NIETZSCHE VS DOOLITTLE : Critique vs Science. Value vs Truth. Inspiration vs Institutions. [I] need to address this issue again for the little boys in the audience. What I take from Nietzsche is his attack on supernaturalism, and submission, and his attempt to restore classicism – which is also what I am also trying to do: discover our origins (I have), and solve the institutional problem (i think I have) of restoring them. Nietzsche created a Critique of semitic religion, and tried to articulate and express the ethic of the classical tradition (heroism, the dominance of man over nature) but was unable to solve the problem of how – just as many post-darwinist were. Unfortunately the abrahamists have nearly won again with marxism, feminism, and postmodernism. And they have won by continuing his technique: abrahamic critique. —“Nietzsche’s thought after Hegel was to incorporate Evolution and to reverse everything possible in prior thinkers. So he reverses Hegel by searching for a way for the Noble to have self-consciousness. He reverses Schopenhauer by attempting to be positive about life and its prospects. He reverses Wagner by rejecting the Christianization of the Pagan mythologies. Of course he then reverses many long held beliefs that were unquestioned within the western worldview such as the necessity to kow tow to Christianity as a religious belief system. … So basically Nietzsche went after as many Sacred Cows of the European tradition as he could”— Kent Palmer I systematically attack all our sacred cows and falsehoods – just as he did. Not for VALUE but for TRUTH. I look for everything FALSE not everything we VALUE. However, I attempt to restore classicism through formal INSTITUTIONS rather than the usual german sophomoric philosophy that is little other than a desperate attempt to restore the ‘woo’ of christian submission by rational sophistry rather than supernatural sophistry. As for ‘spirit’ I see nietzsche’s ‘spirit’ as a choice, and an individual choice, not a truth,or a political movement, or an institutional solution – and I see nietzsche as having failed to discover a solution. And worse, I find his silly german ‘suffering'(struggling) abhorrent – the voice of the weak. The strong do not struggle they just do. Nietzsche was prescient precisely because he FAILED. As did all german thinkers – desperate provincial romanticists appealing to the heartstrings of the pubescent. I see nietzsche as ‘weak’. A polemicist. Like say, Rand, he is a gateway that gives you permission to abandon traditional religion, just as rand is a gateway to abandon traditional political ethics. But they are … childish … works by childish people. Which is fine, because we all work at some level of sophistication available to us at our own stage of maturity. Nietzsche’s rant against his status who is nothing more than what all adolescent men do: express their identities and autonomy as unbound by parental debts, when they reach some level of agency. But in the end, he just was an insightful polemicists that failed to provide a solution other than infinite skepticism and a return to a celebration of life. A pair of sentiments otherwise politically inactionable. Nietzsche practiced critique: he remained an abrahamist. He offered us nothing to supplant the past. And understood the classical civilization only in silly germanic romantic and literary terms – rather than the tedious administration of half domesticated man by the use of military, law, bureaucracy, commerce, and education. Rome was the adult that athens matured into. We are only now, right now, restoring the state of development at which rome fell.
Theme: Institution
-
“Politically, socially, or otherwise: as fragmentation grows linearly, the surfa
—“Politically, socially, or otherwise: as fragmentation grows linearly, the surface area across which a coherent system must retain interfaces grows exponentially. This selection pressure… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=299876563942574&id=100017606988153
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-03 01:04:21 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1047291230772764672
-
Is Libertarianism A Failed Property Management Business Model?
by Dax Rayner —“Libertarianism is simply marxism for the commons instead of marxism for private property.” —Curt Doolittle https://propertarianinstitute.com/…/libertarian-pretense-of-payi…/ I’ve been thinking a lot about this statement the past few months and I see it more and more every day now that I’m paying attention to it, every time I’m in a libertarian thread or discussion. Coming from a libertarian-ish/Ayn Randian worldview myself for much of my life, I began to really heavily question libertarianism the past few years. Anyone who’s known me for awhile can probably tell my positions have shifted quite a bit on many things. It just became glaringly obvious to me that there were a lot of holes and discrepancies between libertarian theories and what we see happening in the real world. I know many others have felt the same way. I’ve just started scratching the surface of propertarianism as defined by the Propertarian Institute but so far it has given me incredible clarity on the problems I was seeing before with libertarianism that I lacked the operational language to describe. Simply put: It seems the core problem of libertarianism can be boiled down to mismanagement of the commons, and that is why marxism has run rampant through the education system, pop culture and liberal establishments. The irony here is that when libertarians talk about the tragedy of the commons it seems they have actually misinterpreted what that means and the REAL tragedy of the commons, at least in the modern West, is an inversion of their analysis. The solutions they propose are not only incorrect but simply not possible. Many libertarians seem to misunderstand or miscategorize what the commons is or in some cases, deny that it even exists at all. There’s a lot of things that made me begin challenging libertarianism from borders to foreign policy to trade but ultimately what really pushed me over the edge was libertarianism’s complete ineptness and total impotence at countering the societal cancer of social justice warriorism and marxist feminism. Not only has libertarianism been an abysmal failure at using individualism to effectively thwart leftist authoritarians and SJWs, but in many ways it’s directly contributed to the problem and is even actively working to suppress real solutions to the problem. I believe this comes down to, again, mismanagement of the commons, as well as gaping holes in the NAP which I’ve seen for a long time, but furthermore an incomplete understanding of what property actually is and inadequate property norms, which I didn’t begin to understand until coming across propertarianism. If you owned a 30 unit apartment complex and you hired a property management company to take care of it and they allowed the place to turn into a complete dump, with people crapping all over sidewalks, throwing trash on the lawn, etc would you continue to work with that property management company? That’s basically what libertarianism has given us. Luke Weinhagen also said it well: “The way it hit me was that libertarianism survives/exists by miscategorizing relations. Specifically libertarians interpret commons(cooperation) as commons(conflict) and use property rights(IVP) to attempt to resolve that conflict. In doing so they justify libertarianism’s parasitism of the commons(that can only be generated via cooperation) as defense and that justification requires it not suppress any parasitism of the commons(cooperation) as this would self destruct the ideology.” I’m writing a 4 Part series on this that I’m putting on minds.com to elaborate my thoughts on it. I’m still an amateur when it comes to political science and legal theory but having started, run and sold numerous companies in the digital publishing world over the last decade and a half I’ve dealt with my share of intellectual property issues, so I’m writing from that perspective in addition to my other research. I know this has been a particular sore spot for many other internet marketers as well. Just based on my own personal experience and observations, I would say a loose form of libertarianism is kind of the default political philosophy for a good amount of people in the sales and marketing world I come from. It just naturally appeals to our independent entreprenur/anti-corporate personality. But I think if a lot of people looked into it more they may find the propertarian definitions of property to be much more all encompassing, useful and applicable to the real world, as I have. Propertarianism has added a whole new dimension of understanding for me when it comes to asset classes, brand protection, diversification & portfolio management. If you’re a business owner or individual who’s using the ideology and school of libertarianism/AnCapism as your property management company, I might encourage you to consider reevaluating your relationship with them. They may not be caretaking your family’s future, your community, your assets and your retirement as well as you’ve been led to think.







