Oct 11, 2019, 9:50 PM Alain Dwight Anarchy is a rhetorical illusion, it doesn’t exist in reality. There is no rule without rulers, there are no active nouns (rules) without actors implementing them (rulers). Every method of interaction has rules that are set and enforced by rulers. We want rule of law (suppressing free-riding of all forms regardless of rank/class) rather than discretionary rule (cherry picked application), and this is what honest anarchists are grasping for. The rest are essentially libertarians peddling the non aggression principle, which amounts to advocacy for discretionary rule because only some impositions of costs are counted while others are ignored. Most often, imposing costs by way of invading someone’s territory or subverting their social norms is permitted and so retaliation against such actions is considered “initiating aggression” while the initial imposition is not. It’s a great recipe for demanding access to low corruption commons and then calling it aggression if there are any demands or conditions required in terms of sharing the cost to construct and maintain the commons. It’s coerced association – ghetto ethics. NAP and anarchism generally permits blackmail too.
Theme: Governance
-
The Inquisition, the Church, in Context.
Oct 12, 2019, 7:46 PM The purpose of the inquisition was: … 1) to suppress factions (heresy) that would have weakened the church’s income (they were crooks), their political power, and the church’s ambition to take over as the central government of Europe … 2) to standardize punishment given the wide variety of punishments coming out of various localities. … 3) identify and prosecute muslims and jews that had pretended to convert but not, … 4) and finally it evolved serve as a bludgeon to prosecute enemies during the reformation – and we see this in the witch trials which were the end process of that process combined with pre-christian heathen rituals. We should note that the reason the french government was so bloodily overthrown was the same reason for the protestant reformation, which was the same reason for the Cathar / Albigensian crusade arose. The corruption because of the church’s attempt to imitate Byzantium, and Byzantium’s attempt to imitate the empires of the pre-muslim world: rule of ignorant illiterate people by superstition, instead of the western model of patriarchal, continuous domestication of man from slave, to freeman, to citizen, to senate. The church was at a level of corruption similar to that of late french monarchy, and what we see in present Washington. There is little difference today between Washington DC, Versailles, The church in France, and the church in Italy (where it did succeed in rule somewhat). My read of the inquisition is a protestant propaganda campaign, and a more modern atheist campaign. In effect the church tried for many centuries to rule Europe as it did Byzantium and it failed. It failed and the many sovereign states succeeded. Because a monopoly calcifies and feeds corruption and a market competes and defeats corruption.
-
The Inquisition, the Church, in Context.
Oct 12, 2019, 7:46 PM The purpose of the inquisition was: … 1) to suppress factions (heresy) that would have weakened the church’s income (they were crooks), their political power, and the church’s ambition to take over as the central government of Europe … 2) to standardize punishment given the wide variety of punishments coming out of various localities. … 3) identify and prosecute muslims and jews that had pretended to convert but not, … 4) and finally it evolved serve as a bludgeon to prosecute enemies during the reformation – and we see this in the witch trials which were the end process of that process combined with pre-christian heathen rituals. We should note that the reason the french government was so bloodily overthrown was the same reason for the protestant reformation, which was the same reason for the Cathar / Albigensian crusade arose. The corruption because of the church’s attempt to imitate Byzantium, and Byzantium’s attempt to imitate the empires of the pre-muslim world: rule of ignorant illiterate people by superstition, instead of the western model of patriarchal, continuous domestication of man from slave, to freeman, to citizen, to senate. The church was at a level of corruption similar to that of late french monarchy, and what we see in present Washington. There is little difference today between Washington DC, Versailles, The church in France, and the church in Italy (where it did succeed in rule somewhat). My read of the inquisition is a protestant propaganda campaign, and a more modern atheist campaign. In effect the church tried for many centuries to rule Europe as it did Byzantium and it failed. It failed and the many sovereign states succeeded. Because a monopoly calcifies and feeds corruption and a market competes and defeats corruption.
