Theme: Cooperation

  • THE IRONY OF UNIVERSAL EQUALITARIANISM The irony of universal equalitarianism is

    THE IRONY OF UNIVERSAL EQUALITARIANISM

    The irony of universal equalitarianism is that it makes us all enemies. Conversely, nationalism makes us all family or trading partners.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-18 12:09:00 UTC

  • Or determining consensus and cooperation vs conflict and dispute resolution

    Or determining consensus and cooperation vs conflict and dispute resolution


    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-18 11:45:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/755005452648316928

    Reply addressees: @excarcini @garrettlgray @Wasian_NRx @DonRadolf @jordanbpeterson

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/754819726644158464


    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/754819726644158464

  • MAYBE SOME PEOPLE CATCH ON = BUT OTHERS DONT: UNITY BY TRADE. (important) I have

    MAYBE SOME PEOPLE CATCH ON = BUT OTHERS DONT: UNITY BY TRADE.

    (important)

    I have to continue to crush the Rothbardian fallacy just like I have to continue to crush the neocon fallacy, and the postmodern fallacy. The socialist fallacy has been crushed. And we are in the process of crushing the Keynesian fallacy and the democratic fallacy.

    But to unite libertarians both artisanal, bourgeoisie and martial, I have to kill off the competing lies. Why? because the truth is uncomfortable for each of us. But it is only the truth that illustrates our common goals, and the high cost we must each pay to create liberty by the organized use of violence to deny it to others.

    And in that organization we must understand we must each sacrifice class perfection in order to achieve class maximum good: the artisan, the bourgeoisie, and the martial must limit their gains to that which imposes no cost upon the other two.

    To be an army we must obey the natural law discovered by warriors: impose no cost upon your brothers.

    We insure one another’s property. All of it. In every form. That which one expends his life’s efforts upon determines his investment in his property. The scale of that investment is not determined by his efforts, but by its value to others in providing incentives to change state of the universe from the current condition to one more favorable.

    So between effort and scale we know value exists. But even if we have difficulty measuring it other than by comparison, that value is never zero, and as such must be respected.

    This is the reciprocal exchange of insurance of property between warriors that creates the institution of property and if sufficiently rigorous, the condition of liberty.

    And no other means exists by which to construct either.

    Liberty cannot be obtained by permission, only by construction.

    Curt Doolittle

    the Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-17 05:06:00 UTC

  • Proximity decreases opportunity costs. We can also argue that as a consequence o

    Proximity decreases opportunity costs. We can also argue that as a consequence of reduced opportunity costs we can create opportunities otherwise impossible.

    And as a consequence we compete to discover and homestead those opportunities.

    We make this density possibly by the high cost of forgoing opportunities for imposing costs. Thereby preserving cooperation despite an equal decrease in the opportunity for parasitism. As such we exchange the increased cost of forgoing opportunity for parasitism for the decreased costs of opportunity for homesteading opportunities.

    This concept is missing from the literature.

    We focus too much upon money that provides numerous additional discounts. And we focus too little operationally on the creation of conditions that make trade and money possible.

    This oversight is related to the other errors of the enlightenment


    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-15 10:36:00 UTC

  • The technical aspects of epistemology in math, sets, language, and cooperation a

    The technical aspects of epistemology in math, sets, language, and cooperation are not valuable except to specialists (me).


    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-11 18:33:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/752571475983495168

    Reply addressees: @SanguineEmpiric

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/752292728436760576


    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/752292728436760576

  • Honor among men has no color. It may be true that at present, the probability va

    Honor among men has no color.

    It may be true that at present, the probability varies with color.

    But no man is incapable of Honor

    It’s a matter of will, effort, and discipline.

    Strong men stand at the wall of war, invasion, and conversion.

    Strong men stand at the wall of violence, theft and fraud.

    Strong men stand at the wall of manners, ethics, and morality

    Strong men stand at the wall of truth in word and deed.

    Honor does not seek approval.

    Honor knows no opinion.

    Its seeks to create a garden which we call civilization.

