Feb 24, 2020, 10:55 AM The Via- Positiva Small, homogenous, low power distance, polities under rule of law, and their naturally limited capacity for fiat currency inflation demonstrate the optimum mixed economies for both trade and redistribution. The optimum organization of such a polity is by Sovereignty, Rule of law of Reciprocity, an independent cult of the judiciary, a universal militia, a standing professional army of warriors, a monarchy as a judge of last resort, houses for the classes demonstrating contribution to the commons for the production of commons. And markets in everything. Ethnocentrism is the optimum group strategy because kin selection favors – or at least doesn’t resist – loyalty, high trust, commons, and redistribution. Ethno-supremacism is a necessary property of ethnocentrism. Europeans are demonstrably superior genetically, culturally, scientifically, medically, technologically, institutionally, civilizationally to all other civilizations in the ancient and modern worlds. And we are so for one reason: sovereignty. Everything in our civilization descends from it.
Theme: Constitutional Order
-
It’s Not Free Markets Its Rule of Law
Feb 24, 2020, 11:23 AM Free market capitalism is not what raises people. It’s rule of law that limits irreciprocity and forces people into LIMITED MARKETS, not ‘free’ markets. Those markets are limited to the prohibition on externalities. Free market capitalism was invented by the abrahamists to circumvent those limits and to profit from false promise, baiting into harm, harmful externality, and social undermining.
-
It’s Not Free Markets Its Rule of Law
Feb 24, 2020, 11:23 AM Free market capitalism is not what raises people. It’s rule of law that limits irreciprocity and forces people into LIMITED MARKETS, not ‘free’ markets. Those markets are limited to the prohibition on externalities. Free market capitalism was invented by the abrahamists to circumvent those limits and to profit from false promise, baiting into harm, harmful externality, and social undermining.
-
Constitution Status
Mar 26, 2020, 6:37 PM The most important reformations in the constitution have to do with the law and rights. The rest of it decreases power distance as intended by the framers. Or the various political, economic, commercial, and educational reforms. If I keep at it for another few weeks I can get the constitution done enough for public debate. I just have to keep at it. And take a break just to do a course video. The topics are pretty much there. I find TINY holes still. But mostly I have to fill in topics and plug holes. Today I discovered a few holes: (a) didn’t handle the distinction between political disassociation for the production of commons, and political and territorial disassociation that would put the federation (empire) at risk. (b) that i didn’t define each of the markets in the ‘man’ (article 1) section. Now, the constitution is wrapped in a ‘book’. That book is a prosecution, judgement, and set of restitutions. The constitution is one of the restitutions. That will take longer. I should be able to get the constitution to edit-ready form during the crisis. The book is now ‘the big book’ because I have moved even the logics over into it. That has more holes. And unfortunately, I still can only work that hard a few hours a day without getting exhausted and having to work on something else.
-
Constitution Status
Mar 26, 2020, 6:37 PM The most important reformations in the constitution have to do with the law and rights. The rest of it decreases power distance as intended by the framers. Or the various political, economic, commercial, and educational reforms. If I keep at it for another few weeks I can get the constitution done enough for public debate. I just have to keep at it. And take a break just to do a course video. The topics are pretty much there. I find TINY holes still. But mostly I have to fill in topics and plug holes. Today I discovered a few holes: (a) didn’t handle the distinction between political disassociation for the production of commons, and political and territorial disassociation that would put the federation (empire) at risk. (b) that i didn’t define each of the markets in the ‘man’ (article 1) section. Now, the constitution is wrapped in a ‘book’. That book is a prosecution, judgement, and set of restitutions. The constitution is one of the restitutions. That will take longer. I should be able to get the constitution to edit-ready form during the crisis. The book is now ‘the big book’ because I have moved even the logics over into it. That has more holes. And unfortunately, I still can only work that hard a few hours a day without getting exhausted and having to work on something else.
-
Propertarianism Fits, but Sovereigntarianism and Rule of Law Fit Better.
Mar 28, 2020, 2:32 PM (in response to hate from a universalist libertarian)
—“Doolittle needs to come up with his own descriptor. By his own admission, Propertarianism no longer fits. He long ago abandoned any propertarian roots he may have had, denying any propositional aspects of human culture in favor of racial collectivism. A ludicrous course down a blind alley, easily exposed by observing the changes in European behavior effected by the Frankfurt School’s “long march through the institutions”.— Karl Brooks
If you mean I attack every sacred cow, and address every taboo in my search for the truth as a means of ending the current attack on western civilization – then that’s true. If you mean I am no longer a universalist – I never was. If you mean I ever denied the reality of human differences given the vast disparity in the size of the underclasses, and the vast evidence of racial competition in heterogeneous societies, or the failure of every heterogeneous society in history – I never did. If you mean by “propertarian” a system of measurement created by reducing all questions of social science to tests of property – I still am. If you mean I am a universal nationalist – I am. If you mean I have come to the conclusion that western civlization is demonstrably superior and articulated why in great detail -I have. If you mean I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that the genetic differences between groups are insurmountable in a heterogeneous polity – then I have. I If you mean separatism is the only method of preserving that civlization because of demographic disparities – yes it does.If you mean I want other than the best for all other people – no it doesn’t. If you mean to suggest that there is any better way of life for all people without imposing costs upon others, than low power distance of many small nation states is the optimum human order – then you err. PREMISE: our differences in demand for commons can only be ameliorated by political separation, and our satisfaction for goods services and information can be satisfied by international trade. This is a purely empirical statement. I can find no evidence in history to counter it. “All People Demonstrate Kin Selection and Kin Preference. All heterogeneous groups self sort, and in proximity come into conflict. So separate and Carry Your Own Weight”
-
Propertarianism Fits, but Sovereigntarianism and Rule of Law Fit Better.
