Theme: Constitutional Order

  • Strict Construction Under Propertarianism

    (important) (law) (strict construction) [W]ith Propertarianism, strict construction of Law is possible. And not particularly difficult. The Structure of a Propertarian Law:

    • (whereas) Given some such means of involuntary transfer/free riding; (prohibition) We prohibit all such involuntary transfers; (assertion) And define these rights; (proof) By this reasoning; (falsification criteria) Until such time as the aforementioned means of involuntary transfer is no longer possible.
    Rule of Law We require only rule of law under the one law of cooperation – a prohibition on parasitism – administered by an independent judiciary, decided by jury, and enforced by sheriff’s with by same criteria. Assuming the Rights of Exit Rights of positive and negative association (organization) Right of nullification (by Jury of any scale: jury, house or senate, regional population) Right of Secession (by  individual, family, and Jury of any scale: jury, house or senate, regional population) Contractual Commons We require no legislature. We require only a formal market for the construction of commons by contract.
  • Strict Construction Under Propertarianism

    (important) (law) (strict construction) [W]ith Propertarianism, strict construction of Law is possible. And not particularly difficult. The Structure of a Propertarian Law:

    • (whereas) Given some such means of involuntary transfer/free riding; (prohibition) We prohibit all such involuntary transfers; (assertion) And define these rights; (proof) By this reasoning; (falsification criteria) Until such time as the aforementioned means of involuntary transfer is no longer possible.
    Rule of Law We require only rule of law under the one law of cooperation – a prohibition on parasitism – administered by an independent judiciary, decided by jury, and enforced by sheriff’s with by same criteria. Assuming the Rights of Exit Rights of positive and negative association (organization) Right of nullification (by Jury of any scale: jury, house or senate, regional population) Right of Secession (by  individual, family, and Jury of any scale: jury, house or senate, regional population) Contractual Commons We require no legislature. We require only a formal market for the construction of commons by contract.
  • The Institutions of Nomocracy (Rule of Law)

    [I]nstitutions:
    The People : A partnership of reciprocal insurance including every living soul in the polity.
    The Militia : Defense and Emergency Services
    The Military : Defense, Strategy, Offense.
    The Judiciary : The Common Organic Law
    The Houses of the Commons : Production of Commons
    The Treasury (The corporation that manages shares of stock as money)
    The Academy : Education
    The Monarchy : A family whose head has veto over the houses of the Commons.

    Source: Curt Doolittle

  • The Institutions of Nomocracy (Rule of Law)

    [I]nstitutions:
    The People : A partnership of reciprocal insurance including every living soul in the polity.
    The Militia : Defense and Emergency Services
    The Military : Defense, Strategy, Offense.
    The Judiciary : The Common Organic Law
    The Houses of the Commons : Production of Commons
    The Treasury (The corporation that manages shares of stock as money)
    The Academy : Education
    The Monarchy : A family whose head has veto over the houses of the Commons.

    Source: Curt Doolittle

  • Libertarian: Aristocratic Egalitarian Nomocratic Classical Liberal

    [A]RISTOCRATIC (rule by best) EGALITARIAN (open to all)  NOMOCRACTIC (rule of law) CLASSICAL LIBERAL (divisions into houses representing classes ) AND THEREFORE LIBERTARIAN (an advocate for institutional liberty.. My point in writing this is that I’m not a ‘white nationalist’. I’m a universal nationalist. A higher-tribalist. An advocate for truth, science, and nomocracy; for the market production of commons. What does that mean?

    It means that we can choose a spectrum between a corporations resulting in castes, or nations (extended families) resulting in aristocracy. But we will never achieve equality. It’s impossible because we are too vastly unequal to one another in value to one another (capability). It is our lower classes that cannot merge. Our aristocracies are, and must be global. But bringing our lower classes – reliant on one another – to capital, and particularly to normative and institutional capital, is suicidal. Our differences are expressed by our lower classes. our similarities by our upper classes. Yet our upper classes can only obtain status (and status can only be widely manufactured by positive (non consumptive) means, if there are many nations, with many aristocrats. Aristocracy gains its status signals from raising its people from one state and one distribution to another state and another distribution. Otherwise they are just parasites on their own people. So I advocate universal aristocracy. Universal tribalism. Universal familialism. And as such I am an anti-corporatist in both private and public institutions. To no small degree, I view the emphasis on signaling via consumption and the offloading of underclasses to more developed nations, as a total abdication of aristocratic responsibility for the parental development of their civilizations.

    Source: Curt Doolittle

  • Libertarian: Aristocratic Egalitarian Nomocratic Classical Liberal

    [A]RISTOCRATIC (rule by best) EGALITARIAN (open to all)  NOMOCRACTIC (rule of law) CLASSICAL LIBERAL (divisions into houses representing classes ) AND THEREFORE LIBERTARIAN (an advocate for institutional liberty.. My point in writing this is that I’m not a ‘white nationalist’. I’m a universal nationalist. A higher-tribalist. An advocate for truth, science, and nomocracy; for the market production of commons. What does that mean?

