

    **Liberty AND Capitalism**

    1. Therefore the relationship between **capitalism** and **liberty** is, precisely, that the sovereign will not interfere in the voluntary organization of production other than to create it in the first place, resolve conflicts as they arise by demand for reciprocity of obligation and rights in the contracts between parties, and to prevent the externalization of costs to the commons or the privatization of commons in the course of private transactions.

    2. However the problem of the degree of taxation (commission), the maximum calculation of which is the favorite hobby of economists, is not answered by this question. Nor is the use of those taxes (commissions), to produce commons within or without of the private economy.

    3. Therefore we **colloquially** use the term ‘**capitalism**’, to refer to the policy bias in favor of minimum taxation, competition, and interference in the market, and we use social democracy or the more pejorative ‘socialism’ to refer to the policy bias in favor of maximum taxation, egalitarianism, and interference in the market for the production of goods, services and information. The central conflcit being that the state does not insure the risk of capital and its losses but takes income regardless of that risk and those losses. And on the other hand, the combination of scale, wealth (capital), and credit, is such a more powerful competitive advantage that those with mere labor can compete with or even seek to participate in.

    4. Therefore liberty and capitalism can only exist when political questions are decidable because costs and returns are calculable, because coincidences of want are marginal, and consequences are perceivable. (Yeah, I know but once you read that a few times you’ll get it, and its important.)

    The net of this is that unless you possess sovereignty the best you can possess is liberty, and both liberty and property exist only as matters of degree in the balance between the impossibility of pure capitalism except between powerful states, and the impossibility of pure communism except within the family. And instead the useful point of demarcation between more capitalism less capitalism and least capitalism, depending upon whether we are in a mode of territorial or economic expansion requiring private risk(capitalism), a mode of relative calm requiring the production of commons (mixed economy), or at war (nationalized and centralized economy).


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 21:56:00 UTC

  • PROPOSED FINAL DEFINITION OF NATURAL LAW The One Law of Reciprocity. (Natural La

    PROPOSED FINAL DEFINITION OF NATURAL LAW

    The One Law of Reciprocity. (Natural Law)

    Thou shalt not, by word, deed, absence of word or deed, impose or allow the the imposition of, costs upon the demonstrated interests of others (property-in-toto), either directly or indirectly, where those interests were obtained by settlement (conversion, or first use) or productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange without such imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others. Therefore thou shalt limit thy words and deeds, and the words and deeds of others, to the productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange of interests (property in toto), free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others either directly or indirectly.

    NOTE:

    Fully understanding this one law may also require:

    1) the knowledge that when we come together in proximity, we decrease opportunity costs, and therefore create opportunities, and that opportunities must be homesteaded (settled/converted/first use), and put into production, in order to demonstrate an interest.

    2) the definition of the three synonyms: demonstrated interest, demonstrated property, or property-in-toto, as that which people empirically retaliate for impositions against *and* have demonstrated an interest.

    3) The use of the common law (of torts) as the means by which we incrementally and immediately suppress new innovations in parasitism that violate the Natural Law of Reciprocity.

    4) The use of Testimonialism (warranty of due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism, and deceit) as an involuntary warranty on public speech in matters of the commons, just as we currently force involuntary warranty of due diligence on products, services, and our words regarding products and services.

    If you understand the one law, and these criteria, nearly all questions of conflict, ethics, morality, politics, and group competition are decidable. (really).

    This solves the libertarian fallacy of non-aggression by specifically stating the scope of property that we must refrain from imposing costs upon; the cause of that scope (retaliation), the empirical means of determining that scope(demonstrate action), and the means by which violations of that law are discovered, recorded, and evolve.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 19:16:00 UTC

  • ALL MEN HAVE VOICE, BECAUSE ALL MEN HAVE VIOLENCE (read this) All men have influ

    ALL MEN HAVE VOICE, BECAUSE ALL MEN HAVE VIOLENCE

    (read this)

    All men have influence. They just assume that means voice rather than violence. But one can ignore voice. One can compromise with protesters. But one cannot ignore or compromise when dead.

    As I told the Ukrainian people, at every opportunity, and repeatedly. The only reason you have bad people in government is because you don’t kill enough of them that only good people remain.