-
Is Libertarianism A Failed Property Management Business Model?
by Dax Rayner —“Libertarianism is simply marxism for the commons instead of marxism for private property.” —Curt Doolittle https://propertarianinstitute.com/…/libertarian-pretense-of-payi…/ I’ve been thinking a lot about this statement the past few months and I see it more and more every day now that I’m paying attention to it, every time I’m in a libertarian thread or discussion. Coming from a libertarian-ish/Ayn Randian worldview myself for much of my life, I began to really heavily question libertarianism the past few years. Anyone who’s known me for awhile can probably tell my positions have shifted quite a bit on many things. It just became glaringly obvious to me that there were a lot of holes and discrepancies between libertarian theories and what we see happening in the real world. I know many others have felt the same way. I’ve just started scratching the surface of propertarianism as defined by the Propertarian Institute but so far it has given me incredible clarity on the problems I was seeing before with libertarianism that I lacked the operational language to describe. Simply put: It seems the core problem of libertarianism can be boiled down to mismanagement of the commons, and that is why marxism has run rampant through the education system, pop culture and liberal establishments. The irony here is that when libertarians talk about the tragedy of the commons it seems they have actually misinterpreted what that means and the REAL tragedy of the commons, at least in the modern West, is an inversion of their analysis. The solutions they propose are not only incorrect but simply not possible. Many libertarians seem to misunderstand or miscategorize what the commons is or in some cases, deny that it even exists at all. There’s a lot of things that made me begin challenging libertarianism from borders to foreign policy to trade but ultimately what really pushed me over the edge was libertarianism’s complete ineptness and total impotence at countering the societal cancer of social justice warriorism and marxist feminism. Not only has libertarianism been an abysmal failure at using individualism to effectively thwart leftist authoritarians and SJWs, but in many ways it’s directly contributed to the problem and is even actively working to suppress real solutions to the problem. I believe this comes down to, again, mismanagement of the commons, as well as gaping holes in the NAP which I’ve seen for a long time, but furthermore an incomplete understanding of what property actually is and inadequate property norms, which I didn’t begin to understand until coming across propertarianism. If you owned a 30 unit apartment complex and you hired a property management company to take care of it and they allowed the place to turn into a complete dump, with people crapping all over sidewalks, throwing trash on the lawn, etc would you continue to work with that property management company? That’s basically what libertarianism has given us. Luke Weinhagen also said it well: “The way it hit me was that libertarianism survives/exists by miscategorizing relations. Specifically libertarians interpret commons(cooperation) as commons(conflict) and use property rights(IVP) to attempt to resolve that conflict. In doing so they justify libertarianism’s parasitism of the commons(that can only be generated via cooperation) as defense and that justification requires it not suppress any parasitism of the commons(cooperation) as this would self destruct the ideology.” I’m writing a 4 Part series on this that I’m putting on minds.com to elaborate my thoughts on it. I’m still an amateur when it comes to political science and legal theory but having started, run and sold numerous companies in the digital publishing world over the last decade and a half I’ve dealt with my share of intellectual property issues, so I’m writing from that perspective in addition to my other research. I know this has been a particular sore spot for many other internet marketers as well. Just based on my own personal experience and observations, I would say a loose form of libertarianism is kind of the default political philosophy for a good amount of people in the sales and marketing world I come from. It just naturally appeals to our independent entreprenur/anti-corporate personality. But I think if a lot of people looked into it more they may find the propertarian definitions of property to be much more all encompassing, useful and applicable to the real world, as I have. Propertarianism has added a whole new dimension of understanding for me when it comes to asset classes, brand protection, diversification & portfolio management. If you’re a business owner or individual who’s using the ideology and school of libertarianism/AnCapism as your property management company, I might encourage you to consider reevaluating your relationship with them. They may not be caretaking your family’s future, your community, your assets and your retirement as well as you’ve been led to think.







