Feb 1, 2020, 7:39 PM
Inalienable means not only that it can’t be taken from you – but you can’t let it be taken from you, and you can’t give it away.
Feb 1, 2020, 7:39 PM
Inalienable means not only that it can’t be taken from you – but you can’t let it be taken from you, and you can’t give it away.
Feb 2, 2020, 11:07 PM
—“So why do lefties default to socio-economics when debating “equality”? That’s not the definition.”—Quinn Patrick
They have escalated from equality of defense under the law, to equality of access, to equality of opportunity, to equality of outcomes. And we cannot yet internalize that the left is cognitively female and unconsciously hyper-consumptive with NO END OF WANTS. It’s never enough for them. They’re parasites.
—“So why do lefties default to socio-economics when debating “equality”? That’s not the definition.”—Quinn Patrick
They have escalated from equality of defense under the law, to equality of access, to equality of opportunity, to equality of outcomes. And we cannot yet internalize that the left is cognitively female and unconsciously hyper-consumptive with NO END OF WANTS. It’s never enough for them. They’re parasites.
They Are Unfit for Service – and The Constitution https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/24/they-are-unfit-for-service-and-the-constitution/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-24 07:12:53 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264454306260008962
Feb 3, 2020, 12:36 PM Western Civilization has been since its foundation, A militia. An army. A militarized society. We gain harmony from doing our duty, and sovereignty for having done it. Sovereignty is harder that liberty by permission, and freedom by promise. And all those who have come to us postwar to undermine that civilization are unfit for service. They are unfit for service. That is why they resist our constitution our natural law our markets, our responsibility – because they are not capable of sovereignty. Therefore we have choices: to lose our sovereignty.
Feb 3, 2020, 12:36 PM Western Civilization has been since its foundation, A militia. An army. A militarized society. We gain harmony from doing our duty, and sovereignty for having done it. Sovereignty is harder that liberty by permission, and freedom by promise. And all those who have come to us postwar to undermine that civilization are unfit for service. They are unfit for service. That is why they resist our constitution our natural law our markets, our responsibility – because they are not capable of sovereignty. Therefore we have choices: to lose our sovereignty.
No, The Constitution Didn’t Survive the Civil War https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/24/no-the-constitution-didnt-survive-the-civil-war/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-24 07:07:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264452826756976774
Feb 3, 2020, 2:05 PM The constitution didn’t survive the civil war. That’s the whole point. If it had, we’d still be a collection of european states like old europe, like it was intended, and people could move to states that had the values that they preferred, while the entire continent could be protected by a unified army (military) as the founders intended. The left wants to destroy the constitution as a transactional document of natural law of sovereigns and their reciprocal rights to life, liberty, and property. They want to change from rule OF LAW that limits the state and the people from violating that natural law, to rule BY LAW that violates that constitution of natural law. There is no political means of saving the constitution. There is only conflict or at least sufficient threat of consequences of conflict, that will require both parties to settle. The right wants to take over and rule. The left to take over and rule. And I propose converting blue cities to states, with 50% of the population and income, and red states with 50% of the population and income. Then to restore the 10th destroyed by the civil war, clearly numerate the federal governments limited scope of powers, and return all power to these states. This will allow the ‘big sort’ to continue and leftists moves to their cities so that they can continue to cause them to collapse one at a a time, while not letting the leftist disease spread to the rest of us. If this is not ‘fair’ then war is preferable and there is zero chance the right will lose. There is no possible moral objection to the constitutional amendments we have proposed other than to engage in conquest of peoples and to deprive them of rights to self determination. If that is the case then war is what we are left with. You may not deprive us of rights of self determination. Ever.
Feb 3, 2020, 2:05 PM The constitution didn’t survive the civil war. That’s the whole point. If it had, we’d still be a collection of european states like old europe, like it was intended, and people could move to states that had the values that they preferred, while the entire continent could be protected by a unified army (military) as the founders intended. The left wants to destroy the constitution as a transactional document of natural law of sovereigns and their reciprocal rights to life, liberty, and property. They want to change from rule OF LAW that limits the state and the people from violating that natural law, to rule BY LAW that violates that constitution of natural law. There is no political means of saving the constitution. There is only conflict or at least sufficient threat of consequences of conflict, that will require both parties to settle. The right wants to take over and rule. The left to take over and rule. And I propose converting blue cities to states, with 50% of the population and income, and red states with 50% of the population and income. Then to restore the 10th destroyed by the civil war, clearly numerate the federal governments limited scope of powers, and return all power to these states. This will allow the ‘big sort’ to continue and leftists moves to their cities so that they can continue to cause them to collapse one at a a time, while not letting the leftist disease spread to the rest of us. If this is not ‘fair’ then war is preferable and there is zero chance the right will lose. There is no possible moral objection to the constitutional amendments we have proposed other than to engage in conquest of peoples and to deprive them of rights to self determination. If that is the case then war is what we are left with. You may not deprive us of rights of self determination. Ever.