I support universal nationalism, tribalism, and familialism, so that families, tribes and nations can produce the commons that are most helpful to their families tribes and nations.
Source date (UTC): 2017-04-10 11:32:00 UTC
Theme: Commons
-
It’s not difficult. a) if they don’t impose costs on you, yours, or your commons
It’s not difficult. a) if they don’t impose costs on you, yours, or your commons do the same. b) if they conduct productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchanges with you, yours, and your commons, do the same. c) if they are willing to conduct productive fully informed, warrantied voluntary exchanges with you but can’t, then impose rule of law for them as an investment, so that they can. d) if they impose ANY unwanted costs on you, yours, or your commons, then kill, rape, pillage, enslave and destroy them. No mercy.
Source date (UTC): 2017-03-31 14:45:00 UTC
-
A Short Course In Perfect Government
PERFECT GOVERNMENT https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/05/25/perfect-government/ THE METHODS OF PRODUCTION OF COMMONS IN MARKET GOVERNENT https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/10/07/market-production-of-commons/ THE NON OBVIOUS BENEFITS OF MARKET GOVERNMENT https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/10/01/the-non-obvious-benefits-of-market-government/ PERFECT GOVERNMENT DEFEATS DECEIT https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/09/17/we-can-create-a-perfect-government-for-opposing-propaganda-and-deceit/ THE STRUGGLE FOR RULE OF LAW – AND AGAINST DISCRETIONARY RULE https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/10/07/evolution-of-a-condition-of-liberty-the-struggle-from-discretionary-to-non-discretionary-to-market-rule/ IT DOESN”T MATTER WHO RULES, ONLY THAT WE DENY PEOPLE RULE https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/04/24/it-doesnt-matter-who-rules-only-that-we-deny-people-rule/
WHAT IS THE MINIMUM BASIS FOR SOVEREIGNTY, LIBERTY, FREEDOM? https://propertarianinstitute.com/2015/07/02/propertarianism-vs-rothbardiansm/POLITICS FOR DUMMIES https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/09/19/politics-for-dummies/ PEOPLE ARE PROTECTED BY RULE OF LAW, THE MILITARY, AND THE MILITIA, NOT GOVERNMENT https://propertarianinstitute.com/2012/12/19/property-is-necessary-for-a-market-society-is-the-market-government-is-the-administration-of-the-market-how-do-we-create-good-government/ OUR MISTAKEN EMPHASIS ON GOVERNMENT INSTEAD OF JURIDICAL DEFENSE FROM IT https://propertarianinstitute.com/2015/08/24/our-mistaken-emphasis-on-government-rather-than-juridical-defense-from-it/ IS DEMOCRACY REALLY THE PROBLEM? https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/11/30/is-the-problem-really-democracy-here-is-your-answer/ POLITICAL PREFERENCE IS REDUCIBLE TO GENETIC STRATEGY https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/09/19/political-preference-is-reducible-to-genetic-strategy/ MODELS OF GOVERNMENTS ARE STRATEGIES IN A GIVEN CONTEXT, NOT UNIVERSAL GOODS https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/10/15/strategies-not-steady-states/ WE USE THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT WE CAN AFFORD https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/09/17/31847/ FASCISM https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/10/01/fascism-in-the-great-game-of-rock-paper-scissors/ https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/11/25/more-on-market-fascism/
-
A Short Course In Perfect Government
PERFECT GOVERNMENT https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/05/25/perfect-government/ THE METHODS OF PRODUCTION OF COMMONS IN MARKET GOVERNENT https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/10/07/market-production-of-commons/ THE NON OBVIOUS BENEFITS OF MARKET GOVERNMENT https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/10/01/the-non-obvious-benefits-of-market-government/ PERFECT GOVERNMENT DEFEATS DECEIT https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/09/17/we-can-create-a-perfect-government-for-opposing-propaganda-and-deceit/ THE STRUGGLE FOR RULE OF LAW – AND AGAINST DISCRETIONARY RULE https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/10/07/evolution-of-a-condition-of-liberty-the-struggle-from-discretionary-to-non-discretionary-to-market-rule/ IT DOESN”T MATTER WHO RULES, ONLY THAT WE DENY PEOPLE RULE https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/04/24/it-doesnt-matter-who-rules-only-that-we-deny-people-rule/
