by Daniel Roland Anderson [Y]ou know Curt, as Iâve been ruminating on this issue for the last year (I canât believe Ive been following you that long already!), and I find myself becoming frustrated and angry at how much different things could be with a Propertarian law school curriculum. And Iâll bet the results would be highly durable, because the longer you went, the more naturally things would flow. The civil court case load would drop drastically I think. And the vastly more predictable results would make it much less likely that parties would take their cases to court, because any Propertarian lawyer would be able to tell his client very quickly what is likely to happen. (CD: made my month … ’cause EXACTLY.)
Theme: Education
-
You can learn the three fundamental models of project management, basic accounti
You can learn the three fundamental models of project management, basic accounting, basic contract law, and micro economics (incentives), in a single course in about a year, and be good at all of those in two. If you can write a contract, run a project, manage the finances, and understand incentives of everyone involved you know the plumbing of the entire world system. Everything else is the craft you employ under that model, and your dress, manners, diction, vocabulary, hygiene, and how much of an ass you are (or not). It’s not difficult to be competent.
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 17:58:00 UTC
-
BRITON VS GERMANY (how germany made use of second mover advantage: england betam
BRITON VS GERMANY
(how germany made use of second mover advantage: england betamax, germany vhs)
By Aaron Kahland
I’ll start by addressing education. Let’s take the metric of universities. Germany had more than ten before 16th century concluded whilst England’s third university was first founded in 1824 and Oxbridge were largely confined to theology and law.
The protestant reformation led to compulsory education in Germany well before it was commonplace in England.
The pietist movement in Germany led to the concept of ‘Bildung’ or a general education in the humanities which led to a revival of the study of the Classics. By the 19th century, whilst the Britons were busying themselves with superficial comparisons between Victorian and Roman periods, Germans were discovering places like Troy.
By 1933, Germany had more Nobel Prize winners than all English speakers on the planet combined.
But that is actually a poor metric considering that Germany invented the modern university and it became the model for the rest of the world and, importantly, the United States.
I want to emphasize that i am not entirely convinced that the general education of the average German was better than that of the average Briton. Perhaps it was, perhaps it was not – I really don’t know. A good indicator might be book sales and what books were being sold in the 19th century.
However, I would argue that by the 19th century, the upper 5% of Germans were better educated than Britons – and this is reflected in the fact that the Second Industrial Revolution occurred not in Britain but Germany. Whilst Britain was the origin of the Scientific Revolution – the Germans scholars absolutely embraced it and built their deucational institutions using the scientific method as a foundation. In fact I might argue that German philosophy was a response / reaction to that tremendous pace of scientific advance.
By the 19th century in both France and Briton – Germany became synonymous with science and France had entirely given up hope of ever competing. It came to be understood, in Europe, that there was something peculiar about German civilization that provided it a technological advantage over others.
It was this second Industrial Revolution – the fact that Germany now completely dominated electrics, machine tools, chemicals, pharamaceuticals that, in my view, was the cause of this civilizational conflict. By the late 19th Century the British ruling classes were determined to build a global Empire that would be run by a global English-speaking elite – the Rhodes Scholarship was established precisely for the purpose of selecting this elite on merit. Germany however, was the obstacle to achieving this because of her scientific advancement.
(I baited Aaron Kahland into this post. He didn’t bit. So I just outright asked him. This is the result. lol -hugs )
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 13:17:00 UTC
-
Getting These Ideas Into a Format for Normies
October 30th, 2018 1:51 PM GETTING THESE IDEAS INTO A FORMAT FOR NORMIES
—“I’m just trying to get your ideas into a format that registers on a level with normal people aside from some superficial respect for scientific sounding words and phrases but instead upon a deeper spiritual and emotional level.”—- Christian Kalafut
[I] understand. I cannot reduce logic of this depth to comforting analogy when it it precisely the use of comforting analogy for the purpose of deception that I have constructed it for. Normal people are not capable of calculus, economics, programming, law, or formal logic. They are merely the BENEFICIARIES of it when used by those of us who can. If you merely explain that it is possible to use the law to prohibit the financial sector, the media, politicians and the academy from taking advantage of them by lying to them, and that Propertarianism provides a method of writing the law in order to make that possible, they will understand. Because the work consists largely of: (a) a single value-independent language of logic, science, ethics, politics, economics, and law. (b) a set of criteria for testing whether or not statements made in that language (which is very close to law already) is false (such that it may still be true but it is not false or dependent upon pretense of knowledge). (c) that we can add this to the constitution and the courts fairly easily. And in doing so allow us to continue market support of what we favor, and court suppression of falsehoods that we don’t. (d) and if we do this most of the ‘redistributive demands’ can be made possible by disempowering of the financial, academy, media, and state sector, so