(Yeah. What you see me doing is constructing markets that create commons without the possibility of discretion. Libertinism avoids commons. But commons are the consequence of western high trust. And our competitive strategy.)
Source date (UTC): 2015-09-16 07:24:00 UTC
But I am not sure why we shouldn’t prohibit obscurantism (pollution) in matters of the commons, if people seek to stop it.
Source date (UTC): 2015-09-10 12:20:01 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641949244660805632
Reply addressees: @mdavilamartinez
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641669293730492416
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/641669293730492416
But under universal standing in defense of the commons then anyone could charge anyone advocating theft (statism).
Source date (UTC): 2015-09-10 12:18:34 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641948879043338240
Reply addressees: @mdavilamartinez
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641669293730492416
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/641669293730492416
That we use monopoly rule (rule of law) differs from monopoly production of commons (government).
Source date (UTC): 2015-09-10 12:15:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641947982913519616
Reply addressees: @mdavilamartinez
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641669293730492416
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/641669293730492416
Rule of Law (Rule), Market for Commons (Government), Market for goods and svcs (Market). No coercion.
Source date (UTC): 2015-09-09 17:24:35 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641663502957064192
Reply addressees: @mdavilamartinez
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641598856736608256
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/641598856736608256
How do we create commons without rent seeking? Not how do we not-create commons to avoid rent seeking.
Source date (UTC): 2015-09-09 09:33:27 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641544940296773632
Reply addressees: @wolfe_fan @mdavilamartinez
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641484405056253953
IN REPLY TO:
@sacrorum_rex
@mdavilamartinez I’ve thought of something I call “post-libertarianism”, something that can incorporate guys from Hoppe to Aristotle
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641484405056253953
[T]HE PURPOSE OF PRIVATIZATION? (important evolutionary hierarchy) 1) To prohibit consumption (create a commons – the ongoing production of a good or service). 2) To increase cooperation by reducing opportunity for conflict. 3) To eliminate rents and fictions on use of such resources in production. 4) To create efficient organizational use of these resources through competition. 5) To permit rational planning (economic calculation) and therefore complex production. 6) To provide individuals with incentives to produce in order to survive without parasitism, and thereby reducing the incentive to cooperate.
[T]HE PURPOSE OF PRIVATIZATION? (important evolutionary hierarchy) 1) To prohibit consumption (create a commons – the ongoing production of a good or service). 2) To increase cooperation by reducing opportunity for conflict. 3) To eliminate rents and fictions on use of such resources in production. 4) To create efficient organizational use of these resources through competition. 5) To permit rational planning (economic calculation) and therefore complex production. 6) To provide individuals with incentives to produce in order to survive without parasitism, and thereby reducing the incentive to cooperate.
THE PURPOSE OF PRIVATIZATION?
(important evolutionary hierarchy)
1) To prohibit consumption (create a commons – the ongoing production of a good or service).
2) To increase cooperation by reducing opportunity for conflict.
3) To eliminate rents and fictions on use of such resources in production.
4) To create efficient organizational use of these resources through competition.
5) To permit rational planning (economic calculation) and therefore complex production.
6) To provide individuals with incentives to produce in order to survive without parasitism, and thereby reducing the incentive to cooperate.
Curt Doolittle
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2015-09-02 03:07:00 UTC
PRIVATIZATION? IT’S NOT AN INTRINSIC GOOD.
Well, the Nobility in western Europe privatized everything and in doing so virtually enslaved Western Europeans. They were civilized by the church, each other and competition for commerce, and eventually displaced, or as in the case of France – murdered wholesale. The rest of Europe surrendered rather than face the same fate.
The “Nobles” in eastern Europe privatized everything and in doing so enslaved the eastern europeans. They and their ‘administrators’ were either executed or run out of Europe.
The Russian Boyars and Oligarchs privatized everything, and enslaved Russians. They were either massacred (frequently) or imprisoned for it. Now they have been exterminated.
Although Putin’s privatization of the commons seems to be holding up relatively well – but it will likely end in similar fashion.
How many Arab tribes have privatized everything, yet have been recently tortured and dismembered?
PRIVATIZATION
Privatization is not an intrinsic good. Privatization is only valuable if it both decreases costs and improves services through competition. Privatization is not so much a good, as much as a monopoly bureaucracy is a bad. That does not mean that common assets managed by competing contractors, in the care of a monarchy is not better than both. (it is).
RULE OF LAW
Privatization is a distraction from the only source of liberty: rule of law, universal standing, under the common law, under the total prohibition on the imposition of costs against the demonstrated property of any other. This scope of law eliminates all possibility of extra-legal retaliation, and eliminates all demand for the state for the discretionary choice of fault, and all demand for the state as a prohibitor of retaliation for those impositions that humans universally retaliate against.
COMMONS
Commons are the most effective means of competing against other groups. The west progressed faster in both the ancient and modern periods when they produced the most competitive commons. Property rights and rule of law, the jury process, truth telling and honesty are all normative commons that are exceptionally expensive to construct. Commons prevent rent seeking by private agents. That’s what define’s a private (corporate) or public (civic) commons: something you can’t force costs upon, yet from which all of us gain “fructus” (fruits. Benefits)
THE ‘PRESTIGE’: VERBAL SLIGHT OF HAND OF MORAL ‘MAGICIANS’
Conversely, privatization is just another excuse to recreate the oligarchical parasitism of Russia and eastern Europe.
We have had enough deceit for one century. The Cosmopolitans were a failure in all their forms: Socialists, Rothbardians, Freshwater economists, and Neocons. The only liberty that is existentially possible is that which was practiced between european aristocracy: rule of law, universal standing, and property-en-toto. While the effort to create an aristocracy of everyone failed, that does not mean that we cannot create an aristocratic rule of law that everyone must adhere to.
And why not? The only reason to practice the ethics of libertines (Block and Rothbard) are to license parasitism, and prohibit retaliation. There is no noble ambition here. It is to restore the parasitism of eastern Europe. So, leave the Russians and The Eastern Europeans to their own history. It continues to be a tragedy they struggle to exit from.
Liberty is the product of the aristocratic militia: the organized application of violence to institute rule of law such that all parasitism is prohibited, thereby forcing all humans into the market for the productive, fully informed, warrantied exchange of goods and services free of external imposition of costs.
Rule of law: Universal constraint, universal standing, strict construction, total prohibition on parasitism, expressed as rights to property en toto, and ‘every man a sheriff’ to enforce it.
Curt Doolittle
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2015-09-01 19:30:00 UTC