Mar 21, 2020, 7:05 PM STIPULATIONS: 0 – Inveriance in human nature 1 – Anti-Hubris (Presumption of hubris) 2 – Requiring Evidence before action. 3 – Political Institutions: Military, Duty, Merit, Property, Law, Benevolent Adversarialism. 4 – Family Institutions: church, marriage, family, humility, 5 – Civil Institutions: virtues, norms, manners. 6 – Western Tradition: Heroism, Excellence, Truth, Beauty, Status, Dominance, Hierarchy – Stability and excellence (capitalization) over experience and novelty (consumption) RIGHT WING [ˌrīt ˈwiNG] NOUN (the right wing) the conservative or reactionary section of a political party or system. “a candidate from the right wing of the party” ADJECTIVE conservative or reactionary. “a right-wing Republican senator” A person or group with conservative or capitalist views. synonyms: conservative · rightist · ultra-conservative · alt-right · blimpish · diehard · reactionary · traditionalist · conventional · traditional · old-fashioned · unprogressive · Birchite CONSERVATISM Conservatism is a political and social philosophy promoting traditional social institutions in the context of culture and civilization. The central tenets of conservatism include tradition, organic society, hierarchy, authority, and property rights. Conservatives seek to preserve a range of institutions such as religion, parliamentary government, and property rights, with the aim of emphasizing social stability and continuity. The more traditional elements—reactionaries—oppose modernism and seek a return to “the way things were” Solidarity Solidarity is an awareness of shared interests, objectives, standards, and sympathies creating a psychological sense of unity of groups or classes. Rule of law the principle whereby all members of a society (including those in government) are considered equally subject to publicly disclosed legal codes and processes Private property Civil Society Communitarianism Familism Family values HISTORY Conservatism is a political and social philosophy promoting traditional social institutions in the context of culture and civilization. The central tenets of conservatism include tradition, organic society, hierarchy, authority, and property rights.[1] Conservatives seek to preserve a range of institutions such as religion, parliamentary government, and property rights, with the aim of emphasizing social stability and continuity.[2] The more traditional elements—reactionaries—oppose modernism and seek a return to “the way things were”.[3][4] The first established use of the term in a political context originated in 1818 with François-René de Chateaubriand[5] during the period of Bourbon Restoration that sought to roll back the policies of the French Revolution. Historically associated with right-wing politics, the term has since been used to describe a wide range of views. There is no single set of policies regarded as conservative because the meaning of conservatism depends on what is considered traditional in a given place and time. Thus conservatives from different parts of the world—each upholding their respective traditions—may disagree on a wide range of issues. Edmund Burke, an 18th-century politician who opposed the French Revolution, but supported the American Revolution, is credited as one of the main theorists of conservatism in Great Britain in the 1790s.[6] According to Quintin Hogg, the chairman of the British Conservative Party in 1959: “Conservatism is not so much a philosophy as an attitude, a constant force, performing a timeless function in the development of a free society, and corresponding to a deep and permanent requirement of human nature itself”.[7]
Theme: Governance
-
The Military’s Job in A Crisis Is to Preserve the Government
The Military’s Job in A Crisis Is to Preserve the Government https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/the-militarys-job-in-a-crisis-is-to-preserve-the-government/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 20:19:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266101824416878592
-
The Military’s Job in A Crisis Is to Preserve the Government
Mar 22, 2020, 1:26 PM You see, the military’s job in a crisis is to preserve the government, in an effort to preserve order. Defense is harder than offense. It requires concentration of forces. The military is small in number. The country is vast. So if you aren’t trying to take over the government by force but to demand the use of the crisis as an opportunity for change, and you’re asking the military to step up and make sure it happens or conditions will degrade….
-
The Military’s Job in A Crisis Is to Preserve the Government
Mar 22, 2020, 1:26 PM You see, the military’s job in a crisis is to preserve the government, in an effort to preserve order. Defense is harder than offense. It requires concentration of forces. The military is small in number. The country is vast. So if you aren’t trying to take over the government by force but to demand the use of the crisis as an opportunity for change, and you’re asking the military to step up and make sure it happens or conditions will degrade….
-
Testimony
Mar 23, 2020, 2:02 PM
—“Once I realized that military/defense is 1) a collective service and 2) provides value by seemingly preventing its own necessity, the libertarian bubble popped.”—Bobo Laremy
CD: military services is also an unsubstitutable good, so no you can’t pay someone to do it for you.