that those proceeds can instead by consumed by the people (citizens), (e) so that once again it is possible to bear and rase a family on one income, pay for one’s house, and then save for retirement for the vast majority of the laboring, working, middle, and upper middle classes. That’s it. That’s what they have to understand. The rest of it is just the technical means of constructing, debating, writing, administering, and judging the law such that all of that is possible. It would be as great a return as the scientific revolution. Because the vast majority of the problem ordinary people face today is that the systems by which they are defrauded are so complicated that it takes people like you can I to explain it to them – and why they suffer from it. This is very profound program. It is larger than marxism, and completes the scientific revolution by producing a logic and science of the social sciences, an an institutional means of suppressing the conquest of our civilization by deception, using marxism, postmodernism, feminism and the organized institution of deception by the state, academy, media, financial sector. That’s alll people need to know. They do not need to know calculus, only have a vague understanding of how statistics can be used. They do not need to undrestand propertarianism (whether you call it natural law, or the law of information). They just need to understand that these tools help us restore our civilization to civility. So, as a reminder: Again, there exists both EDUCATION (meaning via positiva) and DECIDABILITY(Science via negativa) I do the latter so that others may better teach the former. I don’t do RELIGION (Demand for Supernatural Authoritarian Conformity) or PHILOSOPHY (Persuasive Moral Sophistry). I do Law, Science, and Logic. (Decidability). And one day I hope either I or others will do EDUCATION. ps: ( My preference all along, and our strategy all along, has been that I do the theory others do the education, becuase frankly the difference between me and my frame of understanding and that of normies is that of a difference in species. I can’t empathize or sympathize well enough to do their storytelling.) Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine.
-
Getting These Ideas Into a Format for Normies
October 30th, 2018 1:51 PM GETTING THESE IDEAS INTO A FORMAT FOR NORMIES
—“I’m just trying to get your ideas into a format that registers on a level with normal people aside from some superficial respect for scientific sounding words and phrases but instead upon a deeper spiritual and emotional level.”—- Christian Kalafut
[I] understand. I cannot reduce logic of this depth to comforting analogy when it it precisely the use of comforting analogy for the purpose of deception that I have constructed it for. Normal people are not capable of calculus, economics, programming, law, or formal logic. They are merely the BENEFICIARIES of it when used by those of us who can. If you merely explain that it is possible to use the law to prohibit the financial sector, the media, politicians and the academy from taking advantage of them by lying to them, and that Propertarianism provides a method of writing the law in order to make that possible, they will understand. Because the work consists largely of: (a) a single value-independent language of logic, science, ethics, politics, economics, and law. (b) a set of criteria for testing whether or not statements made in that language (which is very close to law already) is false (such that it may still be true but it is not false or dependent upon pretense of knowledge). (c) that we can add this to the constitution and the courts fairly easily. And in doing so allow us to continue market support of what we favor, and court suppression of falsehoods that we don’t. (d) and if we do this most of the ‘redistributive demands’ can be made possible by disempowering of the financial, academy, media, and state sector, so that those proceeds can instead by consumed by the people (citizens), (e) so that once again it is possible to bear and rase a family on one income, pay for one’s house, and then save for retirement for the vast majority of the laboring, working, middle, and upper middle classes. That’s it. That’s what they have to understand. The rest of it is just the technical means of constructing, debating, writing, administering, and judging the law such that all of that is possible. It would be as great a return as the scientific revolution. Because the vast majority of the problem ordinary people face today is that the systems by which they are defrauded are so complicated that it takes people like you can I to explain it to them – and why they suffer from it. This is very profound program. It is larger than marxism, and completes the scientific revolution by producing a logic and science of the social sciences, an an institutional means of suppressing the conquest of our civilization by deception, using marxism, postmodernism, feminism and the organized institution of deception by the state, academy, media, financial sector. That’s alll people need to know. They do not need to know calculus, only have a vague understanding of how statistics can be used. They do not need to undrestand propertarianism (whether you call it natural law, or the law of information). They just need to understand that these tools help us restore our civilization to civility. So, as a reminder: Again, there exists both EDUCATION (meaning via positiva) and DECIDABILITY(Science via negativa) I do the latter so that others may better teach the former. I don’t do RELIGION (Demand for Supernatural Authoritarian Conformity) or PHILOSOPHY (Persuasive Moral Sophistry). I do Law, Science, and Logic. (Decidability). And one day I hope either I or others will do EDUCATION. ps: ( My preference all along, and our strategy all along, has been that I do the theory others do the education, becuase frankly the difference between me and my frame of understanding and that of normies is that of a difference in species. I can’t empathize or sympathize well enough to do their storytelling.) Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine.
