Curt Doolittle

Theme: Commons

  • The Propertarian Community Has Become Its Own Commons

    Apr 22, 2020, 12:40 PM by JWarren Prescott The propertarian circle is a eclectic collection of great people who share a common interest in preserving the elements of civilization that precisely maintain that civilization. Namely, western civilization. The propertarian community has become its own commons that is revered by all – even if they either don’t fully understand all the elements, logic or constructs or even if they might disagree – it is still respected. This is our commons – some are hard at work plowing new areas for our commons and some are happy basking in the grass for the time being. It doesn’t matter, at some point, all of us will be needed to defend it – not just this intellectual commons, but the very civilization in which we talk about saving. So if you have come to the commons to find relief from the soul-destroying, lying pilpul-laden post-modernist hellscape, rest up and find the ongoing conversation restorative. If you are already on the frontlines of the battlefield, you will find allies here, and if you are the curious intellectual, it will be the most stimulating as your core premises are challenged and exercised in both pleasurable and uncomfortable ways.

  • The Propertarian Community Has Become Its Own Commons

    Apr 22, 2020, 12:40 PM by JWarren Prescott The propertarian circle is a eclectic collection of great people who share a common interest in preserving the elements of civilization that precisely maintain that civilization. Namely, western civilization. The propertarian community has become its own commons that is revered by all – even if they either don’t fully understand all the elements, logic or constructs or even if they might disagree – it is still respected. This is our commons – some are hard at work plowing new areas for our commons and some are happy basking in the grass for the time being. It doesn’t matter, at some point, all of us will be needed to defend it – not just this intellectual commons, but the very civilization in which we talk about saving. So if you have come to the commons to find relief from the soul-destroying, lying pilpul-laden post-modernist hellscape, rest up and find the ongoing conversation restorative. If you are already on the frontlines of the battlefield, you will find allies here, and if you are the curious intellectual, it will be the most stimulating as your core premises are challenged and exercised in both pleasurable and uncomfortable ways.

  • Grid Explaining Commons-ism

    Grid Explaining Commons-ism https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/09/grid-explaining-commons-ism/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-09 16:55:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1259165019855638530

  • Grid Explaining Commons-ism

    GRID:

    ........................CHILD............................
.........ANARCHIST........VS..........COMMUNIST 
......(heterogeneous, no commons, just consumption)
(diasporic, tribal, imperial subjects, "the men will do it")
.....no capitalization............no capitalization
......individual.....................collective
.......inequality.....................equality
.
MALE......................VS.........................FEMALE
.
.......inequality.....................equality
.......familial...................collective familial
...max capitalization .............max consumption
..(landed, national, self rule, "we're the men who do it")
..........(homogenous, commons, over consumption )
.........COMMONSIST........VS..........SOCIALIST 
.........................PARENT............................

    Humans have very comprehensible differences in instincts, and evolved to express those very comprehensible instincts, and then to make up stories justifying them.’ “THE ECONOMICS OF NATIONAL COMMONS-ISM”

