Curt Doolittle

Theme: Predation

  • Synonyms Across Disciplines: Free Riding, Involuntary Transfer, Discounting, Theft – But Morally It’s All Just ‘theft’

    [M]urder, violence, destruction, theft by physical appropriation, theft by fraud, theft by fraud using omission, free riding, privatization of commons, socialization of losses, conspiracy, invasion, conquest – all deprive others of that which they have acted to obtain an interest in, against their will. ie: theft – the taking of that which is not obtained by voluntary exchange or first-use. Humans reject, universally, and punish, universally, “theft”. But when we talk about ‘theft’, each discipline uses slightly different language

      [I] do not need to get into a semantic debate on normative terminology. I need only define my terms. “Free riding” is the broadest category I can use in the context of cooperation. While “involuntary transfer” is the broadest categorical term I can use in the context of moral philosophy. And “theft” is the broadest categorical term that I can use in the context of dispute resolution (law). However, whether talking about cooperation (free riding), morality (involuntary transfer), or dispute resolution (theft), the human action they all refer to, is that act which transfers that which one has acted to accumulate or acquire without his informed consent. Cheers

    • From Free-Riding To Rent Seeking To Anarchy

      FROM FREE RIDING TO RENT SEEKING TO ANARCHY People form governments to suppress the high transaction costs of criminal, unethical, and immoral behavior. The consequence is that all that suppressed free riding is simply converted into rent seeking by the bureaucracy. By forming governments, we trade high transaction costs that are pervasive (rampant criminal, unethical and immoral behavior) for low transaction costs that are increasingly expensive (conspiratorial, corrupt and exploitative behavior). The question we face in advancing political theory, is how to prevent rent seeking as well as free riding. The answer is to allow insurance companies, the common law, the courts, and a fully articulated set of property rights to do their jobs for us. Yes, there are certain luxuries we may wish to produce as a commons. There is no reason that we cannot produce luxuries as a commons. But we cannot produce laws. We can only allow the courts to discover them.

    • From Free-Riding To Rent Seeking To Anarchy

      FROM FREE RIDING TO RENT SEEKING TO ANARCHY People form governments to suppress the high transaction costs of criminal, unethical, and immoral behavior. The consequence is that all that suppressed free riding is simply converted into rent seeking by the bureaucracy. By forming governments, we trade high transaction costs that are pervasive (rampant criminal, unethical and immoral behavior) for low transaction costs that are increasingly expensive (conspiratorial, corrupt and exploitative behavior). The question we face in advancing political theory, is how to prevent rent seeking as well as free riding. The answer is to allow insurance companies, the common law, the courts, and a fully articulated set of property rights to do their jobs for us. Yes, there are certain luxuries we may wish to produce as a commons. There is no reason that we cannot produce luxuries as a commons. But we cannot produce laws. We can only allow the courts to discover them.

    • ITS UP TO ROTHBARDIANS TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY ARE NOT MORALLY BLIND ADVOCATES

      ITS UP TO ROTHBARDIANS TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY ARE NOT MORALLY BLIND ADVOCATES OF A PARASITIC, IMMORAL IDEOLOGY….

      …rejected by all but a dysfunctional minority; and by their profligate advocacy of an unethical, immoral, parasitic, regressive, and therefore politically impossible criteria for a voluntary social order, have impeded and harmed the preservation and expansion of our liberty.

      We cannot look to the ghetto – a state within a state – for institutional, legal, and moral insight. We must look to Aristocracy, the militia, the common law, the absolute nuclear family, and the total suppression of free riding, in all its forms, for our moral, legal and institutional insight. Because only Aristocratic Egalitarians of european history have produced liberty in any form.

      The vast majority of humans do not want liberty. But all wish to enjoy the prosperity that results from the aristocracy’s suppression of free riding, and the increased velocity of production and trade that results from that undesired suppression of free riding.

      The use of organized violence to eliminate free riding by a willing and committed minority, the admission into enfranchisement of those who demonstrate such a commitment, and the desire of, and incentive for, the unenfranchised to participate in the wealth of the market produced by the violent suppression of free riding, is the only means of obtaining liberty. Everything else is merely the pretense of liberty by permission of others, and the free riding upon those who fight to preserve liberty against the pervasive human preference to free ride whenever possible.

      Curt Doolittle

      The Philosophy of Aristocracy

      The Propertarian Institute

      Kiev Ukraine.

      Слава Україні Glory to Ukraine

      Слава Європі Glory to Europe

      Слава Свободи Glory to Liberty

      Слава всім нам. Glory to us all.

      Source date (UTC): 2014-04-27 05:56:00 UTC

    • THE MORAL DECEPTION OF THE ETHICAL STANDARD OF ‘PSYCHIC BENEFIT’ (worth repeatin

      THE MORAL DECEPTION OF THE ETHICAL STANDARD OF ‘PSYCHIC BENEFIT’

      (worth repeating)

      Rothbardian ethics only require ‘satisfaction’ or ‘psychic benefit’ or ‘voluntary cooperation in absence of the threat of violence. This is acceptable ethical criteria for exchange between states.

      However in-group ethical and moral codes evolved to prohibit free riding and parasitism. Such that the standard of ethical exchange is not ‘psychic’ alone, and therefore tolerates, licenses, and encourages deception; but objective, in that in-group trust requires that exchanges are objectively productive in addition to subjectively voluntary.