-
The Law
(important piece, core) 1) Judges are forced to adjudicate between customary law, regulation, and legislation during a period of rapid social, economic, and political upheaval. In science for example, there is no temporal pressure to decide. In conflict there is temporal pressure to decide. The state has taken on the monopoly of the application of violence, and created a monopoly method of dispute resolution (courts), and created a monopoly body by which to adjudicate such conflicts (law, legislation, and regulation.) 2) There exists only one universal law of human cooperation. We call that law ‘natural law’. That natural law consists in reciprocity. Reciprocity requires satisfaction of the criteria (a) fully informed, (b) productive, (c) warrantied, (d) voluntary transfer, (d) free of imposition of costs upon the interests of others by externality. One can obtain an interest by bearing a cost (performing an improvement) for the purpose of obtaining an interest; and one can have no interest until one has born a cost to obtain such an interest. 3) This one law (reciprocity) provides decidability independent of opinion, preference, custom, or presumption of good, and is the reason international law is governed by reciprocity it is the only rule that provides reciprocal (equal) incentive against retaliation for the imposition of costs upon one another. Law evolved, from the first record, to the present, for the purpose of preserving the volume, velocity, and returns on cooperation, and preventing cooperation’s opposite: retaliation cycles that throughout history have produced the deleterious effects of feuds. 4) Customary Law (especially germanic, if not all european) consists of the discovery and accumulation of applications of this law of reciprocity that we call Tort law. Legislation (command) and regulation (prior constraint) have been given the FORCE of LAW by those whose profit interest – either the population (preservation of returns on cooperation) or the territorial rulers (returns from taxation). 5) The primary function of RULE has been the preservation of cooperation by use of organized violence to suppress impositions of costs upon the investments of others. This is the role of insurer of last resort of Personal Interests. 6) The primary function of GOVERNMENT has been the construction of commons and the extraordinary returns produced by commons, while insuring those commons from privatization of commons, socialization of losses into the commons, by the organized use of violence. This is the role of insurer of last resort of the Commons. 7) The primary function of the STATE, particularly with the advent of paper currency, and now fiat (unbacked) currency (our money consists of nothing but shares in the economy) has increasingly evolved to function as the insurer of last resort against the Hazards of the vicissitudes of nature (disasters, tragedies, accidents, disability, health, old age, and even war). 8) Rights can only exist (a) by reciprocal exchange of the same obligation, and (b) when insured by a third party with sufficient organized violence to insure and reinforce them. Otherwise they are not rights but impositions by means of command. It is correct to say we create a market ‘demand’ natural rights, and we create a market demand for human rights, but those rights do not exist until we organize sufficient violence into roles and institutions to insure those rights: police, sheriffs, soldiery, and judges. 9) Human rights consist of AMBITIONS that we demand from the Governments of States in order to tolerate their retention of a monopoly of control over a territory. They exist as a postwar attempt to constraint governments to improving their territory, people, and assets by market means, without imposition upon their neighbors. Such rights, likewise, do not exist. But are merely an ambition. 10) The universal declaration of human rights contains a few provisions that were necessary to obtain the signatures of the then-communist states, that asserted positive rights (obligations to provide for one another without constraint on the reproduction that exhausts the ability to provide for others, and therefore results in the gradual dysgenic decline as we reverse thousands of years of upward redistribution of reproduction back down to the underclasses who are not able to produce sufficient market goods and services to exist without harming the reproduction of the middle and upper classes.) [note: we have reversed the flynn effect and have, even in china, been losing a third of a point of intelligence over a fairly short number of years. The productivity of a people is reducible to the median of the population’s cost of education and training, such that every point below what is today’s 105 and tomorrow’s 110 places an intolerable burden upon the rest of the polity.] 8) Our American constitution persisted the anglo saxon, germanic, proto-germanic (and possibly proto-indo-european) law of sovereign men limited to acts of reciprocity, and licensed the government to act in their interests to preserve their sovereignty (the original text being ‘life, liberty, property’). Unfortunately at the time the techniques of formal logic, strict constriction from first principles, were not known. We are no longer limited, and there is no reason any and every law cannot be constructed formally from the natural law of reciprocity, producing a complete, consistent, and easily falsifiable body of adjudicatable law. There is no reason any and every act of legislation, and any and every act of regulation, cannot be so constructed. The principle difference under such formal construction is that the one law, discovered application of the one law, regulation to limit hazards of those actions not open to restitution, and CONTRACTS for the production of commons would be consistent, and as such the government could only issue contracts under law, not edicts above that law. (This would destroy the left’s ability to usurp power by democratic means). 9) The uniqueness of western civilization is reducible to (a) a militia that constitutes the shareholders, (b) individual sovereignty of shareholders, (c) the demand for truth, duty, and reciprocity from one another in mutual insurance of our sovereignty. (d) And sovereignty results in the necessity of markets for association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, and polities. (e) such markets, adjudicated by the law of tort, adapt to change faster than all other methods of human organization. (f) it is this rapidity of adaptation and resulting insulation from corruption and rent seeking that made the west develop faster than the rest in both the ancient world and the modern, with the Abrahamic Dark Age of the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim attacks on the great civilizations, providing the only hindrance. Once north sea trade was reestablished, the saxon commercial order constructed in europe, and the atlantic opened to the age of sail, the west was finally, by the age of napoleon, able to return to Roman levels of institutional sophistication, and universal imposition of law. [note that the west had fertile lands and forests but no flood river valleys to concentrate production, concentrate people, and develop taxation. So while the ancient world could form armies by taxation, western people had to form militias that relied on advanced (at the time) technology that required whole families to pay for. These militias (cattle raiders, sea peoples, vikings, pirates, european explorers ) organized expeditions (raids) but did so voluntarily. There was no other means of organizing other than contract. It was this order that led to our law, our debate, our reason, and from there our science and technology. Western excellence is due to our law – which elsewhere is not contract but command. 