Mar 28, 2020, 2:32 PM (in response to hate from a universalist libertarian)
—“Doolittle needs to come up with his own descriptor. By his own admission, Propertarianism no longer fits. He long ago abandoned any propertarian roots he may have had, denying any propositional aspects of human culture in favor of racial collectivism. A ludicrous course down a blind alley, easily exposed by observing the changes in European behavior effected by the Frankfurt School’s “long march through the institutions”.— Karl Brooks
If you mean I attack every sacred cow, and address every taboo in my search for the truth as a means of ending the current attack on western civilization – then that’s true. If you mean I am no longer a universalist – I never was. If you mean I ever denied the reality of human differences given the vast disparity in the size of the underclasses, and the vast evidence of racial competition in heterogeneous societies, or the failure of every heterogeneous society in history – I never did. If you mean by “propertarian” a system of measurement created by reducing all questions of social science to tests of property – I still am. If you mean I am a universal nationalist – I am. If you mean I have come to the conclusion that western civlization is demonstrably superior and articulated why in great detail -I have. If you mean I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that the genetic differences between groups are insurmountable in a heterogeneous polity – then I have. I If you mean separatism is the only method of preserving that civlization because of demographic disparities – yes it does.If you mean I want other than the best for all other people – no it doesn’t. If you mean to suggest that there is any better way of life for all people without imposing costs upon others, than low power distance of many small nation states is the optimum human order – then you err. PREMISE: our differences in demand for commons can only be ameliorated by political separation, and our satisfaction for goods services and information can be satisfied by international trade. This is a purely empirical statement. I can find no evidence in history to counter it. “All People Demonstrate Kin Selection and Kin Preference. All heterogeneous groups self sort, and in proximity come into conflict. So separate and Carry Your Own Weight”
-
So What’s Next?
Mar 29, 2020, 12:06 PM
—“So what’s next? Will secession and decentralization take root as the wave of the political future? Or are we facing even further entrenchment of the centralized state authoritarian paradigm?”— Josh Deel
It depends if you me and 1M other men make the choice. I’m going to make the choice. Will you make the choice???
—“How then to mobilize and move it forward? We need approx. 3-4% of the greater population to pull it off. No? Or could that number be revised downward in our given “opportunity” of circumstance(s)?”— Josh Deel
We’d need 10-100k to start it, 2M+ to force it. 3-4% to support it, and a quarter of the people to at least not resist it, and provide intel and cover. In simple terms if all the happy christians went to DC with a set of demands, and 1M of us are mobile elsewhere creating pressure then it’s over. But we have to offer a solution that at least 1/4 of the people will want. My view is more than half will want it. That’s enough. In other words, as I understand it, you cannot resist the P-constitution unless you want to impose irreciprocity on others. If you do then we have moral license to impose irreciprocity too. Question is. Can I tolerate producing a podcast to take this to market. Can john and the others take it down market. And can we make it popular enough a conversation (“help us build a new constitution”) that we can get the numbers above.
-
So What’s Next?
Mar 29, 2020, 12:06 PM
—“So what’s next? Will secession and decentralization take root as the wave of the political future? Or are we facing even further entrenchment of the centralized state authoritarian paradigm?”— Josh Deel
It depends if you me and 1M other men make the choice. I’m going to make the choice. Will you make the choice???
—“How then to mobilize and move it forward? We need approx. 3-4% of the greater population to pull it off. No? Or could that number be revised downward in our given “opportunity” of circumstance(s)?”— Josh Deel
We’d need 10-100k to start it, 2M+ to force it. 3-4% to support it, and a quarter of the people to at least not resist it, and provide intel and cover. In simple terms if all the happy christians went to DC with a set of demands, and 1M of us are mobile elsewhere creating pressure then it’s over. But we have to offer a solution that at least 1/4 of the people will want. My view is more than half will want it. That’s enough. In other words, as I understand it, you cannot resist the P-constitution unless you want to impose irreciprocity on others. If you do then we have moral license to impose irreciprocity too. Question is. Can I tolerate producing a podcast to take this to market. Can john and the others take it down market. And can we make it popular enough a conversation (“help us build a new constitution”) that we can get the numbers above.
-
How About Checks and Balances at The Top??
Mar 31, 2020, 10:40 PM First, there is very little federal government left. It consists almost exclusively of the military and treasury plus the insurer function of the treasury. The states are more like european states except that they share a military. (a) Monarchs are superior to presidents and prime ministers, prime ministers are superior to presidents, hired CEO’s are superior to prime ministers. Competing contractors are superior to bureaucracies. So Governors > Senate > Executives (Professional Cabinet) > Bureaucracies (Minimum) > Firms (maximum) (b) The checks and balances rely more on court (suits) against individuals and groups than on votes. After courts, then approval of federal appropriations. Appropriations are not pooled so they are more like payment plans. So there is no discretionary use of these fees. After that we have votes for our governors. Our governors (and governments) appoint senators. The only significant improvement would be an hereditary monarchy to overrule if something gets out of hand (think the present queen of England with more likely exercise of power.) The french really ruined government. The english had it right. Our experiment didn’t work as well as our enumerated rights in the constitution. So the P-constitutional amendments further enumerate rights and shift from the french vision of government back to the British. (classes).