[Y]es, one can attempt to order the human world by constructing power to suit one’s imagination. Or you can deny the ordering of the world by power, so that only nature limits our construction of the world, not we. In my opinion, from the simple proposition that faster calculation will defeat slower calculation, and certainly defeat stagnation or regression, to deny power solves the problem of power. The rule of natural, common, judge discovered law of non-imposition of costs, denies that power. I don’t know what should be I only know what should not be. The market then can use the ‘can’ to calculate the ‘should’ that we cannot know.
Theme: Coercion
-
Deny Power To All – The Cult of Non-Submission
[Y]es, one can attempt to order the human world by constructing power to suit one’s imagination. Or you can deny the ordering of the world by power, so that only nature limits our construction of the world, not we. In my opinion, from the simple proposition that faster calculation will defeat slower calculation, and certainly defeat stagnation or regression, to deny power solves the problem of power. The rule of natural, common, judge discovered law of non-imposition of costs, denies that power. I don’t know what should be I only know what should not be. The market then can use the ‘can’ to calculate the ‘should’ that we cannot know.
-
One doesn’t ask for approval from progressives, one forces restitution
One doesn’t ask for approval from progressives, one forces restitution.
Source date (UTC): 2016-09-08 18:49:38 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/773956476322910208
Reply addressees: @Anti_Gnostic @Mangan150 @ChateauEmissary @lewrockwell @ThomasEWoods
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/773953775870631936
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/773953775870631936
-
Yes, one can attempt to order the human world by constructing power to suit one’
Yes, one can attempt to order the human world by constructing power to suit one’s imagination.
Or you can deny the ordering of the world by power, so that only nature limits our construction of the world, not we.
In my opinion, from the simple proposition that faster calculation will defeat slower calculation, and certainly defeat stagnation or regression, to deny power solves the problem of power.
The rule of natural, common, judge discovered law of non-imposition of costs, denies that power.
I don’t know what should be I only know what should not be. The market then can use the ‘can’ to calculate the ‘should’ that we cannot know.
Source date (UTC): 2016-09-08 09:01:00 UTC
-
CLASS STRUCTURE BY THREE COERCIVE SPECIALIZATIONS
CLASS STRUCTURE BY THREE COERCIVE SPECIALIZATIONS
Source date (UTC): 2016-09-07 02:27:00 UTC
-
INCREMENTAL SUPPRESSION
INCREMENTAL SUPPRESSION
Source date (UTC): 2016-09-07 02:23:00 UTC
-
Q&A: “CURT: IS THE TERM ‘FREE MARKET’ A CONTRADICTION IN TERMS?”” (interesting)
Q&A: “CURT: IS THE TERM ‘FREE MARKET’ A CONTRADICTION IN TERMS?””
(interesting)
—“Hey Curt: Is the term “free market” not a contradiction in terms? Is a market as a norm facilitating fully-informed voluntary (etc.) interactions not in and of itself a restriction imposed on those who want to conduct unfair, unbalanced, involuntary interactions? Can such a thing even be called free?”—
Well you know, I love this question because you’re right of course.
It depends upon what we consider the cost of entry into that market. If the cost is non imposition of costs, then yes, it’s been imposed upon us and that seems to be a good arrangement. But how are the people who impose the prohibition on costs compensated? Usually through taxes (commissions).
So when we say ‘free trade’ independent of fees, that’s hard to defend as anything other than free riding. If we’re saying free trade with only those required fees, then that’s easy to defend as both an imputable cost, and one that’s free of imposition. And if we’re saying unfree trade is that which imposes costs for other purposes (external use) then that’s probably incorrect if we agree with the external use. And if we’re saying unfree trade is that which imposes costs for other purposes (external use) that we disagree with, then that’s probably a bad thing.
In most of our history you had to pay two costs: 1 – forgo the opportunity to benefit from the imposition of costs upon others, and 2- pay a commission on the proceeds of profiting from the market in order to pay for the imposition of the non-imposition of costs.
Curt Doolittle
Source date (UTC): 2016-09-06 11:24:00 UTC
-
Conflates forcible integation into market for reproduction, production, commons,
Conflates forcible integation into market for reproduction, production, commons, law.
Source date (UTC): 2016-09-03 10:48:09 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/772023370145751040
Reply addressees: @HeerJeet @EdBurkenstock @StrolllTrollll @JonHaidt
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/771860475558567937
IN REPLY TO:
@HeerJeet
@StrolllTrollll @JonHaidt A lot of what we rightly see as horrifyingly racist was mainstream in western culture from say 1500 to 1960s
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/771860475558567937
-
Majoritarian monopoly democracy CAUSES conflict that must be solved extra-politi
Majoritarian monopoly democracy CAUSES conflict that must be solved extra-politically.(No reason we can’t return to market gov’t.)
Source date (UTC): 2016-09-03 05:34:56 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/771944546594938881
Reply addressees: @JonHaidt
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/771669887274012672
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/771669887274012672
-
How will the recognition that western man evolved martial technology, then succe
How will the recognition that western man evolved martial technology, then succeeded in creating a new industry (rule), under which he domesticated people as he had plants and animals?
And that it is this successful domestication, and unsuccessful domestication that separates today’s prosperous from poor peoples?
Source date (UTC): 2016-09-02 10:58:00 UTC