Theme: Constitutional Order

  • DISAMBIGUATING P FOR MASS CONSUMPTION? How do we disambiguate P-Method, P-Law, a

    DISAMBIGUATING P FOR MASS CONSUMPTION?

    How do we disambiguate P-Method, P-Law, and a P-Constitution Template, and P-Constitutions for Each Polity?

    0. The system of thought we call propertarianism – that would be better called ‘natural law’ or ‘Testmonialism’ – is a methodology that completes the sciences by completing the transformation of traditional philosophical categories of metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, politics, and aesthetics as well as the pseudo-sciences of psychology, sociology, and political science into a single science with a uniform fully commensurable operational vocabulary and logic. Where “Operational” might be better stated in philosophical terms “realism, naturalism, operationalism (human actions).

    1. With this uniformity provides the ability to write constitution and law in value-neutral prose fully commensurable across all peoples, all, disciplines and all contexts.

    2. We can write any constitution for any people using any group strategy in this P-law – as long as we state it under realism, naturalism, operationalism, sovereignty, and reciprocity – where reciprocity includes testimonial speech.

    3. The only unique properties of a P-law constitution are (a) the suppression of false and ir-reciprocal speech, (b) operational and technical language that prohibits misinterpretation, interpretation, and arbitrary extension.

    4. Using P-method, and P-law, I wrote the The P-consitution as a template for a flexible government that varies from authoritarian to market to redistributive dependent upon circumstances that create demand for different government, and it includes a set of options for government from authoritarian or authoritarian monarchy to multi-house social democracy, and everything in between.

    5. The P-Constitution for the USA is tailored for the problems of the Anglo Civilization (UK, USA, Canada, and Australia-NZ), and I would need to tailor one for western Europe, eastern europe (Intermarium), and one for Russia. But it’s possible to write one for any and every civilization in entirely truthful terms – and there is little reason to do otherwise, since each civilization survives by competing on its terms, and its terms can be stated truthfully (realism, naturalism, operationalism, testimonialism).


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-21 11:37:00 UTC

  • “What about the Military under P?”– The P constitution preserves the federal mi

    —“What about the Military under P?”–

    The P constitution preserves the federal military system for the simple reasons that (a) we need to prevent hostiles taking territory on this… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=489042168359345&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-20 22:20:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1186044544057593856

  • “I’m in the Marines, I’m a ri–t winger. If we were to boogaloo will there be et

    —“I’m in the Marines, I’m a ri–t winger. If we were to boogaloo will there be ethnic separation in propertarianism? Please answer honestly.”— Tyler Granberry

    No. Period. Honestly, Truthfully. (I will get a ton of sh-t for saying that from the WN crowd.)

    There is a right of voluntary DISASSOCIATION as well as ASSOCIATION meaning everyone can create new identitarian neighborhoods, villages, cities, counties, sure, because under P we can’t prohibit that VOLUNTARY association and Disassociation. Just as we can’t make bakers bake cakes they don’t agree with. Just like we can’t prohibit men from forming men’s clubs again. Just like we can’t prohibit people from forming their own group banks, own group biases. In other words we end INVOLUNTARY integration at the local level. (If you know your history, and if know the failure of force integration pretty much everywhere except the military, the 60’s destroyed the formation of the african american middle class and elites.

    That said, P constitution proposes a (libertarian) COMPROMISE that if unmet, escalates to POLITICIDE against the left and the use of undermining by competing ideologies, philosophies, religions and interest groups. It converts the left wing immigrant cities into city states, and removes the government from social policy, and restores it to an insurer of last resort. I suspect that we will see the formation of a small number of local polities that like the amish, the evangelicals, or the white nationalists, want to maintain cultural isolationism by a majority middle class. But the state cannot interfere eithe way. I expect that we will have major cities maintain the high and low versus the middle. I tend to look at black-white relations in the south, vs the north and the differences are rather obvious. Family is family in the south. Politics and political parties and ideology in the northeast. And hostility in southern california and new york.

    What we *DO* threaten is an escalation IF left and right cannot pursue their separate political interests in their local polities. In other words, if the left resists we promise to escalate. I think I’ve said it as political separation is a good thing, politicide is a good thing at the federal level, ethnocide if it escalates, and genocide if it escalates, so let’s do the ‘everybody wins’ scenario and devlove the ‘imperial’ federal government’s rule over other than conflict in property between the states to state, city – state, county, local level. And get out of the business of coercing each other.

    But you can search my ten years of posts on P and the site and all you’ll see is libertarian solutions and “I don’t do racism, I do classism, and it’s class sizes that cause the problem not race, and if we can produce commons and rules and norms suitable to our populations we will all stop having conflict over them.” Ie: it worked in the past just fine. It will work now just fine. people are the same the world over in this regard.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-20 18:42:00 UTC

  • “What about the Military under P?”– The P constitution preserves the federal mi

    —“What about the Military under P?”–

    The P constitution preserves the federal military system for the simple reasons that (a) we need to prevent hostiles taking territory on this continent (b) military is the only organization the benefits tremendously from scale.

