Curt Doolittle

Theme: Commons

  • @Mises Hoppe extends Locke/rothbard to commons. Ergo. Remove German/Jewish pseud

    @Mises Hoppe extends Locke/rothbard to commons. Ergo. Remove German/Jewish pseudoscience, and we get the missing science: social science.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-20 14:09:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/767000590366801921

  • Society means that commons are produced by voluntary actions of citizens rather

    https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-define-a-civil-society-leader/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=6b6962f1Civil Society means that commons are produced by voluntary actions of citizens rather than by the direction by and payment from government.

    Civil societies require high trust. Only northern europeans developed high trust at scale. Ergo civil societies are rare, and the western governments since the war have destroyed most of it through government intervention in under a century.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-18 08:56:00 UTC

  • How Do You Define A Civil Society Leader?

    Civil Society means that commons are produced by voluntary actions of citizens rather than by the direction by and payment from government.

    Civil societies require high trust. Only northern europeans developed high trust at scale. Ergo civil societies are rare, and the western governments since the war have destroyed most of it through government intervention in under a century.

    https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-define-a-civil-society-leader

  • How Do You Define A Civil Society Leader?

    Civil Society means that commons are produced by voluntary actions of citizens rather than by the direction by and payment from government.

    Civil societies require high trust. Only northern europeans developed high trust at scale. Ergo civil societies are rare, and the western governments since the war have destroyed most of it through government intervention in under a century.

    https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-define-a-civil-society-leader

  • If I Wanted To Would It Be Legal To Build A Multi Thousand Acre Lake On All Private Property?

    There is a long tradition of slough, stream, pond and lake building, and it’s very hard to find criticisms of it unless you violate one of the three four principles:

    1. It’s close to an existing stream, pond, lake, that could be in any way impacted by the presence of a competing ecosystem.
    2. It requires diverting water flow from another source over which water rights are already tightly regulated (everything is). This is usually a big no-no. So how would you get that much water to this location?
    3. It requires human maintenance to survive and would scar the landscape if you failed to complete or maintain it. (a possibility in Texas).
    4. You plan to use it for raising some kind of fish or animal that could generate competition, change, or pollution in the local ecosystem.

    However, (and simple research will help you) almost all principalities will benefit from the creation of a recreational or wild lake.

    Where I lived in Western Washington the idea is to maintain ecosystems for animals but rearranging land use is just fine. (In some progressive states these departments attract … nutcases, not people seeking to preserve balance. )

    https://www.quora.com/If-I-wanted-to-would-it-be-legal-to-build-a-multi-thousand-acre-lake-on-all-private-property

  • How Would An Anarcho Capitalist Society Look Like, In The Long Run?

    (a) Libertines (anarcho capitalists) differ from libertarians (jeffersonian contractualists), where Contractualist Libertarian = do no harm to the commons, and anarchist libertine = do no good to the commons. This is the underlying principle of decidability in libertinism (anarcho capitalism): avoid costs of physical, normative, an cultural commons, where the principle of decidability in libertarianism is merely the prohibition on the imposition of costs that would cause retaliation.

    (b) no anarcho capitalist polity can form out of rational economic incentives because without commons and territory on low cost trading routes, any such polity must be endogenously parasitic.

    (c) no anarcho capitalist can retain desirable, productive individuals in competition with other societies that do produce commons that add multipliers to the market for reproduction and production.

    (d) any anarcho capitalist polity that did survive would be limited to endogenously parasitic members, and those polities that bore the parasitism would eventually, when in a period of stress, colonize, conquer, or destroy such a polity (pirates, drug dealers, money launderers etc).

    (e) Ergo no anarcho capitalist society is possible -and its arguable whether one was desirable. If you need a nearly lawless borderland and will bear the costs to consumption of living there, then go. Antartica, Siberia, and canada contain vast areas of unused territory because it has not economic value higher than it’s costs of survival in harsh conditions.

    The only possible liberty is that of the anglo saxons: contractualism. And the only means of achieving it is to eliminate demand for the state as a suppressor of aggression and retaliation by the use of the common law to prohibit the imposition of costs on life, kin, relations, things, built capital, norms, traditions, and institutions.

    There is only one possible form of liberty then: the only social science man has discovered: rule of law, natural law, common judge discovered law, universal enfranchisement, and universal accountability, and universal reciprocal insurance.

    Curt

    https://www.quora.com/How-would-an-Anarcho-Capitalist-society-look-like-in-the-long-run

  • How Would An Anarcho Capitalist Society Look Like, In The Long Run?

    (a) Libertines (anarcho capitalists) differ from libertarians (jeffersonian contractualists), where Contractualist Libertarian = do no harm to the commons, and anarchist libertine = do no good to the commons. This is the underlying principle of decidability in libertinism (anarcho capitalism): avoid costs of physical, normative, an cultural commons, where the principle of decidability in libertarianism is merely the prohibition on the imposition of costs that would cause retaliation.

    (b) no anarcho capitalist polity can form out of rational economic incentives because without commons and territory on low cost trading routes, any such polity must be endogenously parasitic.

    (c) no anarcho capitalist can retain desirable, productive individuals in competition with other societies that do produce commons that add multipliers to the market for reproduction and production.

    (d) any anarcho capitalist polity that did survive would be limited to endogenously parasitic members, and those polities that bore the parasitism would eventually, when in a period of stress, colonize, conquer, or destroy such a polity (pirates, drug dealers, money launderers etc).

    (e) Ergo no anarcho capitalist society is possible -and its arguable whether one was desirable. If you need a nearly lawless borderland and will bear the costs to consumption of living there, then go. Antartica, Siberia, and canada contain vast areas of unused territory because it has not economic value higher than it’s costs of survival in harsh conditions.

    The only possible liberty is that of the anglo saxons: contractualism. And the only means of achieving it is to eliminate demand for the state as a suppressor of aggression and retaliation by the use of the common law to prohibit the imposition of costs on life, kin, relations, things, built capital, norms, traditions, and institutions.

    There is only one possible form of liberty then: the only social science man has discovered: rule of law, natural law, common judge discovered law, universal enfranchisement, and universal accountability, and universal reciprocal insurance.

    Curt

    https://www.quora.com/How-would-an-Anarcho-Capitalist-society-look-like-in-the-long-run

  • Then ask why you should not punish or kill them for trying to steal from you, ot

    Then ask why you should not punish or kill them for trying to steal from you, others, or the commons.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-04 17:40:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/761255416454144000

    Reply addressees: @hostempopuli

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/761253827744034816

    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/761253827744034816

  • We couldn’t require truthful speech in the commons, because we didn’t know how t

    We couldn’t require truthful speech in the commons, because we didn’t know how to test for it. Now we do: Testimonialism. Ergo:No more lies.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-04 17:30:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/761253043266609154

  • “NOMOCRATIC MARKETISM” WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? I’m a ‘Marketist’, which is reducibl

    “NOMOCRATIC MARKETISM” WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

    I’m a ‘Marketist’, which is reducible to nomocracy(rule of law) with formally institutionalized markets for (a) production of commons, (b)production of goods and services, and (c) production of reproduction (families).

    The last may sound odd, but it means only that the family is the central object of certain policies, and as formal an institution as law.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-01 01:03:00 UTC