    And in that garden we all can prosper.

    For generation, after generation, after generation

    Not just so others may sleep well in their beds.

    But so we and ours can as well.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-11 14:17:00 UTC

  • I have no idea why American blacks ( or any other tribe ) must be forced into hi

    I have no idea why American blacks ( or any other tribe ) must be forced into high trust norms or ” white ” rates of training.

    Same way that I don’t understand why my white son with my family sense of justice and reciprocity should be schooled with Asians and judged by their much mor docile and obedient natures.

    Blacks, Browns, whites and yellows mature at different rates and achieve different levels of maturity.

    So while in the adult market we can expect contractualism. It seems idiotic vanity to think that our laws governments and norms should reflect behavioural demands unsuited for the population.

    That we can all mature into market behaviour says nothing about the best environment to train different groups into those behaviours.

    It really agitated me that we force young boys to learn in the same environment as young girls – especially the decline in physicality.

    But if you are to the left of whites and Asians then why should you be scooled as they are?

    It’s not a matter of intelligence or will, or character. It’s a question of the rate of growth.

    In my generation we were divided into six levels ( I was not always in the top level by the way ). It worked well.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-10 23:23:00 UTC

  • Sobre el chismorreo y el rechazo

    Post original de Vivek Upadhyay Traducido al Castellano por Alberto R. Zambrano U. CHISMORREO El chismorreo es un medio libre de garantías y no correspondiente de mejorar el estatuí personal por medio del despliegue y la extrapolación de información seleccionada de la persona sobre la cual se chismea. Por medio del uso de declaraciones infladas, bromas, juicios impresionistas subidos de tono, etc., en un consenso compartido que con frecuencia posee un “sesgo de confirmación” a pesar de que los costos demostrables de este error, los chismosos buscan obtener algún estatus que no les corresponde y con frecuencia parasitario en relación al asunto sobre el cual se chismorrea, en parte para burlar los requerimientos altamente cognitivos de desarrollar críticas constructivas (en vez de críticas infladas y destructivas), lo cual implica valorar de manera vez los rumores de incentivos sujetos a haber dicho o hecho supuestamente imposición de costos hasta dar con la verdad o determinar si la verdad ha sido socavada. Los chismes también burlan la adecuada comparación de los antecedentes interpersonales que son transparentemente analizables, medibles, que tienen una fundamentación hecha con base a méritos, productivos, y que se les agrega valor con base a intentos (Esto comprende algunas pautas dentro de una línea de fondo que sirve para determinar si alguien es claramente una buena inversión para completar una tarde o una sucesión de tareas en relación con otros candidatos que puedan llevar a cabo la tarea designada). El chismorreo impone costos gratuitos (por lo menos) de dos maneras:

    1. Por medio de evitar conversaciones con sus interlocutores, por lo que contamina la información que se transmite a las personas con las que el chismoso se relaciona, dicha información cuando va a otros lugares  a otros lugares, se expande gradualmente fuera del alcance de sus interacciones y va disminuyendo la confianza interpersonal. Se forman interacciones sociales entre los interlocutores cuya velocidad económica interpersonal se hace susceptible.
    2. Por medio de reunir, avergonzar y eventualmente confrontar a la persona sobre la cual se chismea con una cantidad de informaciones exageradas y preguntas sesgadas a en vez de haber conseguido primero el contexto basado en incentivos sobre la persona de la cual se chismorreó y de la que aún no se sabe si esos chismes son ciertos.