10) The progressives lie to mask what is merely theft – they rely on postmodernism (lying by sophistry), and they rely on marxism (pseudoscience) as well as freudian and boazian pseudoscience. So yes, the Progressives (socialists) lie, but the Conservatives (Aristocratics) cannot tell the truth: The truth is quite simple: the reason for the success of western and eastern civilization, and most obviously the ashkenazim, is the upward redistribution of reproduction, and the use of manorialism, taxation, and the vicissitudes of nature to limit the reproduction of the underclass until such point that surpluses are sufficient to continually increase the standard of living through continuous market competition and innovation. Man was not oppressed. The man self domesticated through the same process he used for plants and animals: breeding the best and culling the rest. This is the dirty secret of civilizations. 11) Sovereignty, Truth, Duty, and Reciprocity produce markets, and markets are eugenic. They are just a peaceful form of eugenics rather than war, enslavement, enserfment. By use of Sovereignty, Truth, Duty, Reciprocity, and Markets western man in the ancient world, and in the modern, dragged humanity kicking and screaming out of ignorance, superstition, hard labor, poverty, starvation, infant mortality, early death, 12) The chinese are not so inhibited as we are. they do not care about markets other than in their ability to preserve their racially homogenous polity, and return themselves to position of world power to do so. They are actively researching methods of direct improvement while event their one child policy did not help the ongoing decline in the distribution of intelligence. We are doing the opposite, which is undermining the very reason for our evolutionary success, ad the means by which we dragged mankind out of darkness, and we are doing it through immigration of those very peoples who we have spent thousands of years eliminating from our polities. As far as I know anglicans and ashkenazim remain at parity, but the anglos otherwise have lost a full standard deviation or more since the beginning of the industrial revolution. Even the Norwegians are in distributional decline. 13) The most profitable action any polity can take is to institutionalize benevolent eugenics, and that is to pay the underclasses not to reproduce, and to limit all immigration to skilled professionals, and to push the young and old into the labor force in the less demanding occupations. This is the lesson of our experiment with universal democracy and marxist-postmodernist globalism: dramatic reversal of centuries of civic improvement. At present only the east asians are willing to pay the costs of retaining their accumulated achievements. The eugenicists were right and in retrospect it appears that the Boas, Marx, Freud, Frankfurt, and French Postmodern movements were but reactions against Darwin, Maxwell, Menger, Spencer, and Nietzsche. And the entire postwar period has been nothing but a pseudoscientific and pseudo-rational attack on western civilization – an effort to repeat the destruction of the civilizations of the ancient world by the same means – false promises. This time with pseudoscience and pseudo-rational sophisms using the major media instead of supernatural sophisms using roman roads and greek writing. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine
-
The Law
(important piece, core) 1) Judges are forced to adjudicate between customary law, regulation, and legislation during a period of rapid social, economic, and political upheaval. In science for example, there is no temporal pressure to decide. In conflict there is temporal pressure to decide. The state has taken on the monopoly of the application of violence, and created a monopoly method of dispute resolution (courts), and created a monopoly body by which to adjudicate such conflicts (law, legislation, and regulation.) 2) There exists only one universal law of human cooperation. We call that law ‘natural law’. That natural law consists in reciprocity. Reciprocity requires satisfaction of the criteria (a) fully informed, (b) productive, (c) warrantied, (d) voluntary transfer, (d) free of imposition of costs upon the interests of others by externality. One can obtain an interest by bearing a cost (performing an improvement) for the purpose of obtaining an interest; and one can have no interest until one has born a cost to obtain such an interest. 3) This one law (reciprocity) provides decidability independent of opinion, preference, custom, or presumption of good, and is the reason international law is governed by reciprocity it is the only rule that provides reciprocal (equal) incentive against retaliation for the imposition of costs upon one another. Law evolved, from the first record, to the present, for the purpose of preserving the volume, velocity, and returns on cooperation, and preventing cooperation’s opposite: retaliation cycles that throughout history have produced the deleterious effects of feuds. 4) Customary Law (especially germanic, if not all european) consists of the discovery and accumulation of applications of this law of reciprocity that we call Tort law. Legislation (command) and regulation (prior constraint) have been given the FORCE of LAW by those whose profit interest – either the population (preservation of returns on cooperation) or the territorial rulers (returns from taxation). 5) The primary function of RULE has been the preservation of cooperation by use of organized violence to suppress impositions of costs upon the investments of others. This is the role of insurer of last resort of Personal Interests. 6) The primary function of GOVERNMENT has been the construction of commons and the extraordinary returns produced by commons, while insuring those commons from privatization of commons, socialization of losses into the commons, by the organized use of violence. This is the role of insurer of last resort of the Commons. 7) The primary function of the STATE, particularly with the advent of paper currency, and now fiat (unbacked) currency (our money consists of nothing but shares in the economy) has increasingly evolved to function as the insurer of last resort against the Hazards of the vicissitudes of nature (disasters, tragedies, accidents, disability, health, old age, and even war). 8) Rights can only exist (a) by reciprocal exchange of the same obligation, and (b) when insured by a third party with sufficient organized violence to insure and reinforce them. Otherwise they are not rights but impositions by means of command. It is correct to say we create a market ‘demand’ natural rights, and we create a market demand for human rights, but those rights do not exist until we organize sufficient violence into roles and institutions to insure those rights: police, sheriffs, soldiery, and judges. 9) Human rights consist of AMBITIONS that we demand from the Governments of States in order to tolerate their retention of a monopoly of control over a territory. They exist as a postwar attempt to constraint governments to improving their territory, people, and assets by market means, without imposition upon their neighbors. Such rights, likewise, do not exist. But are merely an ambition. 10) The universal declaration of human rights contains a few provisions that were necessary to obtain the signatures of the then-communist states, that asserted positive rights (obligations to provide for one another without constraint on the reproduction that exhausts the ability to provide for others, and therefore results in the gradual dysgenic decline as we reverse thousands of years of upward redistribution of reproduction back down to the underclasses who are not able to produce sufficient market goods and services to exist without harming the reproduction of the middle and upper classes.) [note: we have reversed the flynn effect and have, even in china, been losing a third of a point of intelligence over a fairly short number of years. The productivity of a people is reducible to the median of the population’s cost of education and training, such that every point below what is today’s 105 and tomorrow’s 110 places an intolerable burden upon the rest of the polity.] 