THE PLAN:
1) BANKRUPT THE STATE (nearing completion) 1975-present
2) PLAN ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS (under construction) 2000-present
3) NULLIFICATION (in experimentation) 2008 – present
4) PLAN TRANSITIONS
5) ISSUE DECLARATIONS
6) IMPLEMENT SECESSIONS
7) REORGANIZATIONS
8) “GOLD RUSH OF PROSPERITY” in each new society.
9) FORM NEW INTER-STATE COOPERATION
10) ASSIST IMITATION
Source date (UTC): 2013-11-25 16:45:00 UTC
ARISTOCRACY VS GENTRY
I have’t figured out how I’m doing to deal with this yet, but there is indeed a difference between Aristocratic egalitarian manorialism, and the Aristocratic class. One describes the metaphysical prejudices of a social order, the other it’s extreme instantiation in a small number of individuals.
In fact, as someone else pointed out today, the Aristocrats were, for much of the medieval period, bloody warriors that the church could not suppress.
But that said, I disagree with the negative opinions of aristocracy held by most historians. The aristocratic obsession was a ‘good thing’ is based upon the fact that the church (STATE) could NOT suppress them. Nor can the state suppress an armed militia.
While the current intellectual emphasis is on the family, and outbreeding, as the source of the western aristocratic egalitarian ethic, the militia is an equally important institution – because it was the first: the cause of liberty and property.
GENTRY
The gentry were the middle managers who actually ran society the way that sergeants run the army.
And when we say that one is a gentleman, we refer to the behavior of the gentry, if not the martial aristocracy.
These gentlemen and their families built England, as a commercial power.
And it is their progeny that we all represent.
Source date (UTC): 2013-11-25 10:17:00 UTC
SAVED BY CHURCH AND GOD. SAVED BY ACADEMIA AND STATE.
There isn’t any difference you know.
Universities were extensions of the church, and with the decline of the church, the university has replaced the church as the source of civic religion, and the promise of prosperity.
But, going to college doesn’t, it turns out, teach you much. It just sorts us into how much hard work we can adapt to in any given period of time.
And it turns out that the church didn’t save you, and academia didn’t save you.
We rebelled against the little slips of paper the church gave out. We are rebelling against the little slips of paper academia has given out.
Why is it that the church doesn’t warranty your access to heaven, or academia your access to prosperity?
If you could take them to court like any other merchant, what would change in both church (premodern religion) and academia (the modern and postmodern religion)?
If someone will not warrant their goods, what does that say about them and their goods?
Fraud is fraud.
Source date (UTC): 2013-11-25 04:37:00 UTC
TRUST AND TRANSACTION COSTS
“…people who do not trust one another will end up cooperating only under a system of formal rules and regulations, which have to be negotiated, agreed to, litigated, and enforced, sometimes by coercive means. This legal apparatus, serving as a substitute for trust, entails what economists call “transaction costs….”
Source date (UTC): 2013-11-21 16:35:00 UTC
THE TWO DARK or ANGLO-COUNTER-ENLIGHTENMENT PROJECTS
1) Attack on diversity and equality as a means of preserving our ability to use historical deliberative classical liberal institutions
2) Formulation of alternative institutions that make possible the voluntary cooperation between diverse and unequal people.
THE RIGHT IS DOING THE FIRST.
I (as a libertarian) AM DOING THE SECOND.
THE DARK ENLIGHTENMENT IS NOT REACTIONARY – ITS RADICAL.
Source date (UTC): 2013-11-13 02:27:00 UTC
LACKING A ‘BOOK’ – YOU NEED A BOOK
We benefit from the evolutionary structure of aristocracy. But we are harmed by by the loss of Druidic mythos, and the failure to articulate the necessary properties of the aristocratic egalitarian society
EITHER THEFT IS IMMORAL OR IT ISN’T – THE MANNER OF THEFT OR THEFT?
Is theft only wrong when it is intersubjectively verifiable? Or is theft wrong, in that it is destructive of cooperation, no matter whether it is visible or not? I think it is hard to convince people of anything but the latter.
Is ownership determined by action? If ownership is determined by action then institutions that require respect of property are a commons that is paid for by action, in voluntary exchange.
While I don’t want to, at this moment, write something very long to demonstrate this argument in detail, it is, as far as I know, an impenetrable criticism of rothbardian ethics, and a replacement of those ethics with propertarian ethics as the only LOGICALLY POSSIBLE definition of property rights. It is a replacement of the ethics of the ghetto with the ethics of the aristocracy.
It is not possible to have an institution of property rights on the rothbardian model, because it is a praxeological disincentive to develop property rights.
Aristocratic propertarianism is the replacement of rothbard’s individualistic me and my promise of violence with the egalitarian us and our promise of violence.
It is the corporation. The corporeal-ization of property rights.
It is not logical that individuals can create ‘possess’ property rights. One can demand them in exchange. But it takes a minimum of two people to create property rights, because they can only be obtained in exchange.