    1) Commons are a non consumable capitalization from which everyone benefits – a park where you can raise small children cuts the cost of yard ownership for example. Lacking a park where you can raise small children increases the cost of homes and yards, driving people out of high investment parenting. 2) Commons solve the problem of high investment parenting, without requiring high familial economic investment by every family. Families buy access to commons by high investment parenting, which creates incentive for the production of commons and their high returns. 3) We use high investment parenting in the production of high investment commons. We use high investment commons to facilitate high investment parenting. 4) This is what the middle working, and lower working classes sense is being stolen from them – the ability to use commons to produce high investment parenting. Best example is that they can’t afford to move away from malcontents by denying them access. 5) Low investment parenting immigrants and classes, decrease the incentive to produce commons that are then consumed for purposes of other than raising families. Low investment parenting immigrants and classes increase consumption that is upwardly redistributable to the financial sector, and decrease production of commons as redistribution to 6) Elites (advertising, media, financial, academic, political), will happily consume profits and income instead of investing in commons if lower working, working, and middle classes tolerate it. 7) The laboring, lower working, working, middle, and increasingly upper middle class, will only tolerate it until the low hanging fruit of consumption has been exhausted, and the demand for commons is restored. 8) Christianity is exceptional at producing respect for commons because behavior in the church environment (suppression of impulse) and the sacredness of the properties, extend to the commons. 9) In the absence of universal christian indoctrination we must us the law to suppress consumption (destruction) of the incentive to produce high trust, ‘sacred’ commons, suitable for the raising of children. And exporting ‘exploratory’ (teen, young adult) behavior (pre-maturity) to labor (markets) sport(competition) and external (wild) commons.
    WE ARE TRYING TO ARTICULATE “NATIONAL COMMONS-ISM” by Luke Weinhagen I have a suspicion that what many are grasping at within NatSoc is not a socialization of the economy but rather a commonization (not communization) of the government. This is what the west was aimed at solving but without full-accounting under P’s complete description of property, government became just another marketable commodity under globalist capitalism. What we are really trying to articulate is a form of National Commonsism. The resistance to “socializing” any part of our civic under our current model of “governance as commodity” is it effectively means selling whatever was socialized to big interest and international agents. There is no trust. National Commonsism == Kinship Capitalism == reciprocity protected by full-accounting — CD: Always count on luke for genius. Edit

    (Y’all gotta thank Luke Weinhagen for that framing. Been fussing with it myself and wasn’t until he put the frame around it that I could write the economics of it. But this concept has legs.) “Commons-ism”

  • Grid Explaining Commons-ism

    GRID:

    ........................CHILD............................
.........ANARCHIST........VS..........COMMUNIST 
......(heterogeneous, no commons, just consumption)
(diasporic, tribal, imperial subjects, "the men will do it")
.....no capitalization............no capitalization
......individual.....................collective
.......inequality.....................equality
.
MALE......................VS.........................FEMALE
.
.......inequality.....................equality
.......familial...................collective familial
...max capitalization .............max consumption
..(landed, national, self rule, "we're the men who do it")
..........(homogenous, commons, over consumption )
.........COMMONSIST........VS..........SOCIALIST 
.........................PARENT............................

    Humans have very comprehensible differences in instincts, and evolved to express those very comprehensible instincts, and then to make up stories justifying them.’ “THE ECONOMICS OF NATIONAL COMMONS-ISM”

    1) Commons are a non consumable capitalization from which everyone benefits – a park where you can raise small children cuts the cost of yard ownership for example. Lacking a park where you can raise small children increases the cost of homes and yards, driving people out of high investment parenting. 2) Commons solve the problem of high investment parenting, without requiring high familial economic investment by every family. Families buy access to commons by high investment parenting, which creates incentive for the production of commons and their high returns. 3) We use high investment parenting in the production of high investment commons. We use high investment commons to facilitate high investment parenting. 4) This is what the middle working, and lower working classes sense is being stolen from them – the ability to use commons to produce high investment parenting. Best example is that they can’t afford to move away from malcontents by denying them access. 5) Low investment parenting immigrants and classes, decrease the incentive to produce commons that are then consumed for purposes of other than raising families. Low investment parenting immigrants and classes increase consumption that is upwardly redistributable to the financial sector, and decrease production of commons as redistribution to 6) Elites (advertising, media, financial, academic, political), will happily consume profits and income instead of investing in commons if lower working, working, and middle classes tolerate it. 7) The laboring, lower working, working, middle, and increasingly upper middle class, will only tolerate it until the low hanging fruit of consumption has been exhausted, and the demand for commons is restored. 8) Christianity is exceptional at producing respect for commons because behavior in the church environment (suppression of impulse) and the sacredness of the properties, extend to the commons. 9) In the absence of universal christian indoctrination we must us the law to suppress consumption (destruction) of the incentive to produce high trust, ‘sacred’ commons, suitable for the raising of children. And exporting ‘exploratory’ (teen, young adult) behavior (pre-maturity) to labor (markets) sport(competition) and external (wild) commons.
    WE ARE TRYING TO ARTICULATE “NATIONAL COMMONS-ISM” by Luke Weinhagen I have a suspicion that what many are grasping at within NatSoc is not a socialization of the economy but rather a commonization (not communization) of the government. This is what the west was aimed at solving but without full-accounting under P’s complete description of property, government became just another marketable commodity under globalist capitalism. What we are really trying to articulate is a form of National Commonsism. The resistance to “socializing” any part of our civic under our current model of “governance as commodity” is it effectively means selling whatever was socialized to big interest and international agents. There is no trust. National Commonsism == Kinship Capitalism == reciprocity protected by full-accounting — CD: Always count on luke for genius. Edit