WHAT IS THE MINIMUM BASIS FOR SOVEREIGNTY, LIBERTY, FREEDOM? https://propertarianinstitute.com/2015/07/02/propertarianism-vs-rothbardiansm/POLITICS FOR DUMMIES https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/09/19/politics-for-dummies/ PEOPLE ARE PROTECTED BY RULE OF LAW, THE MILITARY, AND THE MILITIA, NOT GOVERNMENT https://propertarianinstitute.com/2012/12/19/property-is-necessary-for-a-market-society-is-the-market-government-is-the-administration-of-the-market-how-do-we-create-good-government/ OUR MISTAKEN EMPHASIS ON GOVERNMENT INSTEAD OF JURIDICAL DEFENSE FROM IT https://propertarianinstitute.com/2015/08/24/our-mistaken-emphasis-on-government-rather-than-juridical-defense-from-it/ IS DEMOCRACY REALLY THE PROBLEM? https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/11/30/is-the-problem-really-democracy-here-is-your-answer/ POLITICAL PREFERENCE IS REDUCIBLE TO GENETIC STRATEGY https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/09/19/political-preference-is-reducible-to-genetic-strategy/ MODELS OF GOVERNMENTS ARE STRATEGIES IN A GIVEN CONTEXT, NOT UNIVERSAL GOODS https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/10/15/strategies-not-steady-states/ WE USE THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT WE CAN AFFORD https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/09/17/31847/ FASCISM https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/10/01/fascism-in-the-great-game-of-rock-paper-scissors/ https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/11/25/more-on-market-fascism/
-
Conservative: Non-Parasitism (father) Libertarian: Commons Parasitism (brother)
Conservative: Non-Parasitism (father)
Libertarian: Commons Parasitism (brother)
Progressive: Private and Commons Parasitism (sister-mother)
Source date (UTC): 2017-03-27 12:41:00 UTC
-
Governments as a Hierarchy of Producers of Commons – Where People Possess Common Interests Only
—“My question is how can government peruse multiple solutions while remaining expedient instead of the “one size fits all” solutions that seem to only cause more conflict.”— You can pursue many commons, you cannot pursue multiple norms (cultures). You can form i) a federal government that provides only the functions of insurer of last resort, ii) a regional government that provides only infrastructure commons, and iii) a local government that provides normative commons. And lastly, iv) a family that provides what is necessary to the particular circumstance. People need what they need to compete.
-
Governments as a Hierarchy of Producers of Commons – Where People Possess Common Interests Only
—“My question is how can government peruse multiple solutions while remaining expedient instead of the “one size fits all” solutions that seem to only cause more conflict.”— You can pursue many commons, you cannot pursue multiple norms (cultures). You can form i) a federal government that provides only the functions of insurer of last resort, ii) a regional government that provides only infrastructure commons, and iii) a local government that provides normative commons. And lastly, iv) a family that provides what is necessary to the particular circumstance. People need what they need to compete.
-
Definition: Commons, with Links To the Core
A Short Course in Propertarian Morality propertarianism.com —“CURT: PLEASE DEFINE “COMMONS”— COMMONS – Originally, meaning Land or resources belonging to or affecting the whole of a community. More articulately: any form of property to which members of a group share an interests, because of bearing a cost to obtain that interest, but where that interest is obtained by an unspecified membership in the group rather than by explicit possession of title. I use this term to refer to both physical commons, normative commons, institutional commons, and informational commons. The problem we face with commons is that without explicitly issued shares, even un-tradable shares, the ownership of the commons cannot be protected from confiscation by various means including immigration, or political confiscation. See Also DEMONSTRATED PROPERTY RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS https://propertarianinstitute.com/2015/07/27/property-rights-and-obligations/ A SHORT COURSE IN PROPERTARIAN MORALITY https://propertarianinstitute.com/2015/07/27/a-short-course-in-propertarian-morality-2/ A SHORT COURSE IN PROPERTARIAN REASONING https://propertarianinstitute.com/2015/09/26/a-short-course-in-propertarian-reasoning/ (Honestly people, the accusation that this isn’t accessible is simply untrue. It isn’t in COURSE form, but all the insights are there to consume as fairly simple series (lists). The ‘book’ is up there. The courses are not. )
-
Definition: Commons, with Links To the Core