    It means that we can choose a spectrum between a corporations resulting in castes, or nations (extended families) resulting in aristocracy. But we will never achieve equality. It’s impossible because we are too vastly unequal to one another in value to one another (capability). It is our lower classes that cannot merge. Our aristocracies are, and must be global. But bringing our lower classes – reliant on one another – to capital, and particularly to normative and institutional capital, is suicidal. Our differences are expressed by our lower classes. our similarities by our upper classes. Yet our upper classes can only obtain status (and status can only be widely manufactured by positive (non consumptive) means, if there are many nations, with many aristocrats. Aristocracy gains its status signals from raising its people from one state and one distribution to another state and another distribution. Otherwise they are just parasites on their own people. So I advocate universal aristocracy. Universal tribalism. Universal familialism. And as such I am an anti-corporatist in both private and public institutions. To no small degree, I view the emphasis on signaling via consumption and the offloading of underclasses to more developed nations, as a total abdication of aristocratic responsibility for the parental development of their civilizations.

    Source: Curt Doolittle

  • WE DON’T NEED A MONOPOLY PRODUCER OF COMMONS. WE NEED A MARKET FOR COMMONS AND R

    WE DON’T NEED A MONOPOLY PRODUCER OF COMMONS. WE NEED A MARKET FOR COMMONS AND RULE OF LAW

    (worth repeating) (edited for clarity)

    The state under rule of law, is a monopoly. But any complete and internally consistent logic that is also externally correspondent, existentially possible, and objectively moral, is a monopolistic definition, by necessity. So it’s interesting that if law is scientifically constructed then it’s a monopoly by consequence of logical necessity, not choice.

    The ‘state’ under rule of law is just the body of law and the institutional process of applying it by the judiciary. It’s a tool for the resolution of disputes only. or more precisely, for the suppression of parasitism.

    The ‘government’ under Propertarianism is close to a misnomer. A Propertarian government cannot make laws, only contracts. As such functions as a market for the production of commons. In that market, we can construct contracts between peoples willing to conduct exchanges. In assenting to those contracts, you don’t have to agree with another person or group’s proposition – there is no need for your approval, so your assent can’t be ‘bought’. Instead, you can only dissent by stating how it’s an imposition of costs upon those who don’t want it, and that accusation must stand legal (Propertarian) scrutiny. Just as any other person in any other walk of life can object to the imposition of costs.

    There is no need for monopoly production of commons. And therefore no need for majority rule. All laws are produced outside of the ‘government’ (commons builders). The only monopoly necessary is that of the law, just as the only monopoly in the logic of relations is mathematics. And that monopoly is purely logical.

    So there is no need to create a parasitic monopoly bureaucracy for the production of commons.

    a) politicians are parasitic.

    b) the bureaucracy is parasitic,

    c) the industrial rent seekers are parasitic.

    d) the redistribution seekers are parasitic.

    BUT

    To civilize man (suppress his free riding,and force him to produce in the market to survive) we create central bureaucracies that suppress family and local rents, then centralize rents, and use those profits to pay to civilize man and to eliminate the local middlemen.

    To further civilize man we now eliminate the central bureaucracy and rely entirely on the common interests in suppressing the emergence of statism (monopoly) using rule of law., under the common law, under the total prohibition on parasitism, directly or indirectly, by positive expression of property rights.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-12 04:27:00 UTC

  • Without Propertarianism strict construction of law ( operational ism in law) is

    Without Propertarianism strict construction of law ( operational ism in law) is not possible.

    With Propertarianism strict construction is possible.

    And not particularly difficult.

    “Given this means of involuntary transfer/free riding,

    We prohibit such transfers,

    And define these rights,

    By this reasoning,

    Until such time as the aforementioned means of involuntary transfer is no longer possible.”

    We require no legislature. We require only a formal market for the construction of commons by contract.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-10 03:41:00 UTC

  • NOMOCRATIC INSTUTUTIONS The People : A partnership of reciprocal insurance inclu

    NOMOCRATIC INSTUTUTIONS

    The People : A partnership of reciprocal insurance including every living soul in the polity.

    The Militia : Defense and Emergency Services

    The Military : Defense, Strategy, Offense.

    The Judiciary : The Common Organic Law

    The Houses of the Commons : Production of Commons

    The Treasury (The corporation that manages shares of stock as money)

    The Academy : Education

    The Monarchy : A family whose head has veto over the houses of the Commons.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-07 04:41:00 UTC

  • “Second Amendment is intended to defend against “the supreme power of a corrupt

    —“Second Amendment is intended to defend against “the supreme power of a corrupt and abusive government.”—


    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-02 06:09:00 UTC