Theme: Coercion

  • (Sketch) Eliminate the state sponsored corporation. A corporation is a partnersh

    (Sketch)

    Eliminate the state sponsored corporation.

    A corporation is a partnership whose members are insured by a monopoly insurer insulated from competition: the state.

    All associations are, and only can be, partnerships.

    Restore right of suit for any and all involuntary transfers, outside of morally sanctioned competition, against any and all individuals within the partnership and their agents.

    Require insurance bonds be purchased by the partnership.

    Require all employees be bonded if they communicate with or act on behalf of, customers.

    (The incentives will favor truth telling and allocate money and status to truth-tellers.)

    Stock certificates shall not represent ownership, but a purchase of contractual rights to dividends that are guaranteed by the assets in the event of liquidation or sale. Control then shall not be democratic, but contractual.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-07 09:26:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    http://www.infowars.com/obamas-ex-secret-service-agent-its-not-gun-control-its-people-control/


    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-06 20:58:00 UTC

  • LIBERTARIAN TERMINOLOGY QUESTION (Freedom vs Liberty) Is it just my own selectio

    LIBERTARIAN TERMINOLOGY QUESTION

    (Freedom vs Liberty)

    Is it just my own selection bias in action, or has the term FREEDOM been sufficiently appropriated as to mean “Positive Freedom and liberty” and LIBERTY such that it currently means “Negative Freedom and liberty”?

    It’s too bad we LIBERTARIANS don’t have such energetic literary activists who can put together a campaign to ‘reconstruct’ the meanings of liberty and freedom the way the marxists have, and by doing so appropriated our terminology: via editing, shaming and critique.

    LIBERTY IS DETERMINED BY

    1) The available means of production.

    2) The impact of the means of production on reproduction (family)

    3) The allocation of property rights between individual, family and commons to suit production and reproduction.

    4) The Freedoms and Duties we grant each other according to those rights, and the flexibility of altering those relations in response to changes in the means of production.

    5) The degree of rent-seeking (corruption) by leaders of the hierarchy or network of organizations that resolve conflicts and facilitate investments (ownership or government).

    6) The degree of contribution by individuals willingly paid to the extended family (commons) in exchange for status which increases their opportunities for mating, experience, and opportunity.

    THE STATUS ECONOMY – THE OTHER INVOLUNTARY APPROPRIATION

    (Government members obtain status as well as compensation and earners do not obtain status OR compensation. The need is to create status signals such that the earners are willing to contribute to the commons of their extended family. If instead, high tax payers were publicly identified and given political voice, if not political vote, then the world would be a very different place. But politicians fear this fact. And to some degree, the corrupt on both sizes are protected by their anonymity. Imagine a state of the union meeting where the top 500 taxpayers instead of 500 elected politicians, were required to give their opinions on the state of the union. )


    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-03 09:58:00 UTC

  • MONOPOLY AND BUREAUCRACY Again, there are NECESSARY functions of government. ( s

    http://www.propertarianism.com/glossary/AGAIN: MONOPOLY AND BUREAUCRACY

    Again, there are NECESSARY functions of government.

    ( see http://www.propertarianism.com/glossary/#propertarian item (g) )

    While the definition of property rights must, in the end, be homogenous across groups as individual property rights, there is no reason why we need a monopoly means of organizing people under those property rights. There is absolutely no material reason why we cannot have polycentric governments that vary from absolute surrender to minarchy.

    Government, in the sense, that we need both a definition of property rights, and a means of common investment, as well as common insurance – and all organizations require leaders, even if they are purely judges, selected randomly by lot. (preferably so)

    If you’re wandering around saying government is evil rather than bureaucracy and monopoly are evil you’re just polluting the intellectual pool.

    The problem is monopoly, bureaucracy, and the sanction of various partial monopolies and rents by those in the state, to persist their control over the state.