A Short Course in Propertarian Morality propertarianism.com —“CURT: PLEASE DEFINE “COMMONS”— COMMONS – Originally, meaning Land or resources belonging to or affecting the whole of a community. More articulately: any form of property to which members of a group share an interests, because of bearing a cost to obtain that interest, but where that interest is obtained by an unspecified membership in the group rather than by explicit possession of title. I use this term to refer to both physical commons, normative commons, institutional commons, and informational commons. The problem we face with commons is that without explicitly issued shares, even un-tradable shares, the ownership of the commons cannot be protected from confiscation by various means including immigration, or political confiscation. See Also DEMONSTRATED PROPERTY RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS https://propertarianinstitute.com/2015/07/27/property-rights-and-obligations/ A SHORT COURSE IN PROPERTARIAN MORALITY https://propertarianinstitute.com/2015/07/27/a-short-course-in-propertarian-morality-2/ A SHORT COURSE IN PROPERTARIAN REASONING https://propertarianinstitute.com/2015/09/26/a-short-course-in-propertarian-reasoning/ (Honestly people, the accusation that this isn’t accessible is simply untrue. It isn’t in COURSE form, but all the insights are there to consume as fairly simple series (lists). The ‘book’ is up there. The courses are not. )
-
Rothbardian Libertarians: Common Property Marxists
LIBERTARIANS ARE JUST COMMON PROPERTY MARXISTS. (from elsewhere) Libertarians get it wrong every day, multiple times a day. If you’re objective is an anarchic polity, you must eliminate demand for the state – wishing it away is not only ineffective but childish. The judicial state as we understand it, evolved everywhere, to suppress retaliation cycles between individuals, families, clans, and tribes by standardizing punishments, and prohibiting further cycles of retaliation. The universality of this historical fact contradicts all libertarian dogma both about the nature of man, the state of man, and the process of resolving disputes. To eliminate demand for the state, one must eliminate demand for aggression (suppress opportunity) AND, eliminate demand for retaliation (provide a means of resolution of differences) and eliminate retaliation cycles from forming (insure against retaliation). People are never happy with the outcome of court cases, they merely fear retaliation by the insurers. Whenever we have used competing insurers, they have devolved into feuding insurers. Feuding insurers are more dangerous than individual, family and clan feuds because they profit from it. Organizations seek dominance (a monopoly) and this is where states of all sizes originate: as monopoly insurers of last resort sufficient to hold other insurers (states) at bay. This is the historical narrative and counters the private-property-marxist dogma (socialism), and the common-property-marxist dogma (libertarianism). (I hope you saw what I said just then. Because that is the uncomfortable truth.) Libertarians opine (give opinions) on what constitutes aggression, and despite *decades* of hot air failing to define it, they never seem to determine that it is not the actor who determines but the victim who will sense a violation of his investments and retaliate and therefore determine the scope of property. And it is the community of insurers (the polity) that prevent retaliation cycles (feuds). And it is a monopoly insurer (the state however organized) that prevents it. The state overreach arises from discretionary regulatory power (legislation), discretionary tax power, and discretionary rent seeking power, rather than from it’s function as a monopoly insurer. So, the problems of the state originate in discretion and in full time employment of services organizations, rather than direct economic democracy, and subcontracted employment. As far as I know rule of law eliminates regulatory discretion. As far as I know direct democracy eliminates discretionary taxation. As far as I know subcontractors delivering services are superior to bureaucrats. As far as I know a judiciary can function independently. And all that is necessary is a monarchy as a judge of last resort, and a military as an insurer of last resort. In other words, the ancient monarchies ran the best ‘companies’: private estates. As far as I know there is no model superior to rule of natural common law, an independent judiciary, a hereditary monarch as judge of last resort, a set of houses for each class with differing interests used as a market for the production of commons, and direct economic democracy such that individuals who are enfranchised and contributing to the taxes make choices as to their allocations. Conversely, Libertarianism (jewish diasporic separatism) is another product of marxism and marxist history. And it does nothing but license immorality while prohibiting retaliatory violence against it. There is only one source of liberty: an armed militia, an independent judiciary, a monarch as judge of last resort, and the natural, common, judge discovered law, as the sacred political religion of all of them.