-
You Must Begin with A High Trust Polity
You Must Begin with A High Trust Polity https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/you-must-begin-with-a-high-trust-polity/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 17:37:59 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265698781888200704
-
You Must Begin with A High Trust Polity
Oct 12, 2019, 7:48 PM by Bill Joslin I would take the discussion of Trust a step further. Law and contract eliminate the NEED for trust. However, law and contract that results in this, can only emerge out of a polity that has established high trust in their informal institutions. (which is why, if you introduce a low trust population into the mix, law shifts from rule of law (system which constrains arbitrary discretion) to rule by law (arbitrary discretion hidden behind a mask of calculation). The low trust population erodes the informal institutions which results in a demand for formal institutions to fill the gap.
-
You Must Begin with A High Trust Polity
Oct 12, 2019, 7:48 PM by Bill Joslin I would take the discussion of Trust a step further. Law and contract eliminate the NEED for trust. However, law and contract that results in this, can only emerge out of a polity that has established high trust in their informal institutions. (which is why, if you introduce a low trust population into the mix, law shifts from rule of law (system which constrains arbitrary discretion) to rule by law (arbitrary discretion hidden behind a mask of calculation). The low trust population erodes the informal institutions which results in a demand for formal institutions to fill the gap.
-
Western Man’s Uniqueness in Purpose: Raised to Rule
Oct 12, 2019, 9:02 PM Let me put it in perspective, white people, our fairy tales, our myths, our religion, our education – we were brought up to rule. Ourselves, our families, our polities, our nations and the world. This is what the rest of the world cannot grasp, and what the underclasses cannot achieve. Our civilization evolved for the continuous production of agency – we were all brought up to be princes and princesses – to rule. An aristocracy of everyone capable of joining the aristocracy. and the paternal rule of those who are not. I have been complaining about the anglo seizure of power by the middle class, and the american attempt to create an aristocracy of everyone. But the western man has been trying to create an aristocracy of everyone since we first put horse to wheel. The problem is that loosened the requirements for the demonstration of agency – one’s ability to rule one’s self ,one’s family, on’s business, one’s polity, one’s nation. And we failed to create additional houses for the classes that did demonstrate ability as they evolved education and limited agency.
-
Western Man’s Uniqueness in Purpose: Raised to Rule
Oct 12, 2019, 9:02 PM Let me put it in perspective, white people, our fairy tales, our myths, our religion, our education – we were brought up to rule. Ourselves, our families, our polities, our nations and the world. This is what the rest of the world cannot grasp, and what the underclasses cannot achieve. Our civilization evolved for the continuous production of agency – we were all brought up to be princes and princesses – to rule. An aristocracy of everyone capable of joining the aristocracy. and the paternal rule of those who are not. I have been complaining about the anglo seizure of power by the middle class, and the american attempt to create an aristocracy of everyone. But the western man has been trying to create an aristocracy of everyone since we first put horse to wheel. The problem is that loosened the requirements for the demonstration of agency – one’s ability to rule one’s self ,one’s family, on’s business, one’s polity, one’s nation. And we failed to create additional houses for the classes that did demonstrate ability as they evolved education and limited agency.