    SECRET

    The chinese philosophers could not, because of the asian family structure and existing hierarchy solve the problem of politics, like the Greeks solved the system of politics PRECISELY because they were not hierarchically solidified. Confucius and Lao Tzu failed. They directed the entire civilization to operate as an extended family. (Unfortunately, Fukuyama is wrong. As usual. But at least he’s informative.)

    We libertarians are making a similar mistake. ROTHBARD FAILED, and so did his ethics. Hoppe succeeded (by admittedly strange means) and solve the problem of politics at scale for us. But Rothbard failed, either by intent, or by cultural influence, or by lack of understanding. But he failed. And he continues to cause us to fail at securing our liberty.

    While I would agree that violence was necessary to transform barbarians into city and farm dwellers, I would also argue that such a monopoly was necessary to conduct that transformation.

    But now we need a DIFFERENT ORGANIZATION. The barbarians are converted. The problem is not how to convert barbarians. THe problem is how to prevent FEMALES from returning us to barbarism via the ballot box.

    Socialism was murderous. But the threat to human prosperity is the assumption that women have the right to reproduce at the expense of others, or that all reproduction is of necessity ‘good’.

    Government is not the enemy. Monopoly is. Socialism is not a problem any longer. But feminism and the totalitarian humanism that is an expression of feminine communism are.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-29 07:27:00 UTC

  • OPEN LETTER TO PROGRESSIVES (satire) An open letter from Anarcho Capitalists to

    OPEN LETTER TO PROGRESSIVES

    (satire)

    An open letter from Anarcho Capitalists to Progressives

    Hi.

    You know, we like people who disagree with us. It’s really fun to debate. We are nerds after all. We love this stuff.

    But, you know how you feel when Orthodox conservatives tell you something unscientifically, absolutely ridiculous? With a straight face? I mean, you can’t really hold an debate when science, reason, logic and fact go out the window. Just isn’t possible.

    Well, we feel the same way when you Orthodox Totalitarian Humanists say something economically ridiculous. And, if you’re talking, it’s pretty much economically ridiculous. Really. We love you and all. But. I mean. BOTH of you are ridiculous. You orthodox progressives, AND the orthodox conservatives.

    Now, a lot of libertarians are just as idealistic as you are. We have libertarians that think the world will someday wake up and agree with them; just like you think the world will agree with you, if ‘they only understood’. If they only “could see the light”.

    But, you know, most of us libertarians actually understand that none of us are going to change our moral preferences. I mean, that’s what science and evidence tell us.

    And so, given that none of us will change, we have this crazy idea that you can have your totalitarian government, and we can have our libertarian government, and if we do that, then we can get along just fine.

    We just wonder one thing: why won’t you let us live like we want to, if we are willing to let you live like you want to?

    It’s an honest question. Although, we kinda’ suspect we won’t get an honest answer. (Sorry, but we’re honest about this stuff.)

    And we also suspect that we’re the ones holding the moral high ground. ‘Cause we don’t want to conquer you. But unless you let us live our lives the way we want to, then you just want to conquer us.

    And we don’t think that’s moral, right, good, or nice.

    Cheers.

    Nerdy Anarcho Capitalist Libertarians Everywhere.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-25 15:31:00 UTC

  • MAXIMUM TAXATION? Taxation is by definition immoral. Whereas fees are not. We is

    MAXIMUM TAXATION?

    Taxation is by definition immoral. Whereas fees are not. We issue taxes even in local villages, largely to prevent free riding. We issue taxes under statism for the purpose of empowering the state. And little else.

    The maximum taxation possible is that which maintains the ability of exit from the market and the total reliance on past earnings as a means of maintaining one’s standard of living. If this lottery is removed it will decrease participation in experimentation that is only evident over a decade or more.

    Subtract from this the willingness of people to subsidize that which they disagree with.

    Subtract from this the impact that taxation places on their status signaling ability.

    Subtract from this the trust that their sacrifice is well used by government.

    Subtract from this their current level of economic confidence in the long term.