8) Our American constitution persisted the anglo saxon, germanic, proto-germanic (and possibly proto-indo-european) law of sovereign men limited to acts of reciprocity, and licensed the government to act in their interests to preserve their sovereignty (the original text being ‘life, liberty, property’). Unfortunately at the time the techniques of formal logic, strict constriction from first principles, were not known. We are no longer limited, and there is no reason any and every law cannot be constructed formally from the natural law of reciprocity, producing a complete, consistent, and easily falsifiable body of adjudicatable law. There is no reason any and every act of legislation, and any and every act of regulation, cannot be so constructed. The principle difference under such formal construction is that the one law, discovered application of the one law, regulation to limit hazards of those actions not open to restitution, and CONTRACTS for the production of commons would be consistent, and as such the government could only issue contracts under law, not edicts above that law. (This would destroy the left’s ability to usurp power by democratic means). 9) The uniqueness of western civilization is reducible to (a) a militia that constitutes the shareholders, (b) individual sovereignty of shareholders, (c) the demand for truth, duty, and reciprocity from one another in mutual insurance of our sovereignty. (d) And sovereignty results in the necessity of markets for association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, and polities. (e) such markets, adjudicated by the law of tort, adapt to change faster than all other methods of human organization. (f) it is this rapidity of adaptation and resulting insulation from corruption and rent seeking that made the west develop faster than the rest in both the ancient world and the modern, with the Abrahamic Dark Age of the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim attacks on the great civilizations, providing the only hindrance. Once north sea trade was reestablished, the saxon commercial order constructed in europe, and the atlantic opened to the age of sail, the west was finally, by the age of napoleon, able to return to Roman levels of institutional sophistication, and universal imposition of law. [note that the west had fertile lands and forests but no flood river valleys to concentrate production, concentrate people, and develop taxation. So while the ancient world could form armies by taxation, western people had to form militias that relied on advanced (at the time) technology that required whole families to pay for. These militias (cattle raiders, sea peoples, vikings, pirates, european explorers ) organized expeditions (raids) but did so voluntarily. There was no other means of organizing other than contract. It was this order that led to our law, our debate, our reason, and from there our science and technology. Western excellence is due to our law – which elsewhere is not contract but command. 10) The progressives lie to mask what is merely theft – they rely on postmodernism (lying by sophistry), and they rely on marxism (pseudoscience) as well as freudian and boazian pseudoscience. So yes, the Progressives (socialists) lie, but the Conservatives (Aristocratics) cannot tell the truth: The truth is quite simple: the reason for the success of western and eastern civilization, and most obviously the ashkenazim, is the upward redistribution of reproduction, and the use of manorialism, taxation, and the vicissitudes of nature to limit the reproduction of the underclass until such point that surpluses are sufficient to continually increase the standard of living through continuous market competition and innovation. Man was not oppressed. The man self domesticated through the same process he used for plants and animals: breeding the best and culling the rest. This is the dirty secret of civilizations. 11) Sovereignty, Truth, Duty, and Reciprocity produce markets, and markets are eugenic. They are just a peaceful form of eugenics rather than war, enslavement, enserfment. By use of Sovereignty, Truth, Duty, Reciprocity, and Markets western man in the ancient world, and in the modern, dragged humanity kicking and screaming out of ignorance, superstition, hard labor, poverty, starvation, infant mortality, early death, 12) The chinese are not so inhibited as we are. they do not care about markets other than in their ability to preserve their racially homogenous polity, and return themselves to position of world power to do so. They are actively researching methods of direct improvement while event their one child policy did not help the ongoing decline in the distribution of intelligence. We are doing the opposite, which is undermining the very reason for our evolutionary success, ad the means by which we dragged mankind out of darkness, and we are doing it through immigration of those very peoples who we have spent thousands of years eliminating from our polities. As far as I know anglicans and ashkenazim remain at parity, but the anglos otherwise have lost a full standard deviation or more since the beginning of the industrial revolution. Even the Norwegians are in distributional decline. 13) The most profitable action any polity can take is to institutionalize benevolent eugenics, and that is to pay the underclasses not to reproduce, and to limit all immigration to skilled professionals, and to push the young and old into the labor force in the less demanding occupations. This is the lesson of our experiment with universal democracy and marxist-postmodernist globalism: dramatic reversal of centuries of civic improvement. At present only the east asians are willing to pay the costs of retaining their accumulated achievements. The eugenicists were right and in retrospect it appears that the Boas, Marx, Freud, Frankfurt, and French Postmodern movements were but reactions against Darwin, Maxwell, Menger, Spencer, and Nietzsche. And the entire postwar period has been nothing but a pseudoscientific and pseudo-rational attack on western civilization – an effort to repeat the destruction of the civilizations of the ancient world by the same means – false promises. This time with pseudoscience and pseudo-rational sophisms using the major media instead of supernatural sophisms using roman roads and greek writing. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine
-
Oct 1, 2018, 2:11 PM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/video/starbucks-is-making-significant-changes-including-corporate-layoffs/vp-AAAAYi3Updated Oct 1, 2018, 2:11 PM
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-01 14:11:00 UTC
-
British vs American Legal Systems
I think the open question is between the british model of professional litigators of the court, and professional advocates for the individual, and the american model without the intermediary position. It is much harder to ‘pull bullshit’ in court in the british model. It is much easier to ‘pull bullshit’ in legislation in the british model. I am not yet sure if the house of lords is superior to the supreme court or not, but there is good reason to think it might be. Or, that the lords AND a supreme court would be superior to either condition. American constitution is better given the fact that our founding documents (declaration, constitution, bill of rights) are written, and consistent, if not as consistent as we could make them today – and aside from the fact that one requires all three documents to make sense of the constitution or the bill of rights because the natural law of reciprocity is not stated, and instead states men are equal rather than must be equal for the law of reciprocity (natural law) to fulfill its purpose of harmony. Conversely, the american model is far more common law (meaning permissive – less regulation) than the british model (meaning impermissive – more regulation). So this means that while americans have a superior juridical presumption (optimistic leading to more innovation, but more court disputes to resolve) while the british have less litigation to resolve because of higher regulation. I think the impact on the cultures is vast and the regulation culture in the uk has led to the feminization of the british male in less than eighty years. The optimum is probably the mixture of the two systems, with near zero regulation in america, and adding the intermediary between the lawyer and the court so that less nonsense occurs in court. It can be embarrassing to listen to young lawyers speak for their clients in court, rather than tell them “there is no fking way this is gonna fly so I won’t take your money”.
