Theme: Cooperation

  • MORALITY: THERE IS NOTHING COMPLEX TO UNDERSTAND. The use of morality outgroup i

    MORALITY: THERE IS NOTHING COMPLEX TO UNDERSTAND.

    The use of morality outgroup is only one of utility.

    The only moral imperative ingroup is reciprocity

    The only moral choice ingroup is christian tolerance and charity within the limits of that tolerance.

    Nothing else need be said.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-01 14:52:00 UTC

  • by Luke Weinhagen “Axioms”, like “First principles”, are a common property. You

    by Luke Weinhagen

    “Axioms”, like “First principles”, are a common property. You can not define them without the concept “we”. It is a contradiction to build an ideology that denies commons on a foundation of commons. This foundation is what libertarianism scavenges from ideologies that invest in and defend those properties.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-03-31 15:47:00 UTC

  • “Curt. So what does your utopia look like? And upon what moral axiom is it const

    —“Curt. So what does your utopia look like? And upon what moral axiom is it constructed? The materialized Doolittle system, not the P methodology of coexistence.”—Gideon Green

    1. I don’t do utopia. I do the incremental improvement of the group strategy of the european peoples: sovereignty, reciprocity tested by the natural law of tort (demonstrated interest).

    2. Axioms are arbitrary. Laws are identified. Reciprocity is the natural law necessary for any creatures that can voluntarily cooperate and choose from fields of opportunities for voluntary cooperation, within the limits of survivability.

    3. The natural law is Sovereignty and Reciprocity, including speech (truthful speech) regardless of cost, within the limits of proportionality (ingroup defection) within the limits of the utility of cooperation (outgroups). This is the counter-intuitive reduction of western civilization.

    4. The extension of the natural law of reciprocity is the exhaustion of forgiveness (optimum solution to the prisoner’s dilemma) before retaliation, restitution, punishment, and prevention, with prevention escalating to extermination. (this is the counter-intuitive reduction of christianity).

    5. The resulting markets in everything: association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, polities, elites, and war. With the competition between elites maintained by tripartism: judge law, aristocratic military, and faith.

    6 The hierarchy of institutions the Law, the monarch as a judge of last resort, the cabinet, the house of nobility(territory), the house of industry (commons), and the house of the family (church), and the universal militia of every able bodied man.

    7. The principle enhancements of the P-constitution, are amendements to the English, British, American constitutions, that correct the weaknesses of those constitutions under the industrialization of lying of the 20th, by the marxists, postmodernists, feminists, and HBD-Denialists (political correctness) that are a revolt against the darwinian revolution that explained the reason for western success: rapid, adaptive excellence and the suppression of the reproduction of the underclass for the purposes of directing surpluses to the production of commons instead – because of the disproportionate returns on commons, including heroism, excellence, beauty, discipline, trust, truthful speech regardless of cost – and of course the institutions of sovereignty and reciprocity regardless of status assuming one does his duty of preservation of all of the above.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-03-30 20:38:00 UTC

  • “SO BASICALLY, THAT’S WHY WE LIVE IN A WORLD OF COOPERATION, TRADE, AND WAR” by

    “SO BASICALLY, THAT’S WHY WE LIVE IN A WORLD OF COOPERATION, TRADE, AND WAR”

    by Scott Strong

    So basically all of these schools of thought and socioeconomic systems fail because they fail to take into account the sober reality of humankind’s innate animal selfishness and super-predatory nature, AND that individual and group differences in worldview, intelligence, culture create vastly different preferences.

    So there is no universal moral imperative that will satisfy all people. Which is why we live in a world of cooperation, trade, and war.

    Things would have probably been sorted out by now but certain parasites gain way too much wealth, power, and influence by promoting and profiteering off of lies and divisions, while they reap the benefits of the innovations produced and not the people.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-03-29 17:32:00 UTC

  • Parasitic. We are apex predators, apex innovators, apex producers, and in partic

    Parasitic. We are apex predators, apex innovators, apex producers, and in particular, apex producers of commons. They are apex parasites on the commons. It’s an easily fixable problem by reforming the law to prohibit their means of parasitism – not just by them but by anyone.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-03-29 14:25:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1244269411030138882

    Reply addressees: @LLaddon

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1244268764591542272

  • Compare with the arabs who can’t organize anything outside the family, organize

    Compare with the arabs who can’t organize anything outside the family, organize a corporation, or a military without endemic low trust, free riding, and rent seeking.

    Compare with the jews who restrict commons to the ingroup families and the expense of the host group.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-03-26 15:53:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1243204403080953860

    Reply addressees: @DuchesneRicardo

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1243203903501602816


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @DuchesneRicardo So europeans extended the family INTO THE COMMONS and that is why we can produce commons as our competitive advantage -and other people can’t.

    The weakness is it doesn’t scale, because accountability doesn’t scale. As such we need to maintain low power distance – small states.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1243203903501602816

  • So europeans extended the family INTO THE COMMONS and that is why we can produce

    So europeans extended the family INTO THE COMMONS and that is why we can produce commons as our competitive advantage -and other people can’t.

    The weakness is it doesn’t scale, because accountability doesn’t scale. As such we need to maintain low power distance – small states.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-03-26 15:51:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1243203903501602816

    Reply addressees: @DuchesneRicardo

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1243201237916495872


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @DuchesneRicardo As recently as my grandmother’s generation children moved between households to help raise children, work on farms, work in trades, with Maine’s example of fall school recess for picking potatoes still extant – hence continuous near breeding but not inbreeding.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1243201237916495872

  • As recently as my grandmother’s generation children moved between households to

    As recently as my grandmother’s generation children moved between households to help raise children, work on farms, work in trades, with Maine’s example of fall school recess for picking potatoes still extant – hence continuous near breeding but not inbreeding.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-03-26 15:40:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1243201237916495872

    Reply addressees: @DuchesneRicardo

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1243200409923194885


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @DuchesneRicardo India used a similar strategy but with castes fulfilling roles instead of relative equality within nobility or commoners. Hence their difficulty in modernization. They lack authoritarian human capital reorganization of the chinese, and market reorganization like the europeans.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1243200409923194885

  • The theory is old and imprecise. Western families developed precursors to civil

    The theory is old and imprecise. Western families developed precursors to civil societies, and corporations – employing each other’s children, each other, and specializing in different crafts – an extended family where everyone nearby was kin, employee, AND customer:high trust.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-03-26 15:33:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1243199316220620801

    Reply addressees: @DuchesneRicardo

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1243176252749557760

  • Not that I’m disagreeing but I’m not sure what you’re referring to. Imputation?

    Not that I’m disagreeing but I’m not sure what you’re referring to. Imputation? Stickiness? Preservation of sustainable networks of specialization and trade? idealization of the commodity to signaling scale? The neutrality/non of money? The time between supply change and prices?


    Source date (UTC): 2020-03-22 18:43:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1241797576447397890

    Reply addressees: @Lord_Keynes2

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1241710612800917506