    That’s pretty much it. Math is pretty easy really.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-24 10:40:00 UTC

  • THE IMPACT OF WOMEN SEDUCED BY MALE SOCIALISTS I think it would be interesting f

    THE IMPACT OF WOMEN SEDUCED BY MALE SOCIALISTS

    I think it would be interesting for more educated American women to do a walk through and meet the men in the high security prison system.

    ‘Cause you know. It’s absolutely terrifying. That is what men are capable of. A lot of us, myself included, are capable of being like that.

    If you need a more gentle version, play women versus men flag football a few times. And that tells you something too. And if you don’t like that, then look at IQ score distributions at age 22 or more.

    Then go out on the street where there are a bunch of white boys around and just guess what would happen if you ask them for help. or watch a few videos online that show what happens.

    We live for it. Every day. It’s not even conscious. You know how men seem aware of you? You aren’t really special except as more or less fun to look at. We are aware of where every man and woman is around us at almost all times. Most of us know the threat potential of each at a glance.

    If we wanted to do anything bad to women, like men in most other civilizations do on a regular basis, it isn’t like it would be terribly challenging.

    Instead, you’re surrounded by guys with heroic ambitions to protect you at all times.

    And most of you, at least in my generation, talk s___t about them.

    And the only civilization where men are CHIVALROUS enough to treat women as relative equals, is the very civilization you seek daily to undermine.

    It isn’t a competition. Its cooperation. We can take constant joy in the wonder of each other’s gender, or we can kill our civilization fighting about it.

    Reducing the west to the same communalism that the rest of the world employs, isn’t going to hurt men any. I mean, we’re pretty happy with beer, meat, fire and guns.

    It’s women who, if this vanity of socialistic communalism persists, will be reduced once again to second class status. Because really, it’s a much superior reproductive system, that is more sustainable, and less fragile.

    And every current bit of evidence proves it.

    The aristocratic west could not survive the introduction of women into the voting pool. Without the requirement for property, there is no way to contain the communal impulses of women, and their willingness to be led by men seizing every opportunity to lead them into suicide for personal gain.

    Women single women in particular, have been like moths to the anti-western flame, for a century; and without them voting rapidly for leftist representatives, willingly undermining the constitution, none of the destruction of the west would have occurred. And all the distraction that political infighting has caused, the destruction of intergenerational cooperation, the destruction of the reproductive truce between the sexes we call the ‘family’, has just been a vast failure to direct investment to innovation.

    Instead, we’re financing politics and 30% single motherhood living in perpetual poverty. And men are dropping out of marriage, the workforce, the voting pool, and the civil society entirely in droves.

    Small things in large numbers have vast consequences.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-23 13:00:00 UTC

  • TO FIGHT POVERTY? CAPITALISM. Halving destitute poverty by getting government ou

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzmxQOonnGEHOW TO FIGHT POVERTY? CAPITALISM.

    Halving destitute poverty by getting government out of the way.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-22 16:01:00 UTC

  • THE INSIDIOUS LOGIC OF PAUL KRUGMAN It is perfectly fine to overpay a corrupt go

    THE INSIDIOUS LOGIC OF PAUL KRUGMAN

    It is perfectly fine to overpay a corrupt government because it creates high paying salaries and consumption, despite not producing a good. But it is not perfectly fine to overpay healthcare workers for providing the best healthcare in the world in order to create consumption.

    Ostensibly we assume that its because he is a lying political hack.

    But the truth is, he is a racist who just hates white folk. And everything else is just a vehicle for his hatred.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-14 23:41:00 UTC

  • TECH FASCISM – INCREMENTALISM IN ACTION First an option. Then mandatory. There i

    http://www.myfoxny.com/Story/23684342/microsofts-phone-update-to-feature-driving-modeMORE TECH FASCISM – INCREMENTALISM IN ACTION

    First an option. Then mandatory.

    There is NO REASON FOR THIS FEATURE.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-14 14:08:00 UTC