-
Testimony
Mar 23, 2020, 2:02 PM
—“Once I realized that military/defense is 1) a collective service and 2) provides value by seemingly preventing its own necessity, the libertarian bubble popped.”—Bobo Laremy
CD: military services is also an unsubstitutable good, so no you can’t pay someone to do it for you.
-
“Economic Crisis: Curt, What About Strategic Industries Like Boeing Going Under?
Mar 23, 2020, 2:40 PM
—“I hope you are well Curt. Can I ask, where does P stand on redistributing or Nationalizing corps like Boeing? Obviously it’s a question of Nation Security to have warplanes and such. I don’t like the propping up where the corps have no fear of loss though. Can’t we take it over, keep the jobs, keep it producing as-is, but extract all the old profits from the Losers? I’m sure you have an answer, so I’m not trying to start any shit here. I’m interested.”— Twitter
EASY ANSWER
- Management and investors must pay for their folly not force the people to pay for their folly.
If the management and investors fail to manage the company and it can survive by taking a loan, that’s the answer.
If management and investors fail to manage the company so that it can survive shocks, and it must be bought back by the state (nationalized) and the investors wiped out, then resold once recovered, at a profit, then that’s the answer.
If it is a strategic industry then the state should be an inactive majority investor, and sell off only a minority interest to investors. Why? Private companies make FAR better use of capital.
Why state interest? If you look at how the russians and chinese produce military technology it is an industry better managed. American advantage is only in that we spend more on training and on practicing individual initiative and manoeuvre in combat, are more empirical in our training, and we are more loyal to each other than other peoples. I hav not studied the russian procurement process but I know it is far better than ours. They don’t appeal to congress. Our congress interferes all the time. We have many hands in the pie during every stage. we have too many people involved and not enough soldiers testing iterations of the equipment. The russians give one man responsibility for a program. That is probably enough a set of changes to fix most of it. My great-x uncle jimmy doolittle did a postwar evaluation of the pentagon for the president and was not terribly critical. I do not know what I would find if I did the same. The clinton military change and the obama undermining of the military did severe damage to the trustworthiness of the officer classes – but that is still repairable.
-
“Economic Crisis: Curt, What About Strategic Industries Like Boeing Going Under?
Mar 23, 2020, 2:40 PM
—“I hope you are well Curt. Can I ask, where does P stand on redistributing or Nationalizing corps like Boeing? Obviously it’s a question of Nation Security to have warplanes and such. I don’t like the propping up where the corps have no fear of loss though. Can’t we take it over, keep the jobs, keep it producing as-is, but extract all the old profits from the Losers? I’m sure you have an answer, so I’m not trying to start any shit here. I’m interested.”— Twitter
EASY ANSWER
- Management and investors must pay for their folly not force the people to pay for their folly.
If the management and investors fail to manage the company and it can survive by taking a loan, that’s the answer.
If management and investors fail to manage the company so that it can survive shocks, and it must be bought back by the state (nationalized) and the investors wiped out, then resold once recovered, at a profit, then that’s the answer.
If it is a strategic industry then the state should be an inactive majority investor, and sell off only a minority interest to investors. Why? Private companies make FAR better use of capital.
Why state interest? If you look at how the russians and chinese produce military technology it is an industry better managed. American advantage is only in that we spend more on training and on practicing individual initiative and manoeuvre in combat, are more empirical in our training, and we are more loyal to each other than other peoples. I hav not studied the russian procurement process but I know it is far better than ours. They don’t appeal to congress. Our congress interferes all the time. We have many hands in the pie during every stage. we have too many people involved and not enough soldiers testing iterations of the equipment. The russians give one man responsibility for a program. That is probably enough a set of changes to fix most of it. My great-x uncle jimmy doolittle did a postwar evaluation of the pentagon for the president and was not terribly critical. I do not know what I would find if I did the same. The clinton military change and the obama undermining of the military did severe damage to the trustworthiness of the officer classes – but that is still repairable.
-
The European Social Order
The European Social Order https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/the-european-social-order-2/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 19:10:05 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266084347418943488
-
No. We Tried to Defend from The Leftists by Surviving Their Failures
No. We Tried to Defend from The Leftists by Surviving Their Failures https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/no-we-tried-to-defend-from-the-leftists-by-surviving-their-failures/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 19:02:54 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266082537220255749