Curt Doolittle

Theme: Commons

  • I Think You’re Confused About Property and Commons and The Evolution of Each

    I Think You’re Confused About Property and Commons and The Evolution of Each https://t.co/RpcQIZi7lb

  • I Think You’re Confused About Property and Commons and The Evolution of Each

    I Think You’re Confused About Property and Commons and The Evolution of Each https://propertarianism.com/2020/06/01/i-think-youre-confused-about-property-and-commons-and-the-evolution-of-each/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-01 11:54:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267424163578380289

  • I Think You’re Confused About Property and Commons and The Evolution of Each

    —“Commons are for high-input, savage hunter-gatherers. Deconstruction of the commons via recognition of private property is the first step to civilisation.”— Jonathan Besler

    Um. Well, not quite the argument you’re making. European Hunter gatherers either did not produce fixed commons (hunting grounds, grazing grounds, farms) before they competed with settled peoples, only after they competed with herding peoples, or settled peoples. All people have always produced normative institutional commons: Norms, traditions, myths, manners, customs, and even property respect itself are commons. The central problem for settled people has been the gradual conversion from familial property to individual property, that followed the increase in the division of labor, and the development of inheritance, and the devotion of surplus to the incremental production of commons (defense, granaries(ex:africa), buildings(south america), walls(mesopotamia), grazing lands(caucuses, steppe), farming lands(anatolia), walkways(britain), bridges(asia), water transport (mesopotamia) ). The excess productivity of the flood river valleys when irrigated made possible the conquest of, taxation of, and centralization of proceeds of production in administrative(clerical) and martial (military) classes, in exchange for suppression of local rent seeking, corruption, and exposure to brigandry. Europe was unable to centralize as such until the conquest of other peoples under agrarianism, and the expansion of mediterranean trade. Europe lacks the flood river valleys and warm climate and so production was distributed, power, distributed, and evolved only in parallel with trade. Even the english, the most corporate of european peoples still maintained intergenerational familial property (land, animals, house) until the early modern period. The jews maintained serial marriage until the late middle ages, and the irish until the 1800’s, and slavery, polygamy, and child marriage, and paternal ownership of property are still practiced in developing countries. The distribution of decidability upon the scope and interest in property evolves with the division of labor, just as it did with women in this century. The distribution of decidability in conflict over demonstrated interests determines property. As property increases in atomization, free riding of all kinds is incrementally eradicated. This pushes people into all four directions: decrease in consumption, increases in productivity, innovation in production, or innovation in parasitism. The population always seeks means of externalization of loss, privatization of commons, free riding, parasitism, and predation, so the law must keep pace with innovations in The individual is the most rapid means of adapting to constriction of consumption. The market for goods services and information is the most rapid means of adapting to the expansion of production. The market for suppression of free riding, parasitism and predation is the most rapid means of adapting to the expansion of parasitism. The common law is the most rapid means of suppressing innovations in the parasitism by the immediate expansion of the suppression of innovations in parasitism, by the first case adjudicated. It requires no further institutional support other than communication between judges. The principle difference P-adds is that ALL demonstrated interests of all kinds and require strict construction of judgements (findings), contracts (agreements), regulations (insurance against non-resitutability), legislation (contracts of the commons) and command (military dictate in cases of duress). And it prevents ir-reciprocal and untruthful (untestimonial) speech in matter of the commons to the commons. This means sovereignty, rule of law of reciprocity, and truthful speech, and no more marxism, socialism, libertarianism, feminism, postmodernism, denialism, as well as no more judaism and islam or any other religion contrary to the natural law of reciprocity and testimonial truth. Cheers

  • I Think You’re Confused About Property and Commons and The Evolution of Each

    —“Commons are for high-input, savage hunter-gatherers. Deconstruction of the commons via recognition of private property is the first step to civilisation.”— Jonathan Besler