ORIGINS
Sitting in Church at the age of 12, I promised myself I would write that book. Yes, we have the (rather pitiful) book of Jerusalem, but Athens didn’t give us a book. Plato’s tried but his book is a catastrophe. Aristotle didn’t survive well enough for us enough to work with as “a book” – although it might be reconstructable in at least small parts. The Monarchies didn’t leave us a book. Although we could argue that Smith and Hume together made a pretty good pass at it democratizing it. Chivalry left us a book: arthurian legends. And I think the reason we don’t have a book, is that the church imposed its book – and that book wasn’t a very good one. Not as good as Aristotle’s would have been. That book, and the church, were a prohibition on writing the book of aristocratic egalitarianism. Albiet, the church is the OTHER HALF of aristocratic egalitarianism.
Source date (UTC): 2013-11-13 02:07:00 UTC
We use both informal and formal institutions, to transform descriptive ethics, to prescriptive ethics, to norms.
We can bend these natural ethics. But we cannot break them.
Ethics are systems of incentives.
It is non-rational to expect people to adopt ethical systems that are to their disadvantage.
And not only is it non-rational, it is counter to praxeology.
Source date (UTC): 2013-11-12 07:15:00 UTC
QUESTION:
Why don’t we call ‘liberty’ what it is? “ARISTOCRACY”
“Western Aristocratic, Egalitarian, Propertarianism”
Those who CREATE the institution of property, earn the RIGHT of property.
Source date (UTC): 2013-11-11 06:49:00 UTC
(Sketch)
Eliminate the state sponsored corporation.
A corporation is a partnership whose members are insured by a monopoly insurer insulated from competition: the state.
All associations are, and only can be, partnerships.
Restore right of suit for any and all involuntary transfers, outside of morally sanctioned competition, against any and all individuals within the partnership and their agents.
Require insurance bonds be purchased by the partnership.
Require all employees be bonded if they communicate with or act on behalf of, customers.
(The incentives will favor truth telling and allocate money and status to truth-tellers.)
Stock certificates shall not represent ownership, but a purchase of contractual rights to dividends that are guaranteed by the assets in the event of liquidation or sale. Control then shall not be democratic, but contractual.
Source date (UTC): 2013-11-07 09:26:00 UTC
THE “BIG FIVE” WORKPLACE TRAITS IN CONSULTING
People are not a commoditized “meat” that is reducible to P&L Numbers. It takes a variety of skills to produce excellent service work. And Oversing measures (at least) those five different properties:
—TRAIT————————-Measurement———–
1) “Like-ability” (Peer 360 system
2) “Soft Skills – Trustworthiness” (Skill System by Peers)
3) “Revenue value of hard skills” (Skill System / Peer Skill Ratings)
4) “Customer Trust and Retention” (Net Promoter Score)
5) “Profitability” measured as:
a) Utilization and b) Chargeability (Standard financial metrics)
So, any individual is always represented by oversing using all these ‘metrics’. Their “Personality Profile” so to speak.
THE WORKPLACE AS EXTENDED FAMILY RATHER THAN LABOR POOL.
We found that feedback from PEERS was MORE ACCURATE and MORE RESPECTED and produced GREATER BEHAVIORAL CHANGE than all feedback from management combined. In fact, management opinion of any staff member was usually a CONTRARY INDICATOR of the individual’s value to the business.
So, our use of these measures helped us create a culture of a ‘family’ by giving honest feedback, the purpose of which was to ‘advance the individual and the family’ as a whole. Not through threats, not through incentives, not through pressure, but through advice and counsel. Humans want to do the right thing to fit into groups. And you just have to give them to tools to do so. Reliable information is the best tool.
Like the original meaning of ‘confession’, almost all feedback is publicly visible. Your sins are public, as is your heroism.
ONE OF THE SECRETS OF ANY BUSINESS IS NEED FOR EACH OTHER.
One of the secrets is “IDLE HANDS MAKE ILL WILL”. And people will naturally free-ride and rent-seek, which creates animosity in the ‘tribe’. The best way to prevent bad behavior is by minimizing the potential of it. The best way to minimize potential, is to always be marginally short of staff, so that everyone has to chip in to keep everyone else successful and happy. Furthermore, the incentive to overstaff is usually crated by the most populous RENT SEEKERS in any business : middle management. Oversing reduces the ability of middle management to rent seek, hide information for the purpose of obtaining political power. Our experience was that we needed only talent leadership, not ‘management’ per se. Because the feedback and ‘management’ of individual behavior was democratized into a marketplace of voluntary exchanges of assistance, appreciation and complaint.
Oversing is revolutionary if you use it as we intend that you do. It will transform not only your ability to manage your business by looking forward, and by increasing utilization but it will transform you business by making the ‘family’ manage the business, and thereby feeling PART OF IT, and able to INFLUENCE IT.
Management hierarchy is, just like government, little more than rent seeking and obfuscation of facts.
And just like government, management hierarchy is the primary reason why individuals feel resentment toward the business.
Make them LOVE IT INSTEAD.
IF TALENT IS YOUR BUSINESS, THEN USE IT, AND TAKE CARE OF IT.
Source date (UTC): 2013-11-06 06:29:00 UTC