-
British vs American Legal Systems
I think the open question is between the british model of professional litigators of the court, and professional advocates for the individual, and the american model without the intermediary position. It is much harder to ‘pull bullshit’ in court in the british model. It is much easier to ‘pull bullshit’ in legislation in the british model. I am not yet sure if the house of lords is superior to the supreme court or not, but there is good reason to think it might be. Or, that the lords AND a supreme court would be superior to either condition. American constitution is better given the fact that our founding documents (declaration, constitution, bill of rights) are written, and consistent, if not as consistent as we could make them today – and aside from the fact that one requires all three documents to make sense of the constitution or the bill of rights because the natural law of reciprocity is not stated, and instead states men are equal rather than must be equal for the law of reciprocity (natural law) to fulfill its purpose of harmony. Conversely, the american model is far more common law (meaning permissive – less regulation) than the british model (meaning impermissive – more regulation). So this means that while americans have a superior juridical presumption (optimistic leading to more innovation, but more court disputes to resolve) while the british have less litigation to resolve because of higher regulation. I think the impact on the cultures is vast and the regulation culture in the uk has led to the feminization of the british male in less than eighty years. The optimum is probably the mixture of the two systems, with near zero regulation in america, and adding the intermediary between the lawyer and the court so that less nonsense occurs in court. It can be embarrassing to listen to young lawyers speak for their clients in court, rather than tell them “there is no fking way this is gonna fly so I won’t take your money”.
-
Constitution: Fitness, Religion, Education, Training
Constitution: Fitness, Religion, Education, Training
Article XIII
Fitness, Education, Training, and Religion
“The Market for the Production of Fitness”
Regarding Fitness
Purpose ( … ) Policy ( … )Regarding Education
Whereas; ( … )The purpose of Education is (a) persistence and improvement of intergenerational fitness, knowledge, skills, behavior, and their products as goods, services, and information, both private and common, and to defend against regression and decline of the same. (b) To insure the People against the costs and hazards of those who would otherwise impose costs upon them by lack of fitness, knowledge, skills, and behavior.
And Whereas;Western civilization evolved by uniquely employing sovereignty that resorts in adversarialism, that resorts in and markets, rather than authoritarianism. The problem? Co-Education: Boys and Men Require it. Girls and Women Can’t Bear It. And Women can’t teach with it. The result is emotionally undisciplined women and socially detached men, when persistence requires emotionally stable women and socially invested men.
Therefore;1 – Provide vouchers for education through grade twelve.
2 – Teachers form schools at their discretion, and shall operate the schools entirely themselves as a professional partnership in the legal and accounting traditions, without any administrative staff, other than security and maintenance, and shall accept only students they choose (or not). Discipline shall be restored in schools. Zero tolerance for indiscipline, and the restoration of physical punishment, and the prosecution of parents or guardians who fail to prepare children for a disciplined education.
As such boards of education shall be terminated, and all educational overhead shall be terminated, and teachers shall be rotated until they are sufficiently competent to operate as a profession, or driven out of business.
3 – Teachers shall come from second-career occupations so that they have real-world experience, and children older than those they are teaching. The only other qualification teachers require is the production and use of lesson planning.
Therefore
4 – After the age of eight, boys shall be taught by men, and girls taught by women. Teachers must be no less than twenty years older than their students. Teachers shall come from second-career occupations so that they have real-world experience, and children older than those they are teaching. Current and previous Government employees are prohibited from teaching.
5 – Curriculum
Restore geography, economic, technological, and scientific history. Add Economics, Finance, Accounting, and Law to the Curriculum; Restore Greek Philosophy, Anglo Enlightenment, Add The Crimes of Islam, Judaism, Christianity. Add Nationalism, Full Integration, and Oath to Constitution Add etiquette, manners, ethics, morals, and speech, and diction. Prohibit all anti-western thought, display, word, and deed.
6 – Games ( … ) competition.
7 – Overlapping Classes ( …. ) So No homework.
8. Restore class levels by ability regardless of age, and overlap grade levels in the same room wherever possible.
9. Restore proportional corporal punishment.
10 – Restore school uniforms to neutralize class differences in dress. Remove ‘socialist studies’, ‘literature’, ‘politics’ and other disciplines of political indoctrination.
11 – Restore two periods of physical activity per day – one brief in the morning for exercises, one in the afternoon for team sports.
12 – Increase the size of cafeterias so the entire class can lunch at without hunger pangs, or deliver lunches to classrooms and pick them up afterward. Children will be given some sort of food no less than every three hours.
13 – Cut the school day at age 14 to half-day and begin apprenticeship and work programs, seeking to find afternoon work for all students in the school. At the age of 14, delay the start of school to give teen bodies the morning sleep they require.