    Um. Well, not quite the argument you’re making. European Hunter gatherers either did not produce fixed commons (hunting grounds, grazing grounds, farms) before they competed with settled peoples, only after they competed with herding peoples, or settled peoples. All people have always produced normative institutional commons: Norms, traditions, myths, manners, customs, and even property respect itself are commons. The central problem for settled people has been the gradual conversion from familial property to individual property, that followed the increase in the division of labor, and the development of inheritance, and the devotion of surplus to the incremental production of commons (defense, granaries(ex:africa), buildings(south america), walls(mesopotamia), grazing lands(caucuses, steppe), farming lands(anatolia), walkways(britain), bridges(asia), water transport (mesopotamia) ). The excess productivity of the flood river valleys when irrigated made possible the conquest of, taxation of, and centralization of proceeds of production in administrative(clerical) and martial (military) classes, in exchange for suppression of local rent seeking, corruption, and exposure to brigandry. Europe was unable to centralize as such until the conquest of other peoples under agrarianism, and the expansion of mediterranean trade. Europe lacks the flood river valleys and warm climate and so production was distributed, power, distributed, and evolved only in parallel with trade. Even the english, the most corporate of european peoples still maintained intergenerational familial property (land, animals, house) until the early modern period. The jews maintained serial marriage until the late middle ages, and the irish until the 1800’s, and slavery, polygamy, and child marriage, and paternal ownership of property are still practiced in developing countries. The distribution of decidability upon the scope and interest in property evolves with the division of labor, just as it did with women in this century. The distribution of decidability in conflict over demonstrated interests determines property. As property increases in atomization, free riding of all kinds is incrementally eradicated. This pushes people into all four directions: decrease in consumption, increases in productivity, innovation in production, or innovation in parasitism. The population always seeks means of externalization of loss, privatization of commons, free riding, parasitism, and predation, so the law must keep pace with innovations in The individual is the most rapid means of adapting to constriction of consumption. The market for goods services and information is the most rapid means of adapting to the expansion of production. The market for suppression of free riding, parasitism and predation is the most rapid means of adapting to the expansion of parasitism. The common law is the most rapid means of suppressing innovations in the parasitism by the immediate expansion of the suppression of innovations in parasitism, by the first case adjudicated. It requires no further institutional support other than communication between judges. The principle difference P-adds is that ALL demonstrated interests of all kinds and require strict construction of judgements (findings), contracts (agreements), regulations (insurance against non-resitutability), legislation (contracts of the commons) and command (military dictate in cases of duress). And it prevents ir-reciprocal and untruthful (untestimonial) speech in matter of the commons to the commons. This means sovereignty, rule of law of reciprocity, and truthful speech, and no more marxism, socialism, libertarianism, feminism, postmodernism, denialism, as well as no more judaism and islam or any other religion contrary to the natural law of reciprocity and testimonial truth. Cheers

  • The Case for Fascism 😉

    Nov 5, 2019, 9:10 AM

    —“Do NOT let fear of communism drive you into fascism.”—Stefan Molyneux

    If FASCISM is: Rule of Law, of Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Sanctity of the Commons, The Intergenerational Family, Zero-Tolerance and Jury; Social, Economic,and Political Nationalism; State Credit, Investment, Returns on Industrial Capital; Pragmatic Autarky – that’s PERFECT GOV’T. One cannot morally argue against Rule of Law by Natural Law of Sovereignty and Reciprocity, where the court and jury provide a market for punishment(court) in competition with the market for rewards(the market proper), & where exists a prohibition against imposition by arbitrage. This “Fascism” prevents consumption of accumulated genetic, personal, shareheld, common, social, portable, fixed, territorial, and institutional capital advocated by immoral libertarians under free trade, open borders, and the sophism of non aggression w/o including ALL capital. So if “Fascism” means intolerance that means Rule of Law of Sovereignty and Reciprocity, for individual, family, clan, tribe, and nation including familial, social, normative, traditional, institutional, genetic capital the aggressive, zero-tolerance, prosecution = Optimum Life. So yes, I want, all moral men want, “Fascism” if “Fascism” is Rule of Law of Reciprocity, Markets in Everything, intolerance for Monopoly of Abrahamic undermining by parasitisms of universalism, judaism, christianity, islam, marxism, feminism, postmodernism, denialism, and lying. And that includes prosecution of those who would cast that Fascism (Intolerance) as Immoral, Unethical, Undesirable, who by doing so conspires with our ancient enemies to Underming (Again) our great civilization, by granting license for fomentation of crimes against our people. So “I pray thee take heed” that you do not conspire, even in ignorance, regardless of your intentions, with ancient enemies, whose strategy is to incite monopoly, tyranny, irreciprocity, parasitism, ignorance, sophism, superstition, pseudoscience, and denial to destroy us AGAIN. Because THE LAW does not forgive ignorance of The Law, and when prosecution, restitution, punishment, and prevention are soon restored, those who conspire, in ignorance or not, intent or not, willingly or not, shall be punished – all the same. And what restitution for genocide? So you are either a Fascist for the Natural Law of Sovereignty and Reciprocity or you are the enemy of mankind, and you have confessed your guilt, and those of us who can, shall have no mercy in restitution, punishment, and prevention of imitators by making an example of you.

