(FB 1551050760 Timestamp) “CURT: WHAT IS THE ESSENCE OF PROPERTARIANISM?” —“Can you define the essence of Propertarianism? There’s a saying “I have found the essence of Bushido – To die” Is there something similar in regard to Propertarianism? So for example: sovereignty and reciprocity?”— lol… what does ‘essence’ mean? Propertarianism isn’t ONE thing. It’s a collection of things. But let’s use poetic license: The essence of P-metaphysics is the grammars. The essence of P-psychology of acquisitionism – all human psychology can be explained as acquisition. The essence of p-epistemology of testimonialism is the completion of the method. The essence of p-sociology of compatibilism is the division of perceptual, cognitive, memory, advocacy, negotiation, and labor with cooperation as a test of comparison. The essence of p-ethics (propertarian ethics) is reciprocity as the test of comparison and property as the system of measurement. The essence of p-politics (the natural law) is strict construction using all of the above. The essence of the western group evolutionary strategy is the uniqueness of aristocratic egalitarianism: heroism and excellence, sovereignty and reciprocity, truth before face, and duty before self and family, Rule of law and the Jury, and markets in all aspects of life. So the essence of propertarianism (the set of all ideas) is that this set of ideas that unifies all disciplines of human thought into a single commensurable system that is contiguous with physical science. So if you had me make an analogy to the essence of bushido, it’s “The essence of the uniqueness of western civilization” written in logical and scientific terms. I mean, you guys can ask me to simplify it all ya want but it’s not simple. It’s A LOT OF STUFF Curt
Theme: Property
-
(FB 1551139715 Timestamp) THE OMFG Q OF THE DAY: “CAN YOU OWN P-SSY?” Answering
(FB 1551139715 Timestamp) THE OMFG Q OF THE DAY: “CAN YOU OWN P-SSY?” Answering this ‘fringe’ stuff simply demonstrates the power of propertarian analysis. 😉 And it’s funny….. lol —“Curt Doolittle can pu–y be property?”—Kyle Brawn You know, under the right conditions, I would answer that question sarcastically and get hammered for it. But at the moment I have my wits about me, and I will say that: Empirically, for almost all of history, it has been property. I am not sure it still isn’t. It’s just collective rather than private ownership. Empirically, Given The Possible Series: 1. Possession in fact (under your control – self defense ) 2. Consensual Property. (normative property – reciprocal defense) 3. Institutional Property (property rights – institutional defense) It is possible to have ‘it’ under your control, normatively under your control, and institutional under your control. Having ‘it’ just requires your ability to protect your control by individual, reciprocal, or institutional means. In general it’s pretty difficult without (a) a slave population, and (b) institutional means of defending it. Given that ‘it’ is not capable of self defense, ‘it’ doesn’t have an opinion. It is instead, the men who are willing to insure or prevent ‘ownership’ by individual, reciprocal, or institutional means that determine the outcome. In general the outcome depends upon (a) the affordability of surplus native females willingness of native brothers and fathers to tolerate or (b) the affordability of surplus alien females and the ability of native females to rally their protecting males to prohibit the discount of their female market value by alien females. The future has a very good chance of restoring slavery as far as I can tell, and the recent period of luxury produced by the western advances in technology may be a temporary rather than permanent progression. That is, I think, the argument. Hence, scarce females, protected by fathers and brothers produce high female market value, and plentiful females unprotected by fathers and brothers produce low female market value. In other words Might Makes Rights – whether right or wrong. Always and everywhere. “Veritas Et Violentia”
-
(FB 1551139715 Timestamp) THE OMFG Q OF THE DAY: “CAN YOU OWN P-SSY?” Answering
(FB 1551139715 Timestamp) THE OMFG Q OF THE DAY: “CAN YOU OWN P-SSY?” Answering this ‘fringe’ stuff simply demonstrates the power of propertarian analysis. 😉 And it’s funny….. lol —“Curt Doolittle can pu–y be property?”