Trade (vocational), Professional (junior), College, and University
1 – a Vocational College shall Consist of Those Fields that Teach the Trades that Transform the Physical World Through the Use of Tools. 2 – a Professional (Junior College) shall Consist of Those Offering Vocational Training Outside of The Stem+l Fields, but In the Clerical and Support Fields, and Shall Complete All Courses in Two or Three Years. 3 – a College shall Consist of Specialization in At Least One of The Stem+l Disciplines, and Shall Complete All Courses in Three or Four Years, and May or May Not Offer Masters and Ph.D. Programs. and All Professors Must Be Full Time. 4 – to Hold the Title “University” the Organization Must Grant Two, Four, Masters, and Ph.D. Degrees in More than One College. Exit for Masters and Ph.D. Shall Depend upon The German Academic Method. and All Professors Must Be Full Time. 5 – the Professors shall Operate Both the College and The University, and Charge Rates by Professor and College as They See Fit, with Revenues to The Colleges and Professors as They See Fit. (starve the Bloated Bureaucracy). 5 – Provide Tax-Free, Interest-Free, Loans To Institutions to Loan to Students, with The Stipulation that Those Loans Will Be Paid by Payroll Deductions for No More than Seven Years, with Universities Absorbing All Losses. (end Incentive for Churning), and The University Shall Carry Responsibility for Defaults. Any Drop out Debts Are Forgiven and Losses Born by The Institution. 6 – Limit University Loans to The Fields Whose Calculations Are Warrantable: Physical Science, Technology/Engineering, Economics/finance, Mathematics, and Law (stem+l), with Zero Tolerance for Inflation of The Definitions of Those Disciplines. 7 – Prohibit the Use of Undergraduate Income to Finance Graduate and Ph.D. Programs. Permit Use of Sports Income to Finance Graduate and Ph.D. Incomes. 8 – All State Financing of Research Shall Be Limited to The Stem+l fields. 9 – the State Shall Obtain a Non-Voting Interest exclusive of Sale (transfer), in Any an All Research that Results from State Funding, and Be Given Equal Standing to The Best Standing of Any Dividend or Sale. 10 – the State Shall at All Times Seek to Invest in Private-Public Production of Goods, Services, and Information Resulting from That Research, that Are Revolutionary (additional) Not Just Evolutionary (competitive), as A Means of Increasing the Returns to The Citizenry.
Duration
Scientific College and University 1. Scientific Three+ Years – State Paid STEM+EL refers to Physical Sciences, Physical Technologies, Engineering, Mathematics, Mathematical Economics, and Law.
Administrative College 2. Administrative Two Years – State Paid Non-Stem Refers to Accounting, Finance, Economics; Business, Entrepreneurship, and Marketing; Public Service, Public Administration, Political Systems, International Relations;
College of The Arts 3. Personal Fulfillment – Self Paid Only Arts: History, Philosophy, Languages, Literature, Arts, Music, Theatre, Film;
Vocational College 4. Licensed Trades – One year, Two Year. 5. Vocational – One Year – State Paid Counseling; Experimental Psychology, Education, Health
Prohibited 6. Pseudoscience – Prohibited Fitness, Diet, Nutrition, “psychology”, “sociology”, Any-“studies”, any-Marxists”, any-“Postmodern”, “Political Science”
Academic Subjects in College and University
( … ) Top 100 Universities (999. Student Loans Present, and Past… (universities Bear Debt of Non-Stem Courses)Regarding Education
Purpose Policy8. Restore school uniforms to neutralize class differences in dress, and add laundry service for uniforms and exercise clothes, returning such to each classroom daily.
9. To the Curriculum:
(a) Add Economics, Accounting, and basic and property Law to the Curriculum,
(b) Restore geography, economic, technological, and scientific history in place of political and military history.
(c) Remove ‘socialist studies’, ‘literature’, ‘politics’ and other disciplines of political indoctrination.
(d) Restore logic, debate, rhetoric (public speaking) – and require demonstrated ability in their employment in argument for all teachers above sixth grade. (this will cull the field rapidly).
(e) Add etiquette, manners, ethics, morals under reciprocity, and require their adherence at all times.
(f) Restore two periods of physical activity per day – one brief in the morning for exercises, one in the afternoon for team sports.
10. Increase the size of cafeterias so the entire class can lunch at without hunger pangs, or deliver lunches to classrooms and pick them up afterward.
11. Cut the school day at age 14 to half day and begin apprenticeship and work programs, seeking to find afternoon work for all students in the school.
12. At the age of 14, delay start of school to give teen bodies the morning sleep they require because of their rapid growth while maturing.
13. Those students with disabilities such that they cannot adhere to behavior, etiquette, manners, ethics, and morals, or who disturb the harmony of the classroom by imposing costs upon the students and teachers attention shall be taught separately.
(Counsel: the experiment with commingling the able and unable has failed and shall be dismantled permanently.)
Regarding College and University
1 – A Vocational College shall consist of those fields that teach the Trades that transform the physical world through the use of tools.
2 – A Junior College shall consists of those offering vocational training outside of the STEM+L Fields, but in the clerical and support fields, and shall complete all courses in two or three years.
3 – A College shall consist of specialization in at least one of the STEM+L disciplines, and shall complete all courses in thee or four years, and may or may not offer masters and phd programs. And all professors must be full time.
4 – To hold the title University the organization must grant two, four, masters, and phd degrees in more than one college. Exit for masters and phd shall depend upon the german scholarship method. And all professors must be full time.
5 – The Professors shall operate both the college and the university, and charge rates by professor and college as they see fit, with revenues to the colleges and professors as they see fit. (starve the bloated bureaucracy). The Treasury shall fund loans to the colleges for the production of Monumental Facilities from which to conduct their profession.