      I used to think Rothbard had simply made a mistake. However, it’s pretty hard to think that he was doing something other than trying to justify parasitic ethics as moral.

      Rothbardian ethics are immoral, unethical, parasitic and the reason the liberty movement has failed. Aristocratic Egalitarian (protestant, high trust) ethics are the only ethical scope of constraints that will allow for the formation of a voluntary polity capable of anarchic or private government.

      The total prohibition on free riding. The requirement for fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange, free of negative externality.

      **Why would one argue for an unethical and immoral scope of ethical constraints unless one was himself an immoral and unethical man?**

      Curt Doolittle

      The Philosophy Of Aristocracy

      The Propertarian Institute.

      Kiev

      Source date (UTC): 2014-04-27 04:01:00 UTC

    • ROTHBARDIAN ETHICS ARE IMMORAL, PARASITIC AND THE REASON FOR THE FAILURE OF LIBE

      ROTHBARDIAN ETHICS ARE IMMORAL, PARASITIC AND THE REASON FOR THE FAILURE OF LIBERTARIANISM.

      –“First they ignore you.

      Then they ridicule you.

      Then they fight you.

      Then you win.”–

      Aristocratic Egalitarianism requires that one fight for the liberty of those who would also have it. Proficiency at war, both verbal and physical, is a requirement for membership.

      Only Aristocratic Egalitarians are free. Everyone else is merely given freedom by permission, or a free-riding parasite on that aristocracy.

      Curt Doolittle

      The Philosophy of Aristocracy

      The Propertarian Institute

      Kiev

      Source date (UTC): 2014-04-27 03:31:00 UTC

    • RUSSIANS ARE NOW SPONSORING TERRORISM IN EASTERN UKRAINE Nice. Using women as hu

      RUSSIANS ARE NOW SPONSORING TERRORISM IN EASTERN UKRAINE

      Nice. Using women as human shields too.

      I’m all in favor of voluntary ethnonationalism. I’m not in favor of parasitic systemically unethical, systemically immoral, and bureaucratically corrupt civilizations.

      Russia has nothing to offer the world except suffering, corruption and poverty.

      Source date (UTC): 2014-04-24 12:44:00 UTC

    • Immoral, unethical, whining, free-riding, coward-tarians? Yah. I know those guys

      Immoral, unethical, whining, free-riding, coward-tarians?

      Yah. I know those guys.

      Source date (UTC): 2014-04-23 15:35:00 UTC

    • SYNONYMS ACROSS DISCIPLINES: BUT IT’S ALL JUST THEFT Murder, violence, destructi

      SYNONYMS ACROSS DISCIPLINES: BUT IT’S ALL JUST THEFT

      Murder, violence, destruction, theft by physical appropriation, theft by fraud, theft by fraud using omission, free riding, privatization of commons, socialization of losses, conspiracy, invasion, conquest – all deprive others of that which they have acted to obtain an interest in, against their will. ie: theft. the taking of that which is not obtained by voluntary exchange or first-use.

      Humans reject, universally, and punish, universally, “theft”. But when we talk about ‘theft’, each discipline uses slightly different language

      1) In legal terms resolvable under the common law, the word we use for involuntary transfer is ‘theft’. That is the most general categorical name we have available to us.

      2) Now, the PROBLEM that arises with cooperation is called ‘free riding’. The “problem of free riding’ is how it is discussed in the literature. In the context of social science, and in the context of economics, the term ‘free riding’ refers to that category of involuntary transfers (thefts).

      3) In moral philosophy we must identify first causes. I have borrowed the term ‘involuntary transfer’ from law, in which title is forcibly transferred by the state without consent of its owner. This was the most general and unloaded term I could find. (I should note that Jan Lester uses ‘forced costs” or something of that nature, for the same purpose.)

      I do not need to get into a semantic debate on normative terminology. I need only define my terms. “Free riding” is the broadest category I can use in the context of cooperation. While “involuntary transfer” is the broadest categorical term I can use in the context of moral philosophy. And “theft” is the broadest categorical term that I can use in the context of dispute resolution (law).

      However, whether talking about cooperation (free riding), morality (involuntary transfer), or dispute resolution (theft), the human action they all refer to, is that act which transfers that which one has acted to accumulate or acquire without his informed consent.

      Cheers

      Source date (UTC): 2014-04-17 03:46:00 UTC

    • FROM FREE RIDING TO RENT SEEKING TO ANARCHY People form governments to suppress

      FROM FREE RIDING TO RENT SEEKING TO ANARCHY

      People form governments to suppress the high transaction costs of criminal, unethical, and immoral behavior. The consequence is that all that suppressed free riding is simply converted into rent seeking by the bureaucracy. By forming governments, we trade high transaction costs that are pervasive (rampant criminal, unethical and immoral behavior) for low transaction costs that are increasingly expensive (conspiratorial, corrupt and exploitative behavior).

      The question we face in advancing political theory, is how to prevent rent seeking as well as free riding.

      The answer is to allow insurance companies, the common law, the courts, and a fully articulated set of property rights to do their jobs for us.

      Yes, there are certain luxuries we may wish to produce as a commons. There is no reason that we cannot produce luxuries as a commons.

      But we cannot produce laws. We can only allow the courts to discover them.

      Source date (UTC): 2014-04-04 08:03:00 UTC