—Kyle Brawn You know, under the right conditions, I would answer that question sarcastically and get hammered for it. But at the moment I have my wits about me, and I will say that: Empirically, for almost all of history, it has been property. I am not sure it still isn’t. It’s just collective rather than private ownership. Empirically, Given The Possible Series: 1. Possession in fact (under your control – self defense ) 2. Consensual Property. (normative property – reciprocal defense) 3. Institutional Property (property rights – institutional defense) It is possible to have ‘it’ under your control, normatively under your control, and institutional under your control. Having ‘it’ just requires your ability to protect your control by individual, reciprocal, or institutional means. In general it’s pretty difficult without (a) a slave population, and (b) institutional means of defending it. Given that ‘it’ is not capable of self defense, ‘it’ doesn’t have an opinion. It is instead, the men who are willing to insure or prevent ‘ownership’ by individual, reciprocal, or institutional means that determine the outcome. In general the outcome depends upon (a) the affordability of surplus native females willingness of native brothers and fathers to tolerate or (b) the affordability of surplus alien females and the ability of native females to rally their protecting males to prohibit the discount of their female market value by alien females. The future has a very good chance of restoring slavery as far as I can tell, and the recent period of luxury produced by the western advances in technology may be a temporary rather than permanent progression. That is, I think, the argument. Hence, scarce females, protected by fathers and brothers produce high female market value, and plentiful females unprotected by fathers and brothers produce low female market value. In other words Might Makes Rights – whether right or wrong. Always and everywhere. “Veritas Et Violentia”
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551140498 Timestamp) THOSE WHO “GRADUATE” TO PROPERTARIANISM —“Iâm almost silent on political matters since becoming a Propertarian – Iâm embarrassed about libertarianism and objectivist fervour in the past and cannot speak unless Iâve done due diligence.”—Gary Knight …
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551140498 Timestamp) THOSE WHO “GRADUATE” TO PROPERTARIANISM —“Iâm almost silent on political matters since becoming a Propertarian – Iâm embarrassed about libertarianism and objectivist fervour in the past and cannot speak unless Iâve done due diligence.”—Gary Knight …
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551278999 Timestamp) LIBERTARIAN FREE TRADE VS PROPERTARIAN FREE TRADE —“Are you for a free market or against it? I’m curious. I can never really tell with you.”— Matthew What is the limit of a free market? In other words, a ‘free market’ like ‘NAP’ is a half truth in order to propagate a lie. At what point are you stealing from the shareholders of the polity? —“The libertarian concept of property is lacking, I agree.”— So we fix libertarianism’s half-truth half-lie: Rule of law with warranty of due diligence of a full accounting of externalities means free trade by reciprocity to the limits of proportionality. So I teach full accounting not ‘limitless free trade’.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551279344 Timestamp) ANARCHISM VS PROPERTARIANISM “Anarchism” means POLYLOGICAL polycentric law, of voluntary exchange independent of warranty and externality. “Propertarianism” ‘s Rule of Law means MONOLOGICAL polycentric (market) law of productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange, limited to positive externalities. Libertarianism = jewish (semitic) Ghetto Ethics, and; Propertarianism = Anglo Saxon (germanic) Aristocratic ethics.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551278999 Timestamp) LIBERTARIAN FREE TRADE VS PROPERTARIAN FREE TRADE —“Are you for a free market or against it? I’m curious. I can never really tell with you.”— Matthew What is the limit of a free market? In other words, a ‘free market’ like ‘NAP’ is a half truth in order to propagate a lie. At what point are you stealing from the shareholders of the polity? —“The libertarian concept of property is lacking, I agree.”— So we fix libertarianism’s half-truth half-lie: Rule of law with warranty of due diligence of a full accounting of externalities means free trade by reciprocity to the limits of proportionality. So I teach full accounting not ‘limitless free trade’.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551279344 Timestamp) ANARCHISM VS PROPERTARIANISM “Anarchism” means POLYLOGICAL polycentric law, of voluntary exchange independent of warranty and externality. “Propertarianism” ‘s Rule of Law means MONOLOGICAL polycentric (market) law of productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange, limited to positive externalities. Libertarianism = jewish (semitic) Ghetto Ethics, and; Propertarianism = Anglo Saxon (germanic) Aristocratic ethics.
-
(FB 1551371937 Timestamp) —“Proprietarianism-You can have my donut if I can ha
(FB 1551371937 Timestamp) —“Proprietarianism-You can have my donut if I can have yours and no one else gets harmed in the process”–Greg Grzywacz He forgot the last bit. —…. Otherwise, either you don’t get my donut, and if you even try, I’m going to end you and eat both our donuts.”–CurtD