    We also push forward military reforms like the light infantry proposal, limiting constraints on rules of engagement, limiting punishments for lapses of judgement during conflict; fully separating the Marines, cultural remasculinization, competitive pay, mixing civilian contract military service personnel,and detaching compensation from rank, restoring military R&D, skipping a generation and moving out of policing and into pure defense of our citizens anywhere in the world, trade route, territorial, population and asset defense, and giving the military full license so that they are rarely used, but if they are, they are terrifying.

    In addition the military gets a ‘house’ in congress and all in all restores the state-military-industrial complex over the state-academy-media complex. Honestly it’s very hard for the military to disagree with our proposal.

    P is a reform on the scale of the roman reforms.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-20 18:20:00 UTC

  • We don’t need to protect western civilisation from anyone as much as solipsistic

    We don’t need to protect western civilisation from anyone as much as solipsistic psychotic women here at home. Repeal the nineteenth and all is settled.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-20 14:22:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185924296478248960

    Reply addressees: @LadyAodh

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185923825235562506


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @LadyAodh Did you know that about a third of women have some form of mental illness? That the spectrum of female to male brain structure is psychotic to autistic? That hyper solipsistic empathising is borderline psychotic? And that moralising doesn’t scale or account for costs?

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1185923825235562506


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @LadyAodh Did you know that about a third of women have some form of mental illness? That the spectrum of female to male brain structure is psychotic to autistic? That hyper solipsistic empathising is borderline psychotic? And that moralising doesn’t scale or account for costs?

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1185923825235562506

  • “ROBOT JUDGES” (from elsewhere) I have worked on automating legal argument since

    “ROBOT JUDGES”
    (from elsewhere)

    I have worked on automating legal argument since we wrote ipx drivers by hand, and was certainly one of the first people to do it for every federal court. I… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=488343851762510&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-20 01:54:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185735930537267200

  • “I think only that the constitution and the law can be restored to pre-postmoder

    —“I think only that the constitution and the law can be restored to pre-postmodern, pre-marxist, pre-civil war terms, as a federal government limited to the adjudication of differences in… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=488149368448625&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-19 19:42:07 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185642301881815040

  • I think only that the constitution and the law can be restored to pre-marxist, p

    I think only that the constitution and the law can be restored to pre-marxist, pre-postmodern, pre-civil war terms, as a federal government limited to the adjudication of differences in material property between the states, where hostile cities converted to city states.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-19 19:37:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185641029145419776

    Reply addressees: @PaulB76720253 @irenaissancemn

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185639782417874945


    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/1185639782417874945

  • “I think only that the constitution and the law can be restored to pre-postmoder

    —“I think only that the constitution and the law can be restored to pre-postmodern, pre-marxist, pre-civil war terms, as a federal government limited to the defense of the states, and to the adjudication of differences in material property between the states, and where hostile cities are involuntarily converted to city states, and where all local norm, custom, and tradition is determined by at the local level, and only investment at the state. … And I absolutely positively without question know how to do it – because the alternative for the “Left” is so terrible they will agree rather than risk it. That is why have confidence – I am very slow and deliberate and thorough, but I am very, very, good at what I do. It will take 1/3 of 1% of our males to make it happen, and it will happen quickly. And frankly we will hope the enemy resists – because “—


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-19 15:42:00 UTC

  • THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, EQUALITY CLAUSE A look into the thoughts of Tho

    THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, EQUALITY CLAUSE

    A look into the thoughts of Thomas Jefferson

    By JWarren Prescott

    The declaration of independence’ equality clause refers to the equality of self-evident, unalienable (natural) rights among people – it does not mean anything beyond that.

    Natural rights of namely, Life, Liberty and Property. (and those rights derived from these such as self-preservation and defense)

    It does not mean that men and women should earn the same amount for the same work. It does not mean that we should initiate social reforms to assure affirmative action or racial quotas. And, it certainly does not mean that everyone is gonna get (or entitled to) the same opportunities as your neighbor. These are not rights, but they are coercion for resources.

    Jefferson was was very precise with his language and wrote the Declaration of Independence to make the case to england about the philosophical justification for secession and independence. he anticipated the counter argument from the royalist perspective, i.e. the divine right of kings.

    This is why he when to the philosophical basis of rights and that is natural law – in this natural state, there is no distinction of race, class or status. John Locke and Hobbes were influential in Jefferson’s thoughts on this.

    I would also say that Jefferson was shaking with fear as he was writing to the King. England was just about the strongest nation in the world and here is Jefferson assigned the duty to word a document in just the right way to make a logical and reasonable case and not be hung at the post…. Class, race or sex was the furthest thing from his mind.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-12 13:42:00 UTC