-
GETTING THESE IDEAS INTO A FORMAT FOR NORMIES —“I’m just trying to get your id
GETTING THESE IDEAS INTO A FORMAT FOR NORMIES
—“I’m just trying to get your ideas into a format that registers on a level with normal people aside from some superficial respect for scientific sounding words and phrases but instead upon a deeper spiritual and emotional level.”—- Christian Kalafut
I understand.
I cannot reduce logic of this depth to comforting analogy when it it precisely the use of comforting analogy for the purpose of deception that I have constructed it for.
Normal people are not capable of calculus, economics, programming, law, or formal logic. They are merely the BENEFICIARIES of it when used by those of us who can.
If you merely explain that it is possible to use the law to prohibit the financial sector, the media, politicians and the academy from taking advantage of them by lying to them, and that Propertarianism provides a method of writing the law in order to make that possible, they will understand.
Because the work consists largely of:
(a) a single value-independent language of logic, science, ethics, politics, economics, and law.
(b) a set of criteria for testing whether or not statements made in that language (which is very close to law already) is false (such that it may still be true but it is not false or dependent upon pretense of knowledge).
(c) that we can add this to the constitution and the courts fairly easily. And in doing so allow us to continue market support of what we favor, and court suppression of falsehoods that we don’t.
(d) and if we do this most of the ‘redistributive demands’ can be made possible by disempowering of the financial, academy, media, and state sector, so that those proceeds can instead by consumed by the people (citizens),
(e) so that once again it is possible to bear and rase a family on one income, pay for one’s house, and then save for retirement for the vast majority of the laboring, working, middle, and upper middle classes.
That’s it.
That’s what they have to understand.
The rest of it is just the technical means of constructing, debating, writing, administering, and judging the law such that all of that is possible.
It would be as great a return as the scientific revolution. Because the vast majority of the problem ordinary people face today is that the systems by which they are defrauded are so complicated that it takes people like you can I to explain it to them – and why they suffer from it.
This is very profound program. It is larger than marxism, and completes the scientific revolution by producing a logic and science of the social sciences, an an institutional means of suppressing the conquest of our civilization by deception, using marxism, postmodernism, feminism and the organized institution of deception by the state, academy, media, financial sector.
That’s alll people need to know. They do not need to know calculus, only have a vague understanding of how statistics can be used.
They do not need to undrestand propertarianism (whether you call it natural law, or the law of information).
They just need to understand that these tools help us restore our civilization to civility.
So, as a reminder:
Again, there exists both EDUCATION (meaning via positiva) and DECIDABILITY(Science via negativa) I do the latter so that others may better teach the former.
I don’t do RELIGION (Demand for Supernatural Authoritarian Conformity) or PHILOSOPHY (Persuasive Moral Sophistry).
I do Law, Science, and Logic. (Decidability).
And one day I hope either I or others will do EDUCATION.
ps: ( My preference all along, and our strategy all along, has been that I do the theory others do the education, becuase frankly the difference between me and my frame of understanding and that of normies is that of a difference in species. I can’t empathize or sympathize well enough to do their storytelling.)
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev Ukraine.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-30 13:51:00 UTC
-
New Introduction To Propertarianism for Libertarians
October 29th, 2018 8:38 AM NEW INTRODUCTiON TO PROPERTARIANISM FOR LIBERTARIANS Created a page for introducing libertarians to Propertarianism, includes: 1) Eli’s Introduction (with Ahmed’s Arabic Translation), 2) Reforming Mises (long) 3) Reforming Rothbard (medium) 4) Reforming Hoppe. (short) (Every time I read Ely Harman’s introduction I’m thrilled. He is a fabulous communicator.) https://propertarianinstitute.com/2018/10/28/propertarianism-for-for-libertarians/
-
New Introduction To Propertarianism for Libertarians
October 29th, 2018 8:38 AM NEW INTRODUCTiON TO PROPERTARIANISM FOR LIBERTARIANS Created a page for introducing libertarians to Propertarianism, includes: 1) Eli’s Introduction (with Ahmed’s Arabic Translation), 2) Reforming Mises (long) 3) Reforming Rothbard (medium) 4) Reforming Hoppe. (short) (Every time I read Ely Harman’s introduction I’m thrilled. He is a fabulous communicator.) https://propertarianinstitute.com/2018/10/28/propertarianism-for-for-libertarians/
-
NEW INTRODUCTiON TO PROPERTARIANISM FOR LIBERTARIANS Created a page for introduc
NEW INTRODUCTiON TO PROPERTARIANISM FOR LIBERTARIANS
Created a page for introducing libertarians to Propertarianism, includes:
1) Eli’s Introduction (with Ahmed’s Arabic Translation),
2) Reforming Mises (long)
3) Reforming Rothbard (medium)
4) Reforming Hoppe. (short)
(Every time I read Ely Harman’s introduction I’m thrilled. He is a fabulous communicator.)