    RECHAZO Rechazar es un comportamiento que impone un costo, que no logra dar una rendición de cuentas bien informada de por que una persona rechaza a alguien. Impone límites de conducta sobre el rechazado sobre los cuales éste debe operar para mantener relaciones interpersonales; estos límites no corresponden con los términos de la transacción sobre la cual el rechazado debe reforzar la interpretación cargada y no correspondiente de los eventos (aun cuando esté en consenso compartido uno con otro). Lo que alguien que rechaza administra es una prueba no explicada sin la garantía de que esa prueba valga la pena tomar: “Compórtate y habla como yo quiere o te privaré de afecto, instrucción, recursos, inversión u otras formas de capital”. No logra registrar los incentivos de cambios de comportamiento y discurso del que rechaza y por ello compromete las pruebas de realidad del rechazado a favor de sus medios intuitivos, de presionar al rechazado de apaciguar sus preferencias: Preferencias que son costosas de forma demostrable o intuitivas para el rechazado. Si alguien te rechaza, pregúntate el valor que ese alguien tiene en tu vida antes de considerar el contexto por el cual fuiste rechazado. ¿Provee quien me rechaza algo que no tenga un valor único que yo no pueda obtener en algún otro lado con un descuento (o precio comparable) entre ti y el interlocutor que no te rechaza? Confirmas que por medio de la conveniencia no intuitiva del rechazo ganas paz y  capital con el cual puedes amar y producir más para aquellos en los que confías, algo que no demuestran aquellos que te imponen esos costos al rechazarte. ¿Si? Entonces déjalos mientras compartes que estos nuevos hallazgos de valores deben continuamente incentivar el que no interactúes con ellos. Después de hacer claro esto, déjalos seguir adelante con sus proyectos. Déjalos sin ningún tipo de rencor. Asegúrate que si está en tus intereses volver a llegar a algún tipo de acuerdo con ellos, puedes hacerlo sin tener que imponer un ataque que imponga costos, es decir, una observación no basada en la crítica de las acciones, valores, creencias, virtudes o actitudes de alguien más. No inyectes costos gratuitos en tus intentos de restablecer conexiones en los cuales ambas partes pueden exclusivamente añadir valores a sus vidas, de acuerdo a los términos comunicativos y voluntarios que fueron fijados para hacer una transacción, de modo tal que eso no le imponga costos a tus amigos y familia, o elige simplemente no interactuar en una instancia particular.

  • NO CAPITALISM IS NOT ENOUGH –“trust isn’t necessary just capitalism”— Diego A

    NO CAPITALISM IS NOT ENOUGH

    –“trust isn’t necessary just capitalism”— Diego Anonymous

    Diego,

    Let me correct you a bit – largely by providing you with more precise language.

    Capitalism – private production of goods and services by the universal distribution of private property rights – has always existed to some degree – it must for trade to exist.

    But, cooperation at *scale* using institutions, that creates what we call ‘consumer capitalism’ requires high trust society.

    Without high trust, states are necessary to organize sale and complex production, because of the risk required of all participants. States as the insurer of last resort, insure against ‘risk of defection’.

    This is why centrally managed economies can be used to transform states from a condition of backwardness, but cannot be used to maintain them once backwardness is reduced and society reordered, or to create persistently competitive states where self-ordering produces consistent market innovation.

    The only known way of producing high trust is evolution from common (negative) law, property rights for women, and the prohibition on inbreeding (cousin marriage). Common law insures against ‘risk of defection’.

    The only known way of producing common (negative) law is evolution from a militia (Anglo-Saxon model).

    The only known way of producing a professional bureaucracy is evolution from an army (french-german-prussian). (And this leads to napoleonic law of state vs people, not common natural-law of militias of universal equality)

    The only known way of producing a libertarian (anglo-saxon) political order is with militia and common law, combining to provide sufficient suppression of free riding such that commons can be produced without defection preserving competitiveness, and private goods can be produced competitively.

    One man may rule.

    An Oligarchy may rule.

    A professional bureaucracy may rule.

    Or all may rule – thereby ensuring that none rules.

    Rule of law (nomocracy);

    The civic production of commons (liberalism);

    The private production of goods and services (capitalism);

    And the condition under which we experience all three (liberty);

    Can each exist but they cannot exist without one another.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-03 05:09:00 UTC

  • “… ethical theory is also a subfield of evolutionary theory, since it deals wi

    —“… ethical theory is also a subfield of evolutionary theory, since it deals with the rules of cooperation possible for social networks of rational agents.”— Adam Voight

    bingo.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-06-29 17:17:00 UTC