  • The Case for Fascism 😉

    Nov 5, 2019, 9:10 AM

    —“Do NOT let fear of communism drive you into fascism.”—Stefan Molyneux

    If FASCISM is: Rule of Law, of Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Sanctity of the Commons, The Intergenerational Family, Zero-Tolerance and Jury; Social, Economic,and Political Nationalism; State Credit, Investment, Returns on Industrial Capital; Pragmatic Autarky – that’s PERFECT GOV’T. One cannot morally argue against Rule of Law by Natural Law of Sovereignty and Reciprocity, where the court and jury provide a market for punishment(court) in competition with the market for rewards(the market proper), & where exists a prohibition against imposition by arbitrage. This “Fascism” prevents consumption of accumulated genetic, personal, shareheld, common, social, portable, fixed, territorial, and institutional capital advocated by immoral libertarians under free trade, open borders, and the sophism of non aggression w/o including ALL capital. So if “Fascism” means intolerance that means Rule of Law of Sovereignty and Reciprocity, for individual, family, clan, tribe, and nation including familial, social, normative, traditional, institutional, genetic capital the aggressive, zero-tolerance, prosecution = Optimum Life. So yes, I want, all moral men want, “Fascism” if “Fascism” is Rule of Law of Reciprocity, Markets in Everything, intolerance for Monopoly of Abrahamic undermining by parasitisms of universalism, judaism, christianity, islam, marxism, feminism, postmodernism, denialism, and lying. And that includes prosecution of those who would cast that Fascism (Intolerance) as Immoral, Unethical, Undesirable, who by doing so conspires with our ancient enemies to Underming (Again) our great civilization, by granting license for fomentation of crimes against our people. So “I pray thee take heed” that you do not conspire, even in ignorance, regardless of your intentions, with ancient enemies, whose strategy is to incite monopoly, tyranny, irreciprocity, parasitism, ignorance, sophism, superstition, pseudoscience, and denial to destroy us AGAIN. Because THE LAW does not forgive ignorance of The Law, and when prosecution, restitution, punishment, and prevention are soon restored, those who conspire, in ignorance or not, intent or not, willingly or not, shall be punished – all the same. And what restitution for genocide? So you are either a Fascist for the Natural Law of Sovereignty and Reciprocity or you are the enemy of mankind, and you have confessed your guilt, and those of us who can, shall have no mercy in restitution, punishment, and prevention of imitators by making an example of you.

  • Updated to Explicitly State Human Capital as A Commons

    Updated to Explicitly State Human Capital as A Commons. https://t.co/thfOD4abqR

  • Updated to Explicitly State Human Capital as A Commons

    Updated to Explicitly State Human Capital as A Commons. https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/31/updated-to-explicitly-state-human-capital-as-a-commons/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-31 14:28:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267100543299850241

  • Updated to Explicitly State Human Capital as A Commons.

    Nov 17, 2019, 8:47 AM III. Common Interests, or “Commons” (Community Property) Physical Capital (1) Resources: natural resources. (2) Formal (Physical) Commons: waterways, parks, buildings, improvements, and infrastructure. (3) Monuments: arts and artifacts. Institutional Capital (4) Formal (Procedural) Institutions: Our institutions: Religion, Education, Banking, Treasury, Government, Laws, Courts. (5) Cooperative Institutions: Family, Neighborhood, (6) Common Opportunity Interests: Un-homesteaded Opportunities Human Capital (7) Informational commons: Knowledge. Information. (8) Skills (Explicit Knowledge) (9) Cooperative Commons: Trust, Truthful Speech (10) Informal (Normative) Institutions: Our norms: habits, manners, ethics and morals. (11) Population and Distribution: The distribution of our classes (12) Genetic Interests: Our Genome

  • Updated to Explicitly State Human Capital as A Commons.

    Nov 17, 2019, 8:47 AM III. Common Interests, or “Commons” (Community Property) Physical Capital (1) Resources: natural resources. (2) Formal (Physical) Commons: waterways, parks, buildings, improvements, and infrastructure. (3) Monuments: arts and artifacts. Institutional Capital (4) Formal (Procedural) Institutions: Our institutions: Religion, Education, Banking, Treasury, Government, Laws, Courts. (5) Cooperative Institutions: Family, Neighborhood, (6) Common Opportunity Interests: Un-homesteaded Opportunities Human Capital (7) Informational commons: Knowledge. Information. (8) Skills (Explicit Knowledge) (9) Cooperative Commons: Trust, Truthful Speech (10) Informal (Normative) Institutions: Our norms: habits, manners, ethics and morals. (11) Population and Distribution: The distribution of our classes (12) Genetic Interests: Our Genome