    (Y’all gotta thank Luke Weinhagen for that framing. Been fussing with it myself and wasn’t until he put the frame around it that I could write the economics of it. But this concept has legs.) “Commons-ism”

  • Disambiguation: Illegal, Legal, Commercial, Commons

    Disambiguation: Illegal, Legal, Commercial, Commons https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/09/disambiguation-illegal-legal-commercial-commons/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-09 16:35:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1259160035747340289

  • Disambiguation: Illegal, Legal, Commercial, Commons

    Apr 30, 2020, 11:42 AM [R]egarding: Alcohol, Pot, Other Drugs, Sex, Promiscuity, Prostitution, any unregulated behavior, attention-causing, or Hedonism (unregulated behavior) in general – there is a difference between illegality (prohibition), legalization (private and out of the commons) and commercializing (in the commons). Many if not all unregulated behavior can and should be removed from the commons. What people do in private is their own business. We share the commons.We don’t share private spaces.Prohibited(illegal) > … Private(outside of commons) > … … Craft Production (for home and friend consumption) … … … Commercial (sourced in and marketed in markets) > … … … … Commons (demonstrated in commons) > … … … … … Monument-Memorial (heralded in commons)

  • Disambiguation: Illegal, Legal, Commercial, Commons

    Apr 30, 2020, 11:42 AM [R]egarding: Alcohol, Pot, Other Drugs, Sex, Promiscuity, Prostitution, any unregulated behavior, attention-causing, or Hedonism (unregulated behavior) in general – there is a difference between illegality (prohibition), legalization (private and out of the commons) and commercializing (in the commons). Many if not all unregulated behavior can and should be removed from the commons. What people do in private is their own business. We share the commons.We don’t share private spaces.Prohibited(illegal) > … Private(outside of commons) > … … Craft Production (for home and friend consumption) … … … Commercial (sourced in and marketed in markets) > … … … … Commons (demonstrated in commons) > … … … … … Monument-Memorial (heralded in commons)

  • Heroism, Excellence, Truth before Face, Sovereignty, Reciprocity, The Absolute N

    … Heroism, Excellence, Truth before Face, Sovereignty, Reciprocity, The Absolute Nuclear Family, Commons, Law, Jury, and Markets in everything – the most rapidly adaptive system invented by man. A small population on the edge of the bronze age in three eras revolutionized man.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-09 01:45:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1258936010647515142

    Reply addressees: @niceprinter12 @healingbyhenry @sunkiisss

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1258935744401465345

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @niceprinter12 @healingbyhenry @sunkiisss … the west invented pretty much everything that dragged your primitive barbarism out of ignorance, superstition, hard labor, poverty, starvation, disease, child mortality, early death, and the chaos of nature in a few centuries in bronze, iron, and steel ages. Why? ….

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1258935744401465345

  • P increases the scope of the law to cover both false promise, and baiting into h

    P increases the scope of the law to cover both false promise, and baiting into hazard, at contractual ( private contracts ) and political ( contracts of the commons ) scales. This is the weakness in the current law.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-07 12:12:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1258369025073127425

    Reply addressees: @YvesBurri @EricLiford @Nationalist7346

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1258365508732289027

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @YvesBurri @EricLiford @Nationalist7346 That’s patently false. The foundation of contract law is reciprocity, and irreciprocal contracts will not be enforced by the court. The problem is the court’s definition of irreciprocity favors personal choice and consequence rather than legal defense from baiting into hazard.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1258365508732289027