[M]onarchy (which is a purely christian european order, in which kings are crowned by the church, as an insurer of their fitness), has been limited by traditional (indo european then germanic law) of individual sovereignty, interpersonal reciprocity, truthful testimony, promise, and contract. Russian Tzars had dictatorial power, European monarchs did not. Roman and Greek did not. The rest of the world has some version of chieftain, headman, ruler, but they do not have traditional european law of tort, trespass, property, or what we call natural law. As far as I know we had the optimum form of government evolve in england, with a strong monarchy, a strong parliament as a jury negotiating the monarchy’s requests for money and policy, a house of industry (lords) as a supreme court, and a church for matters of family and society not matters of state. Unfortunately the church did not reform itself into a benevolent house government of natural law, nor did the state force it to, because the malinvestment by the church in it’s supernatural dogma was impossible to overcome. And so we both failed to add a house of ‘the family’ for labor and the underclasses, ad the church fell out of public policy. This resulted in parliaments and houses of government eventually subject to mob (underclass) rule and the frauds, sophists and pseudoscientists who made those classes false promises. If we maintained houses for the classes, and one for women, then we would be able to conduct trades (parliament = parley-ment = parley = negotiating conflicts) between the classes and genders rather than conduct all out propaganda wars in public in an attempt to get the most ignorant to side with one class or the other. As far as I can tell, a monarchy hiring and firing aristocracy to rule the state under that natural law, traditional law, indo european law of trespass, tort, property, combined with christian tolerance and charity) is the optimum form of government. My opinion is that we need only retain voting by direct vote, by economic contribution, when the monarchy wishes to raise taxes (revenues), and that those revenues be directed to stated purposes, not under discretion of the monarchy, and then some constant portion of revenues left to the monarchy to use at its discretion for the development of high commons (beautiful things). And so, we will now either add houses or lose participatory government altogether – as predicted.
Theme: Constitutional Order
-
“WHAT IS YOUR OPINION OF MONARCHY”— Monarchy (which is a purely christian euro
—“WHAT IS YOUR OPINION OF MONARCHY”—
Monarchy (which is a purely christian european order, in which kings are crowned by the church, as an insurer of their fitness), has been limited by traditional (indo european then germanic law) of individual sovereignty, interpersonal reciprocity, truthful testimony, promise, and contract.
Russian Tzars had dictatorial power,
European monarchs did not.
Roman and Greek did not.
The rest of the world has some version of chieftain, headman, ruler, but they do not have traditional european law of tort, trespass, property, or what we call natural law.
As far as I know we had the optimum form of government evolve in england, with a strong monarchy, a strong parliament as a jury negotiating the monarchy’s requests for money and policy, a house of industry (lords) as a supreme court, and a church for matters of family and society not matters of state.
Unfortunately the church did not reform itself into a benevolent house government of natural law, nor did the state force it to, because the malinvestment by the church in it’s supernatural dogma was impossible to overcome. And so we both failed to add a house of ‘the family’ for labor and the underclasses, ad the church fell out of public policy. This resulted in parliaments and houses of government eventually subject to mob (underclass) rule and the frauds, sophists and pseudoscientists who made those classes false promises.
If we maintained houses for the classes, and one for women, then we would be able to conduct trades (parliament = parley-ment = parley = negotiating conflicts) between the classes and genders rather than conduct all out propaganda wars in public in an attempt to get the most ignorant to side with one class or the other.
As far as I can tell, a monarchy hiring and firing aristocracy to rule the state under that natural law, traditional law, indo european law of trespass, tort, property, combined with christian tolerance and charity) is the optimum form of government. My opinion is that we need only retain voting by direct vote, by economic contribution, when the monarchy wishes to raise taxes (revenues), and that those revenues be directed to stated purposes, not under discretion of the monarchy, and then some constant portion of revenues left to the monarchy to use at its discretion for the development of high commons (beautiful things).
And so, we will now either add houses or lose participatory goverment altogether – as predicted.
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-25 10:42:00 UTC
-
We offered to take over the payroll of the Ukrainian Judiciary (about 10k people
We offered to take over the payroll of the Ukrainian Judiciary (about 10k people) in order to force rule of law into the country (that’s what was needed and I repeated it regularly in every media outlet possible). But the oligarchs and government wouldn’t have it. Issue remains.
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-24 17:30:25 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176549459490213889
Reply addressees: @karlbykarlsmith
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176548969968799744
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@karlbykarlsmith I suspect that if past patterns of behavior follow, Trump was aware of Fox News investigation and simply went directly to the source and asked the obvious. Holding money from ukraine is a daily activity. I live here. It’s corrupt as hell. Money disappears into pockets instantly.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1176548969968799744
IN REPLY TO:
@curtdoolittle
@karlbykarlsmith I suspect that if past patterns of behavior follow, Trump was aware of Fox News investigation and simply went directly to the source and asked the obvious. Holding money from ukraine is a daily activity. I live here. It’s corrupt as hell. Money disappears into pockets instantly.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1176548969968799744
-
Um. Duels are only used for the solution of interpersonal disputes that cannot b
Um. Duels are only used for the solution of interpersonal disputes that cannot be settled by the court (ie: dependent upon testimony alone). People who are problematic for the GROUP are just eliminated by the group. It’s numbers of opposition that keep men moral.
