State Corporatism is a conspiracy. Rule of Law, Monarchy, Market Commons, are just social science. -We had it right. Democracy was a failure
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-12 03:55:00 UTC
State Corporatism is a conspiracy. Rule of Law, Monarchy, Market Commons, are just social science. -We had it right. Democracy was a failure
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-12 03:55:00 UTC
Nomocracy = Rule of law, common law, natural law, for the purpose of preventing retaliation (feuds).
Anarchism = libertinism. For the purpose of justifying free riding.
That is the answer I come to no matter what I do.
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-10 13:49:00 UTC
Small things in large numbers have vast consequences. The west was designed for the noble. But we enfranchised all.
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-09 17:16:20 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/718850041755148288
Reply addressees: @bierlingm
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/718847872221978625
IN REPLY TO:
@bierlingm
@curtdoolittle Thanks, this makes sense. Via Negative pops up in so many places, it’s quite fascinating.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/718847872221978625
[I] am still stuck with the problem : 1) THE THREE CITIES a) The anglos had the right language mode (science), the right political model (rule of law common law), the right commons model (market for commons) but the wrong theory of man (equality),.
[I] am still stuck with the problem : 1) THE THREE CITIES a) The anglos had the right language mode (science), the right political model (rule of law common law), the right commons model (market for commons) but the wrong theory of man (equality),.
[T]he longer I work on the necessity of a judicial priesthood, the longer I study the Templars(bankers), the Inquisition(judges), the closer I come to the model I’m looking for. The problem is always paying for the initial stages. The first phase must produce sufficient confiscation that the men can be fed and armed. Yet wholesale predation on the islamic model (ISIS) is counter-productive.
[T]he longer I work on the necessity of a judicial priesthood, the longer I study the Templars(bankers), the Inquisition(judges), the closer I come to the model I’m looking for. The problem is always paying for the initial stages. The first phase must produce sufficient confiscation that the men can be fed and armed. Yet wholesale predation on the islamic model (ISIS) is counter-productive.
MORE ON RULE OF LAW IN UKRAINE
More feedback. There is nothing wrong with the law and everything wrong with the compensation for judges.
If there are 8000 judges in Ukraine, and the average salary is 500-1000 dollars per month, the only way to fix corruption is to make it undesirable to engage in it, plus to vicious use the journalists and independent prosecutors to police it.
That cost is roughly 8K average per judge per month or 750M per year. The problem is, that these judges would need to be paid and monitored by a third party of judges from the developed world for a period of 6-8 years.
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-09 06:45:00 UTC
The longer I work on the necessity of a judicial priesthood, the longer I study the Templars(bankers), the Inquisition(judges), the closer I come to the model I’m looking for. The problem is always paying for the initial stages. The first phase must produce sufficient confiscation that the men can be fed and armed. Yet wholesale predation on the islamic model (ISIS) is counter-productive.
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-08 11:19:00 UTC
I am still stuck with the problem that
1) THE THREE CITIES
a) The anglos had the right language mode (science), the right political model (rule of law common law), the right commons model (market for commons) but the wrong theory of man (equality),.
b) the germans had the wrong language model (literary rationalism), a typical political model (bibartate continental law), a typical commons model (decision by professional bureaucracy), and the right theory of man (hierarchy).
c) the jews had the wrong language model (legalistic pseudoscience), political model (propaganda), commons model (none), and the wrong theory of man (separatism)
2) THE PEDAGOGICAL VS THE DECIDABLE
The german model is one of regulation for the prevention of conflicts at the expense of innovation. The american is one of dispute resolution for the preservation of liberty in experimentation.
The german model of man is empirical while the anglo model is ideological – a superior german transition from aristocracy to bureaucracy.
The german model is pedagogical an literary (literary philosophy), and the anglo model is anti-pedagogical, and limited to dispute resolution..
The german model is to seek rational optimums while the american model is to use competition to discover optimums.
3) What troubles me is the success of the pedagogical german model in contrast to decideable anglo model. I am an anglo analytic philosopher. I know my function. But does that mean other authors will have to create pedagogical models of my work and that it is THEY who will be successful and not I?
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-08 08:07:00 UTC