Theme: Coercion

  • What Kind of Anti-Market are You? (You’re some kind, I promise)

    WHAT KIND OF ANTI-MARKET ARE YOU? What kind of anti-market activity do you prefer? – Fascism: anti-market for politics, commons, norms, and limited market for goods, services, and information – Libertarianism: anti-market for commons, politics, but market for norms, goods, services, information. – Libertinism: anti-market for norms,politics, but market for goods, services and information.Classical Liberalism: markets for good services and information, with limited-market for commons. – Aristocracy: markets for everything except law and politics. – Democratic socialism: minimum markets for politics, commons, and private property. – Socialism: anti market for goods, services, and information – Communism: anti market for politics, commons, norms, goods, services, and information. CONSERVATIVE (MALE) Social Conservatives limit the market for goods, services, information, norms, commons, politics, to that which is EVIDENTIARY, and imposes no costs, requiring individuals develop agency and discipline – however they do so in archaic moral (childlike) language with a touch of economics thrown in. PROGRESSIVE (FEMALE) Social Progressives limit the market for goods services, information, norms, commons, and politics to that which is HYPOTHETICAL, and imposes any possible costs, therefore NOT requiring individuals to develop agency and discipline – however they do so in modern moral and pseudoscientific language. The Frankfurt School modernized female discourse, but we have had no aristocratic school equivalent (until now) to modernize male language. Why? Uncomfortable Truths that ask us to pay the costs of discipline in pursuit of agency is harder (more expensive in the short term) than Comforting Lies that tell us to forgo the costs of discipline and agency in the short term in favor of consumption (indiscipline) in the short term. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute, Kiev, Ukraine.

  • What Kind of Anti-Market are You? (You’re some kind, I promise)

    WHAT KIND OF ANTI-MARKET ARE YOU? What kind of anti-market activity do you prefer? – Fascism: anti-market for politics, commons, norms, and limited market for goods, services, and information – Libertarianism: anti-market for commons, politics, but market for norms, goods, services, information. – Libertinism: anti-market for norms,politics, but market for goods, services and information.Classical Liberalism: markets for good services and information, with limited-market for commons. – Aristocracy: markets for everything except law and politics. – Democratic socialism: minimum markets for politics, commons, and private property. – Socialism: anti market for goods, services, and information – Communism: anti market for politics, commons, norms, goods, services, and information. CONSERVATIVE (MALE) Social Conservatives limit the market for goods, services, information, norms, commons, politics, to that which is EVIDENTIARY, and imposes no costs, requiring individuals develop agency and discipline – however they do so in archaic moral (childlike) language with a touch of economics thrown in. PROGRESSIVE (FEMALE) Social Progressives limit the market for goods services, information, norms, commons, and politics to that which is HYPOTHETICAL, and imposes any possible costs, therefore NOT requiring individuals to develop agency and discipline – however they do so in modern moral and pseudoscientific language. The Frankfurt School modernized female discourse, but we have had no aristocratic school equivalent (until now) to modernize male language. Why? Uncomfortable Truths that ask us to pay the costs of discipline in pursuit of agency is harder (more expensive in the short term) than Comforting Lies that tell us to forgo the costs of discipline and agency in the short term in favor of consumption (indiscipline) in the short term. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute, Kiev, Ukraine.

  • the best use of drones is to track antifa members so that ‘rear guards’ can pick

    the best use of drones is to track antifa members so that ‘rear guards’ can pick them off one two or three at a time outside groups.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-17 13:47:54 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/853968264405422081

    Reply addressees: @kweenslandah

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/853961973569957888


    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/853961973569957888

  • THINK ABOUT THIS SERIES OF POLITICAL QUESTIONS 1) Why don’t I fight with you? 2)

    THINK ABOUT THIS SERIES OF POLITICAL QUESTIONS

    1) Why don’t I fight with you?

    2) Why don’t I steal from you?

    3) Why don’t I trade with you?

    4) Why don’t I finance with you?

    5) Why don’t I (exchange-or-create norms) with you?

    6) Why don’t I create laws (government) with you?

    7) Why don’t I cohabitate with you?

    8) Why don’t I reproduce with you?


    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-17 08:57:00 UTC

  • THE GRAND SEQUENCE Oath, Truth, Manners, Ethics, Morals, Liberty, Aristocracy, B

    THE GRAND SEQUENCE

    Oath, Truth, Manners, Ethics, Morals, Liberty, Aristocracy, Beauty

    OATH: THE FULLY ARTICULATED OATH

    I shall not lie, cheat, steal, cause others to bear unwanted cost, or the commons to suffer loss, nor shall I tolerate those who do, nor leave them unpunished by censure, restitution, imprisonment, banishment, or death.

