Theme: Commons

  • Democracy = Monopoly rule over the Monopoly production of commons. As difference

    Democracy = Monopoly rule over the Monopoly production of commons. As differences decline, monopoly becomes impediment.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-19 11:33:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/711153656968650752

    Reply addressees: @JonHaidt @sapinker

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/711150124861362176


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @JonHaidt @sapinker Sadly, the distribution of philosophers is worse than that of psychologists prior to Operationism. For the same reason.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/711150124861362176


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @JonHaidt @sapinker Sadly, the distribution of philosophers is worse than that of psychologists prior to Operationism. For the same reason.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/711150124861362176

  • “NOMOCRATIC KIN-CONTRACTUALISM UNDER MARKET GOVERNMENT WITH A HEREDITARY JUDGE O

    “NOMOCRATIC KIN-CONTRACTUALISM UNDER MARKET GOVERNMENT WITH A HEREDITARY JUDGE OF THE COMMONS”

    Some of us understand that the holy grail of government is a scientific government: that being rule of law. The problem with constructing rule of law by means of discovering conflicts, is that we have always sought the first principles of that law. And they are … inconvenient for leadership and parasites.

    It is not so much that we need meritocracy, but that we need to remove all parasitism. It is not so much that we need individualism, but that we need to remove all collective parasitism. It is not that we need kings to rule, it is that we need kings to veto those agreements that conduct parasitism against future generations. It is not so much that we need rule, as that we need decidability in matters of conflict. It is not so much that we need government, as that we need a method of constructing competitive commons. It is not so much that we should be universally gregarious, as it is that we should attempt to fund every opportunity for reducing in-group transaction costs.

    I can continue. But most of political history can be reduced to justificationism in an effort to construct an artwork out of adding clay from the earth of cooperation, and most of scientific history can be reduced to criticism in an effort to construct an artwork by removing unwanted stone with the chisel of violence. We must do both: construct our art of cooperation while removing the unwanted parasitism.

    This is science in government. And the discipline of science in government is natural, common, organic, distributed, universally applicability under universal standing ,

    Economic science then is NOT the theory of the social sciences, but the science of the production of commons, and all of that theory must take place within, and be bound by, this science of natural law.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-18 05:28:00 UTC

  • What Is After Socialism And Capitalism?

    We have always had mixed economies and always will. Neither extreme is possible since under pure capitalism commons cannot be produced because incentives to produce them don’t exist, and under pure socialism production is impossible in no small part because incentives to produce don’t exist. 

    These two terms are also questionably dishonest. Capitalism refers to the voluntary organization of production of consumption and commons. Socialism to the involuntary organization of production of consumption and commons. 

    There is no state of post capitalism. It is possible that there is a form of pure contractualism available to us – and I am working on that solution.

    But as long as women can bear children at will without certain to if the ability to support them or their eventual self support, then there will always be intolerable want.

    The egalitarianism of Northern Europe was achieved through centuries of systemic eugenics under manorialism and its predecessors. And westerners do not like to admit this truth. They’d rather attribute their current luxury to the product of their character.

    Hanjal line character is the product of dispassionate eugenics in all walks of life.

    The early northern people delayed reproduction and outbred. The anglo Saxons starting in the Netherlands practiced manorialism. The rest of Europe hung half to one percent of the population every year as entertainment and constant suppression of the criminal underclasses.  The peasantry was not oppressed – it was domesticated.

    It is far more important for a people to eliminate the ‘Evil 80s’ from the population than it is to create genius.

    This knowledge is the crisis of our age. mixed economies have won. There is no end to capitalism in the consumer economy and socialism in the commons economy.

    Not as long as we are discussing humans. 

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-after-socialism-and-capitalism

  • What Is After Socialism And Capitalism?

    We have always had mixed economies and always will. Neither extreme is possible since under pure capitalism commons cannot be produced because incentives to produce them don’t exist, and under pure socialism production is impossible in no small part because incentives to produce don’t exist. 

    These two terms are also questionably dishonest. Capitalism refers to the voluntary organization of production of consumption and commons. Socialism to the involuntary organization of production of consumption and commons. 

    There is no state of post capitalism. It is possible that there is a form of pure contractualism available to us – and I am working on that solution.

    But as long as women can bear children at will without certain to if the ability to support them or their eventual self support, then there will always be intolerable want.

    The egalitarianism of Northern Europe was achieved through centuries of systemic eugenics under manorialism and its predecessors. And westerners do not like to admit this truth. They’d rather attribute their current luxury to the product of their character.

    Hanjal line character is the product of dispassionate eugenics in all walks of life.

    The early northern people delayed reproduction and outbred. The anglo Saxons starting in the Netherlands practiced manorialism. The rest of Europe hung half to one percent of the population every year as entertainment and constant suppression of the criminal underclasses.  The peasantry was not oppressed – it was domesticated.

    It is far more important for a people to eliminate the ‘Evil 80s’ from the population than it is to create genius.

    This knowledge is the crisis of our age. mixed economies have won. There is no end to capitalism in the consumer economy and socialism in the commons economy.

    Not as long as we are discussing humans. 

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-after-socialism-and-capitalism

  • Yep. We financed perversion and our own ridicule by the grant of copyright, rath

    Yep. We financed perversion and our own ridicule by the grant of copyright, rather than creative commons


    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-16 08:03:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/710013568134070272

    Reply addressees: @CanadaNRx @ne0colonial

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/710012868985556992


    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/710012868985556992

  • Copyright protection has financed immorality. Creative commons protects creativi

    Copyright protection has financed immorality. Creative commons protects creativity enough. Copyright must end. And with it decadent arts.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-16 07:44:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/710008762157961216

  • Defense of the commons and service in the jury, are not revenue sources but cost

    Defense of the commons and service in the jury, are not revenue sources but costs we must pay.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-14 16:14:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/709412366606311424

    Reply addressees: @whitespace732 @AidanTTierian @AndrewCFollett

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/709408940233256960


    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/709408940233256960

  • Sacred commons. Universal service (militia). Universal standing. The Oath (tell

    Sacred commons. Universal service (militia). Universal standing. The Oath (tell the truth, never steal). Jury. Sovereignty.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-13 13:48:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/709013214781153280

    Reply addressees: @charlesmurray

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/709007640676929536


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @charlesmurray Rule of law. Family as the unit of political decision making, production, and reproduction. Civic (participatory) Society.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/709007640676929536


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @charlesmurray Rule of law. Family as the unit of political decision making, production, and reproduction. Civic (participatory) Society.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/709007640676929536

  • There is no reason why we can practice a market for consumption of individual go

    There is no reason why we can practice a market for consumption of individual goods but must bear a monopoly in production of common goods.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-12 16:02:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/708684527724597252

  • THE TRUTH: Avoidance of Contribution to a Commons Libertarians Deem Disadvantage

    THE TRUTH: Avoidance of Contribution to a Commons Libertarians Deem Disadvantageous to Their Reproductive Strategy.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-12 13:42:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/708649258887548929

    Reply addressees: @libertarianism

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/708649017475997696


    IN REPLY TO:

    @libertarianism

    Is the foundation for libertarianism based on ethics or economics? https://t.co/2V5xuRSgKM

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/708649017475997696