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-24 16:11:44 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176529660643106818
Reply addressees: @Gyeff
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176526763549175810
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/1176526763549175810
-
PLEASE ACCELERATE – GIVE US IMPEACHMENT —“It is not clear what law, if any, Tr
PLEASE ACCELERATE – GIVE US IMPEACHMENT
—“It is not clear what law, if any, Trump would have broken by urging the Ukrainian government to re-open the case. The alleged “whistleblower” in the case did not hear his conversations with Ukrainian leaders directly, and the Wall Street Journal has suggested there was no quid pro quo — that Trump did not offer (or withhold) anything in return.”—-
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-23 22:58:00 UTC
-
Access to political power creates risk. Democracy creates access to political po
Access to political power creates risk. Democracy creates access to political power. Rule of law and monarchy denies access to political power and forces all of us to limit ourselves to seeking status in the markets.
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-23 21:37:45 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176249317151137792
Reply addressees: @StefanMolyneux
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176247199048577026
IN REPLY TO:
@StefanMolyneux
Places I’ve needed constant security and faced bomb/death threats for giving a speech:
– Canada
– America
– Australia
– New Zealand
Places where I have not needed security and have been able to a have spontaneous peaceful meetups:
– Poland
– Hong Kong
Why? What is the diff?Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176247199048577026
-
Rule of Law vs Government – Deconflation
Rule of Law vs Government – Deconflation https://propertarianism.com/2019/09/23/rule-of-law-vs-government-deconflation/
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-23 12:53:27 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176117372773703681
-
Rule of Law vs Government – Deconflation
[R]ule of Law is Rule of Law ( prohibitions, via-negativa ) regardless of the form of Government (actions, requirements, via-positiva). The only necessary function of law is the resolution of disputes. The only necessary function of government is the production of commons. In a democracy individuals vote on those commons recommended by whom? A king? A bureaucracy? Any proposed by anyone? In a republic, individuals vote for representatives who then vote on those commons. Dictator/Monarchy, Cabinet, (Representatives) Bureaucracy, People. European Parliaments like thangs and juries were originally juries, where the monarchy would petition local landowners (businesspeople) if they wished to tax them for some purpose or not. The battle over via negativa control Rule of Law vs Rule by DIscretion), and the limits of exception on rule of law vs rule by discretion, and the distribution of via-positiva rule between monarch(nation)/dictator(empire), oligarchy/parliament (intermediary between state and people), and the people, has continued. As far as I know the form of government is dependent upon the demographic distribution of the people (relative sizes of the classes), their state of development (size of the middle classes), scale of territory, and hostility and competitiveness of neighbors. If we want an ideal government – at least, the one possible by man – we probably had it: small homogenous nation states, rule of law by the natural (necessary) law of reciprocity (tort, trespass), an hereditary monarch as judge of last resort, a cabinet of professionals acting largely as venture capitalists, a small professional bureaucracy, preferably trained in the aristocratic (private secular), church or confucian model from youth. Via Negativa voting by the people in matters of taxation. And (what is causing most of our 19th-20thc problems) universal standing before the court in matters of the commons. This creates a political market for commons, a productive market for goods services and information, and a juridical market for prosecution of ir-reciprocity regardless of whether private or public.
-
Rule of Law vs Government – Deconflation
[R]ule of Law is Rule of Law ( prohibitions, via-negativa ) regardless of the form of Government (actions, requirements, via-positiva). The only necessary function of law is the resolution of disputes. The only necessary function of government is the production of commons. In a democracy individuals vote on those commons recommended by whom? A king? A bureaucracy? Any proposed by anyone? In a republic, individuals vote for representatives who then vote on those commons. Dictator/Monarchy, Cabinet, (Representatives) Bureaucracy, People. European Parliaments like thangs and juries were originally juries, where the monarchy would petition local landowners (businesspeople) if they wished to tax them for some purpose or not. The battle over via negativa control Rule of Law vs Rule by DIscretion), and the limits of exception on rule of law vs rule by discretion, and the distribution of via-positiva rule between monarch(nation)/dictator(empire), oligarchy/parliament (intermediary between state and people), and the people, has continued. As far as I know the form of government is dependent upon the demographic distribution of the people (relative sizes of the classes), their state of development (size of the middle classes), scale of territory, and hostility and competitiveness of neighbors. If we want an ideal government – at least, the one possible by man – we probably had it: small homogenous nation states, rule of law by the natural (necessary) law of reciprocity (tort, trespass), an hereditary monarch as judge of last resort, a cabinet of professionals acting largely as venture capitalists, a small professional bureaucracy, preferably trained in the aristocratic (private secular), church or confucian model from youth. Via Negativa voting by the people in matters of taxation. And (what is causing most of our 19th-20thc problems) universal standing before the court in matters of the commons. This creates a political market for commons, a productive market for goods services and information, and a juridical market for prosecution of ir-reciprocity regardless of whether private or public.
-
RT @MartianHoplite: It’s time to face the fact that the Constitution didn’t work
RT @MartianHoplite: It’s time to face the fact that the Constitution didn’t work. It’s not “our fault” for not enforcing it. It starts off…
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-23 01:03:15 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1175938643132919808