https://propertarianism.com/2018/10/28/propertarianism-for-for-libertarians/
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-28 20:51:00 UTC
-
who are the best right wing philosophers/thinkers? I’m a leftist, and I believe
https://propertarianism.com/reading-list/—“Currently, who are the best right wing philosophers/thinkers? I’m a leftist, and I believe that it’s important to challenge the beliefs you hold, so I’m mostly looking for authors/public speakers that’ll give me something worthwhile to engage with.”— Quora User
(repost, for educational value)
CONSERVATISM UNDERSTOOD
1. A conservative questions the overestimation of reason, and above all questions consensus. Conservatism is familial, stoic, pragmatic, and empirical. In other words risk averse to capital.
2. As a means of questioning, a conservative requires reciprocity (tort): american < british < anglo saxon < germanic < european < norther indo european in law. That law evolved from the oath (tell the truth, never steal, never flee, in combat).
3. A Conservative requires ‘empirical’ results – and where empirical fails, the ‘traditional’ is adequate, since traditional survived empirical tests in competition in reality.
4. A Conservative accumulates genetic, cultural, normative, institutional, physical, and territorial capital – attempting to pass on to future generations of his family, more than he himself inherited.
5. Conservatism is a eugenic group evolutionary strategy that increases accumulated capital through intergenerational transfer, using intergeneration lending, in order to produce increasingly ‘noble’ families.
6. Ergo successful individuals in the market for craftsmanship, successful purchase of the franchise through military service, successful individuals in the market for marriage and child rearing, successful individuals in the market for industry, successful families in the market for noble (intergenerational) families.
7. In other words, conservatism(aristocracy) is a eugenic group evolutionary strategy. And while bipartite manorialism was practiced from 700, and aggressive hanging of up to 1% of the population every year after 1000, and an attempt to escape church-state nobility, and create an entrepreneurial nobility (meritocracy), succeeded by 1600, there was a great reaction to the english revolution, and a greater reaction to the french revolution. Thus while Locke,smith,hume,adams, and jefferson promised an aristocracy available to everyone, Burke, after the french revolution, and germans after that, recognized that the peasantry was even worse at rule (see russia) than the nobility.
The problem with today’s conservatism is that darwin and spencer were famous before the war, after the second world war, conservatism and eugenics were effectively banned from discourse, academy, and science.
As such conservatives never (until perhaps 2000) restored empirical discourse to conservatism, because eugenics are antithetical to the experiment with democracy. This changed incrementally beginning in 76, through the 80s, and aggressively since 2000, and more aggressively since 2008.
1 – Soveriengty requires reciprocity
2 – Reciprocity requires rule of law (tort), jury(thang, senate, house of lords, supreme court), and an independent judiciary.
3 – Rule of law forces markets, since it incrementally suppresses each innovation in parasitism.
4 – Markets cause hierarchies, because they are necessary to voluntarily organize production.
5 – Markets are eugenic, because they are empirical means of testing industry and impulse.
6 – But they make possible liberty for those with property, freedom for those who labor, and subsidy for those who impose no costs on sovereignty, liberty, freedom, or property.**
DOMESTICATION
Man domesticated the human animal after he had learned to domesticate the non-human animal. And he did so by the same means. And the result in both domestication of the human and non human animal is the same: eugenics.
CONSERVATIVES
Most conservatives do not write philosophy, they run businesses, or write history, economics, science, and law. (I write because I was successful enough in multiple businesses to spend my time writing full time.) Conservatives also are actively suppressed in academy and media.
This has been true since the end of the war and teh rise of the Frankfurt School, and the Postmodern school, both of which were necessary after the failure of marxist pseudoscience. (a pseudoscience marx died knowing, since he stopped writing as soon as he read the Mengerians, and kept silent only to keep the checks coming in from Engels.)
AUTHORS TO READ
Burke, Hayek, Burnham, Sowell, Buchanan, Murray, and maybe Nietzsche. Veblen.
(The essayists are nonsense)
Anyone in Hoover or Heritage institutions.
READING LIST
Propertarianism’s Reading List (https://propertarianism.com/reading-list/).
My reading list (above) contains most of the science we’ve been looking for, while the pseudosciences dominated the mid to late 20th century under the marxist-postmodernists.
Cheers
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-28 16:35:00 UTC