    All men are born with a natural wealth of violence, the application of which we lend to the state, to exercise on our behalf, in a division of labor.

    But when the government no longer acts in the interests of ourselves, our families, our kin, our tribes, and our nations, then it is just another form of war, by slow means of attrition. It is the most dishonest and dishonorable of weapons of war.

    So take back your violence from the parasites who war against you, apply your violence once again to the incremental suppression of parasitism and predation, and take one step closer to the imposition of the Natural Law of Reciprocity, beyond which none may venture without restitution, punishment, and bloody constraint.

    It seems that the long line of Aryans, Europeans, Germania, Celts, Itals, Hellenes, Romans, Franks, Anglo Saxons, and Americans must once again, as we must every few generations, overthrow those who usurp our natural law, by one excuse or another, and thereby restore and reinforce the contract of employment for those whom we hire to rule justly, by restoring the terms of contract to the only moral terms of for rule that are possible: the natural law of reciprocity of sovereign men, and its incremental improvement and application by the judge discovered common law of testimony before a jury of our peers, and the voluntary exchange in markets for association, reproduction, cooperation, production, production of commons, and production of polities, in the only civilization to discover rule of law: the eradication of discretion in the adjudication of differences.

    Do you ancestors, your family, your kin, your tribe, your nation, and your people justice and continue the costly investment that they have made for 3500 years, in raising you, your kin, your nation and all mankind out of superstition, ignorance, tyranny, poverty, disease, and dysgenia.

    Kill those who would prey, steal, destroy, and commit genocide against you and your people. Kill them until they stop coming. Kill them until they stop trying. Kill them until they stop scheming. Kill them until they remember nothing but the great crimes that they have committed against you, yours and ours.

    Truth is enough. Restore Natural Law. Impose strict construction, decidability, and our standing before the courts in matters public and private. Extend the involuntary warranty on products and services, to the involuntary warranty against information placed into the commons. Defend not just our genes, not just our families, not just our property, not just our territory, not just our water, not just our air,but the very information that surrounds us as do the rest.

    Restore our accountability in both word and deed. Prohibit word and action for which a man may not perform restitution in matters private or public. Demand due diligence against fraud, as well as ignorance, error, bias, wishful-thinking, suggestion, overloading, fictionalism, and outright deceit.

    Let no man in word or deed repeat the crimes of the prophets and Abrahamists, or the secular prophets we call the philosophers of deceit, or the secular frauds we call social pseudoscientists – all of whom who have attempted as they have in the ancient world, to promise a heaven in this world or the next by the systematic advocacy of parasitism by a host of methods and contrivances, at the cost of civilization and the transcendence of man through continuous domestication of his parasitism.

    Every dark age has been preceded by a mass migration of the undomesticated animal man to the lands of those tho speak truthfully either in China or Europa. We must never allow this again.

    Never again. Truth is enough. Truth is enough if demand it or violence.

    Use your wealth of violence. Transcend yourself. Transcend your people, and transcend mankind in the process.

    Kill them all until none remain.

    Sic Semper Tyrannis.

    Deus Vult.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 15:01:00 UTC

  • WE SHALL, IN SHORT ORDER, BRING YOU TO HEEL, OR BREAK IT ALL TO PIECES. —“We a

    WE SHALL, IN SHORT ORDER, BRING YOU TO HEEL, OR BREAK IT ALL TO PIECES.

    —“We aren’t taking to the streets. We aren’t rallying or protesting. We’re going to impoverish, starve, freeze, silence and immobilize you. We’re coming for you in your homes, in your places of work, while you’re traveling, for your wives, husbands, parents, uncles, cousins, and those who come to defend you. Because we do not want your approval, or your submission, but your defeat, removal, and punishment. You have participated in the attempted genocide of our people. You must pay restitution. And you have never seen fifth generation civil war with this era’s possibilities of command and control. No empire in history has ever been this fragile, and your confidence in its continuity is mistaken. We shall, in short order, bring you to heel, or break it all to pieces.”—-


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 13:51:00 UTC

  • Yep: “Racist” = “N—-er” To be met with violence at every utterance

    Yep: “Racist” = “N—-er” To be met with violence at every utterance.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-30 09:57:00 UTC