6 – All state financing of research shall be limited to the STEM+L fields.
7 – The state shall obtain a non-voting interest exclusive of sale (transfer), in any an all research that results from state funding, and be given equal standing to the best standing of any dividend or sale.
9 – The state shall at all times seek to invest in private production of public goods, services and information that are revolutionary (additional) not just evolutionary (competitive), as a means of increasing the returns to the citizenry.
Policy1 – Provide tax free loans to universities to loan to students, with the stipulation that those loans will be paid by payroll deductions for no more than ten years, with universities absorbing all losses. (end incentive for churning)
2 – Limit university loans to the fields whose calculations are warrantable: Physical Science, Technology/Engineering, Economics/Finance, Mathematics, and Law (STEM+L), with zero tolerance for inflation of the definitions of those disciplines.
3 – Prohibit use of undergraduate income to finance graduate and phd programs. Permit use of sports income to finance graduate and phd incomes.
Regarding Religion
( … ) Where; The purpose of Religion; Where; Definition;European Religion shall refer to European Heathen of the Hearth(Ancestors and seasons), European Pagan of Dayus Patar (Heroic Ideals), Germanic, Scandinavian and Slavic Pagan (Germanic Ideals), Christian(Feminine Ideals) and none other.
And WhereOne is an Aristotelian if he has adopted the teaching of Aristotelianism: 1) Acceptance the laws of nature as binding on all of existence; … 2) Denying existence of a supreme being with dominion over the physical laws; thereby treating all gods, demigods, heroes, saints, figures of history, and ancestors as characters with whom I may speak to in public recital and private contemplation in the hope of gaining wisdom from having done so. And 3) Leaving open that synchronicity appears to exist now and then, and that it may be possible that there is a scientific explanation for it, other than that humans subject to similar stimuli producing similar intuitions and therefore similar ends. That is all that is required to be an Aristotelian.
One is a Heathen if ( … ancestors … ) and 2) treats nature as sacred and to be contemplated, protected and improved; and 3) treats the world as something to transform closer to Garden in whatever ways he can before death; and And 4) participates with others of the society in repetition of oaths, repetition of myths, repetition of festivals, repetition of holidays, and the perpetuation of all of the above to my offspring. This is all that is required to be a Heathen.
One is a Christian if he has adopted the teaching of Christianity: 1) the eradication of hatred from the human heart. 2) the extension of kinship love to non-kin. 3) the extension of exhaustive forgiveness before punishment, enserfment, enslavement, death, or war. 4) Demand for Personal acts of Charity for individuals less fortunate. This is all that is required of me to be a Christian.
On is an Aryan if he 1) proudly displays his excellences so that others seek to achieve or exceed them; 2) He seeks competition to constantly test and improve himself so improves and does not weaken; 3) Speak no insult and demands the same; 4) Speaks the truth and demands it; 5) Takes nothing not paid for and demands the same; 6) Grants sovereignty to kin and demand its; 7) Insures his people regardless of condition, and demands it; 8) Shows no fear or cowardice, nor abandons his brothers, or retreats, and 9) to die a good death in the service of my kin, my clan, my tribe and my people. 8) To discipline, enserf, enslave, ostracize or kill those who do otherwise; 1) we will prepare for war so perfectly that none dare enter it against us. 2) Once we go to war, we do so with *joy*, with eagerness, and with passion, and without mercy, without constraint, and without remorse; And 3) before ending war, we shall defeat an enemy completely such that no other dares a condition of our enemy, and the memory of the slaughter lives a hundred generations. 9) And in doing so leaves nothing but voluntary markets of cooperation between sovereign men; As far as I know, this is all that is required of me to be an Aryan.
As far as I know, if One succeeds as a Christian, as an Aristotelian, as a Heathen, as an Aryan,` as a Smith, then he has transcended the animal man, and earned his place among the saints, heroes, demigods, gods, in the memories, histories, and legends of man. And Where;1. No fundamental right can exist if it violates natural law.
2. Religion must be compatible with Natural Law or it is not religion but either politics in religious dress, or warfare in disguise – but not religion.
3. If a religion is incompatible with Natural Law, then it is the merger of politics and religion – yet defense of the separation of church and state is the reason for our tolerance of religions.
So religions that are incompatible with natural law cannot be claimed a natural right. So I have come to disagree with freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Instead: Require Truthful Speech and Truthful Religion: Compatibility with Natural Law. Religion remains truthful despite the use myth, parable, allegory, scripture and ritual, as long as it conveys truthful principles by those analogies: compatibility with natural law. Christianity is compatible with Natural Law. Poly-moralism and Dualist ethics are not compatible with natural law. Christianity advises us how to act in concert with natural law. Islam, Judaism, and a handful of others recommend actions an expressly counter to natural law. And they state that they contain laws – the Talmud and the Christians have been tolerant of heresies and competing religions in order to prevent the mandate of a state religion, and therefore to protect natural law, and the independence of religious wisdom based upon natural law from harm by the folly of men. Neither Christianity nor Natural Law prohibit us from the expurgation of immoral religions that violate natural law. Nor are we prohibited from philosophies that violate natural law: had we defeated Marxism-Leninism earlier then we would have saved a hundred million souls from suffering. The limit of religious tolerance is Natural Law. Everything else is just another act of war wearing a mask of religion to deceive us by preying upon our altruism. We are the people who invented truth. We rescued mankind from ignorance, mysticism, disease, and poverty using our technology of truth: science and natural law. We are the only people to have done it. The others hate it. We must not perish from this earth. Therefore;( … ) prohibition on all non-european, Semitic religions
( … ) purge of, and the prohibition on, and non-transmission of information in …
( … ) nationalization of all pre-war churches in Christendom