    TRUTH: TESTIMONY

    Identity (Categorically consistent)

    Internally (Logically) consistent

    Externally Correspondent (Empirically Consistent)

    Existentially Possible

    Parsimonious (fully accounted, parsimonious, limits)

    Moral (productive, fully informed, warrantied voluntary transfers)

    Beautiful (craft, aesthetic, moral, resources)

    SOCIAL SCIENCE:

    Physical Law

    Natural Law,

    Family,

    Market for Commons,

    Regional Nobility,

    Monarchy,

    Nationalism.



    GERMAN SUCCESS AND ANGLO FAILURE

    German success is reducible to the oath under nationalism. Anglo failure to the abandonment of the oath for market universalism: greed.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-17 08:47:00 UTC

  • Um. Grow Up. We Want The Warlords To Rule. The Entire Militia of Them. 😉

    But Wouldn’t Warlords Take Over? mises.org GROW UP – WE **WANT** WARLORD RULE – THE MILITIA https://mises.org/library/wouldnt-warlords-take-over Warlords MUST take over. That’s the whole point. The question is only their number. A militia of warlords constitutes a distributed dictatorship under which only markets governed by natural law are possible. Anarchism? A lot of optimistic bullshit. Go live in Ukraine. in Belarus. In Russia (at least outside of moscow or st Petersburg.) Ukraine (the borderland) is where Jewish separatism of Rothbard was envisioned, under the protection of lithuanian, or polish, or russian empires, allowed financial and commercial gangsterism, while prohibiting physical retaliation. It was a system of organized predation upon the people just as today’s financialism consists of organized predation upon the people while preventing juridical defense from it, and physical retaliation against it. And that’s Ukraine today. The pretense of order. But 40+ Gangsters (warlords) we call Oligarchs (Private Property Rulership) with enough money and arms to (a) stack and buy the courts, (b) stack and buy the government, who have their own militaries, and who cannot be displaced, because they can too easily turn the rest of ukraine into a civil war zone like the east, leaving the only option Russian invasion and enforced order – which was exactly the plan all along. The reason ukraine is weak, is that it has no militia. Period. Rothbardianism consists of nothing but optimistic juvenile platitudes sold to reproductively, socially, economically uncompetitive males, as a wishful separatist movement, so that they might beg not to contribute to a commons that makes the market order possible, and instead, may parasitically exploit it without contribution. ie: separatism. Rothbardian ghetto ethics of intersubjectively verifiable property There is only one source of liberty: the organized use of violence to obtain, hold, and advance territory, resources, population, institutions, and capital – by a militia of sufficient scale that they cannot be opposed by any cost effective means, or by any concentration of power. How is that possible: only under genetic, cultural, and institutional homogeneity. PERIOD. How do you create liberty (permission)? As a byproduct of creating sovereignty in fact. How do you create sovereignty in fact? By organizing a corporation (franchise) of warriors – all of whom obtain a share (dividend) from the market produced by their distributed dictatorship of individual rule. But those warriors must be kin or to prevent organization by other than kin selection. A genetically and culturally homogenous population in the ruling class – the militia – must exist for liberty to exist. Sorry. Thats western history in a nutshell. Rothbard was just a commons marxist (Free Rider) just like Marx was a private property free rider. Just as the Neocons are a political market free riders. Monarchy and nobility (aristocracy) didn’t oppress. They domesticated the animal man. And clearly failed to domesticate the borderlands – where parasitic separatists allied with the state to prey upon the people, while preventing their retaliation against them. So grow up. Libertarianism is for boys. Men fight. they take. They rule. They profit from rule. They profit from rule by the incremental suppression of every means of profit possible other than productive, fully informed warrantied, voluntary exchange, free of negative externality in the markets for association, cooperation, reproduction, production of goods, services, and information, and production of commons, institutions, and political orders. Men fight. Boys beg from mommy and daddy authority of whatever scale they must. Men are sovereign in fact. Boys have a little pretense of liberty by permission. THUS ENDETH THE LESSON

