Theme: Coercion

  • The Court Is Required To Address All Thefts

    [T]he manner of theft is immaterial. Either the court provides a means of remedy for a theft, or we are free to use violence to obtain remedy for the theft. The court does not grant what we may do. It holds provision only over those conflicts which it agrees to resolve via property rights.

    See Burke
    —-“In a state of nature, it is true, that a man of superior force may beat or rob me; but then it is true, that I am at full liberty to defend myself, or make reprisal by surprise or by cunning, or by any other way in which I may be superior to him.

    But in political society [, outside of the state of nature], a rich man may rob me in another way. [And] I cannot defend myself; for money is the only weapon with which we are allowed to fight [in political society]. If I attempt to avenge myself, the whole force of that society is ready to complete my ruin.” -– Edmund Burke

    Ergo, political society fails, and juridical society succeeds.

  • Liberty: A Distributed Dictatorship of Free Men

    Guest Post By Eli Harman

    [L]iberty can triumph because liberty is the most robust sort of authoritarianism. You can kill a king. You can corrupt a democracy. But a distributed dictatorship of free men is practically irresistible and unassailable in comparison. Its power derives from a degree of all-seeing omnipresence that exceeds even the wildest fantasies of an autocrat; yet does not detract from its adaptability, resilience or ability to react rapidly to nearly any contingency.

    ( Damn.  Very smart. -Curt.)

  • Liberty: A Distributed Dictatorship of Free Men

    Guest Post By Eli Harman

    [L]iberty can triumph because liberty is the most robust sort of authoritarianism. You can kill a king. You can corrupt a democracy. But a distributed dictatorship of free men is practically irresistible and unassailable in comparison. Its power derives from a degree of all-seeing omnipresence that exceeds even the wildest fantasies of an autocrat; yet does not detract from its adaptability, resilience or ability to react rapidly to nearly any contingency.

    ( Damn.  Very smart. -Curt.)

  • Just doin’ my job of putting violence back into liberty one paragraph at a time

    Just doin’ my job of putting violence back into liberty one paragraph at a time.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-12-03 13:57:00 UTC

  • PROPERTARIANISM: THE TRANSACTION COST THEORY OF GOVERNMENT (second draft) (close

    PROPERTARIANISM: THE TRANSACTION COST THEORY OF GOVERNMENT

    (second draft) (closer)

    History says only that the development of a state – a monopoly bureaucracy – transfers high local transaction costs without central rents, to state rents and low transaction cost. Libertarians nearly universally ignore the evidence of universal transaction costs and free riding at the local level.

    And they further ignore the demonstrated necessity using organized violence by a monopoly organization to suppress those transaction costs and free ridings (“local rents”), and to convert them into central rents in order to pay for such suppression.

    The counter-argument is that states are in fact a neutral cost, and that we don’t spend enough on them in the suppression of transaction costs, because states provide multiples of return on that suppression. This is also demonstrable.

    The question isn’t how we can do without the state (a corporation articulated as a monopoly definition of property rights ), but now that we have suppressed local transaction costs, and replaced them with centralized rents in order to produce the commons we call property rights – how do we suppress centralized rents while maintaining the suppression of transaction costs, and the ability to construct commons that such suppression of transaction costs and rents allows us to construct?

    To argue that a monopoly definition of property rights is somehow “bad”, is irrational since property, obtained by homesteading and by voluntarily exchange, under the requirements for productivity, warranty and symmetry, is as far as I know, as logically consistent and exception-less as are mathematical operations on natural numbers. So the imposition of property rights cannot be illogical, immoral, unethical no matter how they are imposed since they define that which is logical, ethical and moral.

    There is nothing wrong whatsoever with violence – in fact, it is violence with which we pay for property rights and liberty – it is our first, most important resource in the construction of liberty. Instead, the question is purely institutional: having used violence to centralize transaction costs into rents, how do we now use violence to eliminate rents from the central organization?

    This is pretty easy: Universal standing, Universal Property rights, and Organically constructed, Common Law, predicated upon the one law of property rights as positive articulation of the prohibition on and the suppression of involuntary transfers: the demand for fully informed, productive, warrantied, voluntary exchanges free of externality. Because it is only under fully informed, productive, voluntary transfer, warrantied and free of externality that cooperation is rational, rather than parasitic. And only under rational cooperation is forgoing one’s opportunity to use violence equally rational.

    The question becomes then, who prohibits the formation of authority and this falls to the citizenry: the militia – those who possess violence.

