Theme: Governance

  • We are very fine people. We aren’t out there doing any of this nonsense. We’re w

    We are very fine people.
    We aren’t out there doing any of this nonsense.
    We’re waiting for the obvious to occur to you: the experiment failed, we are incompatible, and separation will be necessary or there will be civil war (soon).

    Reply addressees: @billprady

  • We are very fine people. We aren’t out there doing any of this nonsense. We’re w

    We are very fine people.
    We aren’t out there doing any of this nonsense.
    We’re waiting for the obvious to occur to you: the experiment failed, we are incompatible, and separation will be necessary or there will be civil war (soon).


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-31 22:59:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267229341945073664

    Reply addressees: @billprady

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267131628481941505

  • Any of the ‘-ists are meaningless.

    Nov 5, 2019, 6:33 PM Any of the ‘-ists are meaningless. Unless you write a constitution that engineers order and suppresses demand for authority, then you’re hand waving another NAP-lie. So say Rule of Law, Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Property-in-Toto, and then Commune, Oligarchy, Monarchy, or Despot, and then the means of revenue generation to pay for defense of territory externally, and defense of property internally with sheriff, and court , both of which are sufficient to deny competitors conquest. And then what comons will you produce and how will you pay for them, in order to attract trade, people, and opportunity, sufficient that neighboring ‘states’ do not conquer you as a parasite upon their economy.

  • Any of the ‘-ists are meaningless.

    Nov 5, 2019, 6:33 PM Any of the ‘-ists are meaningless. Unless you write a constitution that engineers order and suppresses demand for authority, then you’re hand waving another NAP-lie. So say Rule of Law, Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Property-in-Toto, and then Commune, Oligarchy, Monarchy, or Despot, and then the means of revenue generation to pay for defense of territory externally, and defense of property internally with sheriff, and court , both of which are sufficient to deny competitors conquest. And then what comons will you produce and how will you pay for them, in order to attract trade, people, and opportunity, sufficient that neighboring ‘states’ do not conquer you as a parasite upon their economy.

  • HEARTH -> PERSONAL -> POLITICAL

    HEARTH -> PERSONAL -> POLITICAL. https://t.co/2VhSm73LgN

  • HEARTH -> PERSONAL -> POLITICAL

    HEARTH -> PERSONAL -> POLITICAL. https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/31/hearth-personal-political/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-31 21:30:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267206745220419586

  • Thing(Thang, Ding): Jury > Assembly > Senate > Legislature

    Nov 6, 2019, 6:57 AM Thing (assembly) – Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org

    THING(THANG,DING): JURY > ASSEMBLY > SENATE > LEGISLATURE

    A thing was a governing assembly in early Germanic society, made up of the free people of the community presided over by law-speakers. The word appears in Old Norse, Old English, and modern Icelandic as þing, in Middle English (as in modern English), Old Saxon, Old Dutch, and Old Frisian as thing, in German as Ding, and in modern Norwegian, Danish, Swedish, Faroese, Gutnish, and Norn as ting, all from a reconstructed Proto-Germanic neuter *þingą; the word is the same as the more common English word thing, both having at their heart the basic meaning of “an assemblage, a coming together of parts”—in the one case, an “assembly” or “meeting”, in the other, an “entity”, “object”, or “thing”. The meeting-place of a thing was called a “thingstead” (Old English þingstede) or “thingstow” (Old English þingstōw). The Anglo-Saxon folkmoot (Old English folcgemōt, “folk meeting”; Middle English folkesmōt; modern Norwegian folkemøte) was analogous, the forerunner to the witenagemōt and a precursor of the modern Parliament of the United Kingdom. Today the term lives on in the English term hustings, in the official names of national legislatures and political and judicial institutions of Nordic countries and, in the Manx form tyn, as a term for the three legislative bodies on the Isle of Man.

  • Thing(Thang, Ding): Jury > Assembly > Senate > Legislature

    Nov 6, 2019, 6:57 AM Thing (assembly) – Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org

    THING(THANG,DING): JURY > ASSEMBLY > SENATE > LEGISLATURE

    A thing was a governing assembly in early Germanic society, made up of the free people of the community presided over by law-speakers. The word appears in Old Norse, Old English, and modern Icelandic as þing, in Middle English (as in modern English), Old Saxon, Old Dutch, and Old Frisian as thing, in German as Ding, and in modern Norwegian, Danish, Swedish, Faroese, Gutnish, and Norn as ting, all from a reconstructed Proto-Germanic neuter *þingą; the word is the same as the more common English word thing, both having at their heart the basic meaning of “an assemblage, a coming together of parts”—in the one case, an “assembly” or “meeting”, in the other, an “entity”, “object”, or “thing”. The meeting-place of a thing was called a “thingstead” (Old English þingstede) or “thingstow” (Old English þingstōw). The Anglo-Saxon folkmoot (Old English folcgemōt, “folk meeting”; Middle English folkesmōt; modern Norwegian folkemøte) was analogous, the forerunner to the witenagemōt and a precursor of the modern Parliament of the United Kingdom. Today the term lives on in the English term hustings, in the official names of national legislatures and political and judicial institutions of Nordic countries and, in the Manx form tyn, as a term for the three legislative bodies on the Isle of Man.

  • This is why proximity creates hostility. Ergo, the only solution is separation,

    This is why proximity creates hostility. Ergo, the only solution is separation, which would provide the incentives destroyed by the great society (socialist relocation) movement, for communitites to produce norms, institutions, and elites suitable for those distributions.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-31 19:40:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267179114013884420

    Reply addressees: @evrythingstays @Steve_Sailer

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267178822698520576


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @evrythingstays @Steve_Sailer Given universal kin selection and ingroup bias, and given predictable hierarchy of sexual, social, economic, and political market values, determined by those traits, we are socially(normatively), economically(competitively), and politically (demands for commons), incompatible.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1267178822698520576

  • This is why proximity creates hostility. Ergo, the only solution is separation,

    This is why proximity creates hostility. Ergo, the only solution is separation, which would provide the incentives destroyed by the great society (socialist relocation) movement, for communitites to produce norms, institutions, and elites suitable for those distributions.

    Reply addressees: @evrythingstays @Steve_Sailer