  • Um. Grow Up. We Want The Warlords To Rule. The Entire Militia of Them. 😉

    But Wouldn’t Warlords Take Over? mises.org GROW UP – WE **WANT** WARLORD RULE – THE MILITIA https://mises.org/library/wouldnt-warlords-take-over Warlords MUST take over. That’s the whole point. The question is only their number. A militia of warlords constitutes a distributed dictatorship under which only markets governed by natural law are possible. Anarchism? A lot of optimistic bullshit. Go live in Ukraine. in Belarus. In Russia (at least outside of moscow or st Petersburg.) Ukraine (the borderland) is where Jewish separatism of Rothbard was envisioned, under the protection of lithuanian, or polish, or russian empires, allowed financial and commercial gangsterism, while prohibiting physical retaliation. It was a system of organized predation upon the people just as today’s financialism consists of organized predation upon the people while preventing juridical defense from it, and physical retaliation against it. And that’s Ukraine today. The pretense of order. But 40+ Gangsters (warlords) we call Oligarchs (Private Property Rulership) with enough money and arms to (a) stack and buy the courts, (b) stack and buy the government, who have their own militaries, and who cannot be displaced, because they can too easily turn the rest of ukraine into a civil war zone like the east, leaving the only option Russian invasion and enforced order – which was exactly the plan all along. The reason ukraine is weak, is that it has no militia. Period. Rothbardianism consists of nothing but optimistic juvenile platitudes sold to reproductively, socially, economically uncompetitive males, as a wishful separatist movement, so that they might beg not to contribute to a commons that makes the market order possible, and instead, may parasitically exploit it without contribution. ie: separatism. Rothbardian ghetto ethics of intersubjectively verifiable property There is only one source of liberty: the organized use of violence to obtain, hold, and advance territory, resources, population, institutions, and capital – by a militia of sufficient scale that they cannot be opposed by any cost effective means, or by any concentration of power. How is that possible: only under genetic, cultural, and institutional homogeneity. PERIOD. How do you create liberty (permission)? As a byproduct of creating sovereignty in fact. How do you create sovereignty in fact? By organizing a corporation (franchise) of warriors – all of whom obtain a share (dividend) from the market produced by their distributed dictatorship of individual rule. But those warriors must be kin or to prevent organization by other than kin selection. A genetically and culturally homogenous population in the ruling class – the militia – must exist for liberty to exist. Sorry. Thats western history in a nutshell. Rothbard was just a commons marxist (Free Rider) just like Marx was a private property free rider. Just as the Neocons are a political market free riders. Monarchy and nobility (aristocracy) didn’t oppress. They domesticated the animal man. And clearly failed to domesticate the borderlands – where parasitic separatists allied with the state to prey upon the people, while preventing their retaliation against them. So grow up. Libertarianism is for boys. Men fight. they take. They rule. They profit from rule. They profit from rule by the incremental suppression of every means of profit possible other than productive, fully informed warrantied, voluntary exchange, free of negative externality in the markets for association, cooperation, reproduction, production of goods, services, and information, and production of commons, institutions, and political orders. Men fight. Boys beg from mommy and daddy authority of whatever scale they must. Men are sovereign in fact. Boys have a little pretense of liberty by permission. THUS ENDETH THE LESSON

  • War: The Fragility Spectrum

    When you are small you cannot fight to defend, fight to stop, fight to exit. There are only so many fragile regions on the human body, the human organization, the human polity, the human state, that you can attack with all your might, and end it’s agility(knees), action (jaw), thought (neck-arteries), air(throat), vision(eyes). The body is hard to kill. But a thing that cannot sense or move, can be killed with ease. The head and the knees on man, the money and the leadership of organizations, the information systems and illusion of control by the polity, the need for economic velocity of the state. Order is achieved largely by habit and self interest. Disorder is achieved by the simple fact of creating uncertainty and deprivation of information and energy (electricity).

  • War: The Fragility Spectrum

    When you are small you cannot fight to defend, fight to stop, fight to exit. There are only so many fragile regions on the human body, the human organization, the human polity, the human state, that you can attack with all your might, and end it’s agility(knees), action (jaw), thought (neck-arteries), air(throat), vision(eyes). The body is hard to kill. But a thing that cannot sense or move, can be killed with ease. The head and the knees on man, the money and the leadership of organizations, the information systems and illusion of control by the polity, the need for economic velocity of the state. Order is achieved largely by habit and self interest. Disorder is achieved by the simple fact of creating uncertainty and deprivation of information and energy (electricity).

  • Weapons of Chaos – and Revolution

    WEAPONS OF CHAOS The best weapons in an urban skirmish are mace – to buy you opportunity, hardened and weighted knuckles – to give you extra mass and minimize absorption of shock, a lighter and lighter fluid – to create uncertainty, and area of effect damage, molotovs – artillery at a distance, and a motorcycle helmet for defense. You cannot be identified easily, your weapons are impossible to find easily, and and your opponent can be disabled (mace), routed (fire), ranged( molotovs) and killed (fists). Yet you preserve your mobility, and ability to sprint into attacks, maneuver, and to disappear. This supplies weapons at long, medium, close, and short range. Understand that you are not trying to win so much as provoke escalation to the point where there is sufficient confusion and opportunity that you can bring real weapons to bear. It is nearly impossible for a state to defend against mobile infantry that relies upon fire, because fire is far more dangerous than you are, and its effects far longer lasting. Revolution today requires fire, ending power and data transmission, slowing commercial road and rail traffic, and overwhelming first responders. Once first responders are overwhelmed they become the next target of action. At that point the state must admit defeat call in the military, and all one need to is move action from on urban environment to the next.