-
Scale and The Store of Trust
Oct 15, 2019, 2:22 PM Jonathan Haidt on his book The Coddling of the American Mind standard.co.uk https://standard.co.uk/lifestyle/books/jonathan-haidt-the-coddling-of-the-american-mind-a4261081.html? SCALE AND THE STORE OF TRUST by Luke Weinhagen ( CD: I’m Sharing because of this bit of genius:
—“The system can not scale beyond its ability to generate and store trust and begins to fail immediately when the extraction of stored trust exceeds the production of trust. That store can act as a buffer during a period of backsliding (and can enable a lot of really destructive behavior in the guise of “tolerance”), but it will not save us.”— Luke Weinhagen
) === COMPLETE POST ===
—-“We came out of a century that had some of the worst horrors in history but which made extraordinary progress on almost every conceivable front in the decades afterwards, and now we’re backsliding.” — Jon Haidt
Putting this in the context I’ve been building over the last couple weeks, the “progress” Haidt is describing (from my perspective) are the mechanisms we developed to foster the development of trust that became possible through the shared exposure to those horrors. I agree with both Haidt and Doolittle in that the outcome of this backsliding in inevitable should it continue. The lesson will impose itself. Whether we learn from it, kindly or not, is another matter. Looking at Curt’s response in the same context I’ve been using –
“…conspicuous consumption of compromises between genes, gender, class, and interests” = extraction of trust. “…cooperative necessity in social orders…” = mechanisms for the production of trust
The system can not scale beyond its ability to generate and store trust and begins to fail immediately when the extraction of stored trust exceeds the production of trust. That store can act as a buffer during a period of backsliding (and can enable a lot of really destructive behavior in the guise of “tolerance”), but it will not save us. “Domestication” is the process of transcendence from each of the lower foundational rules of human interaction to the next higher form of interaction/expansion of the capacity to store trust. THE FOUNDATIONS 1. Via Positiva: ……. The Golden Rule. 2. Via Negativa: ….. The Silver Rule. 3. Via Logica: ……….The Natural Law of Reciprocity. 4. Via Existentia: …. Rule of Law, ………………………….. … The Jury, and ………………………….. … Markets in everything. 5. Via Violentia: …. The Iron Rule. Might Makes Right. Both of these texts are worth a read when you get a chance. – Luke Weinhagen
-
Scale and The Store of Trust
Oct 15, 2019, 2:22 PM Jonathan Haidt on his book The Coddling of the American Mind standard.co.uk https://standard.co.uk/lifestyle/books/jonathan-haidt-the-coddling-of-the-american-mind-a4261081.html? SCALE AND THE STORE OF TRUST by Luke Weinhagen ( CD: I’m Sharing because of this bit of genius:
—“The system can not scale beyond its ability to generate and store trust and begins to fail immediately when the extraction of stored trust exceeds the production of trust. That store can act as a buffer during a period of backsliding (and can enable a lot of really destructive behavior in the guise of “tolerance”), but it will not save us.”— Luke Weinhagen
) === COMPLETE POST ===
—-“We came out of a century that had some of the worst horrors in history but which made extraordinary progress on almost every conceivable front in the decades afterwards, and now we’re backsliding.” — Jon Haidt
Putting this in the context I’ve been building over the last couple weeks, the “progress” Haidt is describing (from my perspective) are the mechanisms we developed to foster the development of trust that became possible through the shared exposure to those horrors. I agree with both Haidt and Doolittle in that the outcome of this backsliding in inevitable should it continue. The lesson will impose itself. Whether we learn from it, kindly or not, is another matter. Looking at Curt’s response in the same context I’ve been using –
“…conspicuous consumption of compromises between genes, gender, class, and interests” = extraction of trust. “…cooperative necessity in social orders…” = mechanisms for the production of trust
The system can not scale beyond its ability to generate and store trust and begins to fail immediately when the extraction of stored trust exceeds the production of trust. That store can act as a buffer during a period of backsliding (and can enable a lot of really destructive behavior in the guise of “tolerance”), but it will not save us. “Domestication” is the process of transcendence from each of the lower foundational rules of human interaction to the next higher form of interaction/expansion of the capacity to store trust. THE FOUNDATIONS 1. Via Positiva: ……. The Golden Rule. 2. Via Negativa: ….. The Silver Rule. 3. Via Logica: ……….The Natural Law of Reciprocity. 4. Via Existentia: …. Rule of Law, ………………………….. … The Jury, and ………………………….. … Markets in everything. 5. Via Violentia: …. The Iron Rule. Might Makes Right. Both of these texts are worth a read when you get a chance. – Luke Weinhagen