    As far as I know this is the correct analysis of political evolution, and the correct theory for future political action.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-12-03 11:09:00 UTC

  • AND REVERSE RACISM: OR PERHAPS IT’S TRIVIALLY SIMPLE AND SUCH DISCUSSION IS DISH

    http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2014/11/on-reverse-racism-three-thought-experiments/RACISM AND REVERSE RACISM: OR PERHAPS IT’S TRIVIALLY SIMPLE AND SUCH DISCUSSION IS DISHONEST

    1) The distribution of physical desirability for mating, the demonstrated behaviors of impulsivity and time preference, aggression, and demonstrated intelligence vary between individuals. (true)

    2) The social classes are organized by these distributions due to reproductive desirability, status utility, and cooperative (economic) utility. (true)

    3) The races demonstrate different relative distributions of these classes. (true)

    4) Racial groups demonstrate kin selection in mating, neighborhoods, friendship, social organizations, and business organizations. (true).

    5) The norms demonstrated by racial groups reflect behavior at the mean (true). This means lower trust, less intelligent groups must compete against norms in groups with higher trust and higher intelligent groups. (true). It also means that the group that holds dominant political power, and biases toward their norms, determines the economic velocity of the entire polity (true).

    6) Racial groups demonstrate kin selection in voting (true).

    7) INABILITY to use the state for rents and privileges limits political competition and conflict, whereas ABILITY to use the state for rents and privileges increases political competition and conflict. (true)

    8) Economic Wealth reduces dependence upon kin for mutual insurance under kin selection. (true). Economic stress increases dependence upon kin for mutual insurance via kin selection. (true)

    9) The difference between economic, political, social, reproductive and status success of one race or another is due to the distribution of superior talents versus inferior liabilities of the members of those races – plus normative factors, the most important of which is in-group trust, and the second is the degree of the suppression of free riding. (true)

    10) As such the only reason for racism is the rates of reproduction between the classes. And the only possible means of achieving equality in any and all cases is to suppress the reproduction of the lower classes of the races whose distribution is bottom weighted.

    11) It is non-rational to treat unknown individuals who are visually indistinguishable by other than the properties of their peer groups. (true) (which is what people do). One cannot both demand rational action, defend Praxeology, and deny this statement.

    12) Equality is achievable and desirable in just four generations. But it is upward reproductive redistribution that must mach downward economic redistribution for equality to be possible. If china can do this so can the rest of the world.

    Otherwise, it is non-rational for people with higher reproductive desirability, lower impulsivity, lower aggression, and higher intelligence to tolerate political competition from those who are less desirable and in the net, parasitic, just as it is politically preferable to compete via parasitism if one is less desirable at the bottom.

    Human beings are not unique and precious snowflakes. It is only that disregard for life is a moral hazard. The fact that mothers MUST believe their dysgenic offspring are precious is an evolutionary convenience, not a demonstrable fact.

    The purpose of science is quite often to force us to acknowledge uncomfortable truths. Equality is not a problem of belief (lying), but one of fact (truth).

    Try not to lie.

    It hurts the discipline of philosophy. It hurts mankind.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-29 03:20:00 UTC

  • Just negotiated a challenging deal in Kiev. People are more honest when violence

    Just negotiated a challenging deal in Kiev.

    People are more honest when violence is on the table.

    “If I think someone is dishonest, I will not be happy” was all I needed to say.

    I like business here.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-28 07:40:00 UTC

  • THE COWARDICE AND INCOMPETENCE OF LIBERTINES (cross post) (example argument for

    THE COWARDICE AND INCOMPETENCE OF LIBERTINES

    (cross post) (example argument for use by others)

    James, Xander:

    Gossip: Ridicule, Rallying and Shaming: refuge of schoolgirls and libertines. Gossip is, after all, one of the three possible modes of human coercion. It is just the most dishonest. Force is honest. Exchange is honest. But gossip is not.

    Either construct an argument or admit that you cannot. That is what honest men do.

    But no. You see, Libertinism is merely a restatement of ghetto separatism – a feel good cult of incompetence for Pussy-tarians. Libertines. Free-riders on liberty created by the actions of others – the reason the liberty movement has failed.

    See? I even ridicule better than you do.

    So, do you want to stick to adult conversation, or are you going to jump up and down in your pink dress trying to rally real men to fight for you?

    Because that is the evolutionary origin of rallying and shaming.

    But it’s a hollow threat – libertines have no real men to call upon.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-28 04:01:00 UTC

  • Not enough brave men with guns. They don’t own society. So they dont act like it

    Not enough brave men with guns.

    They don’t own society.

    So they dont act like it.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-26 13:58:00 UTC

  • HAS HANS HOPPE COME AROUND TO ACCEPTING VIOLENCE AS THE SOURCE OF PROPERTY? One

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allodial_titleSO HAS HANS HOPPE COME AROUND TO ACCEPTING VIOLENCE AS THE SOURCE OF PROPERTY?

    One of the central arguments of libertarianism that I am trying to reframe, is the origin of property (violence), and the need for ongoing violence. But it has been difficult battling libertine and german rationalism’s hold on people.

    Hoppe comes around. I think?

    A militia organizes violence.

    Violence creates property.

    We embody property in law.

    We adjudicate that law with judges and juries.

    All organizations need leaders to resolve deductively undecidable propositions.

    Kings provide such decision making.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-26 03:32:00 UTC