Theme: Property

  • A summary essay of the book, The Origins of English Individualism:

    Nov 19, 2019, 2:39 PM A summary essay of the book, The Origins of English Individualism: Family Property and Social Transition, by Alan Macfarlane, professor of social anthropology and historical anthropology at Cambridge university from 1975-2006. —by Lisa Outhwaite “…one of the most thoroughly investigated of all peasantries in history turns out to be not a peasantry at all. The classical example of the transition of a “feudal”, peasant-based society into a new, capitalist, system turns out to be a deviant case”. The general point made is the refutation of previous claims of English life prior to the 16th Century being predominantly that of a peasantry (here defined as land ownership and property rights generally being held by the family and extended kin and not the individual, with a general lack of social mobility or capitalist economy).

    • Ample evidence for frequent land ownership transference outside of the family group in the 13th century.
    • Inheritance was subject to a will and not birth-right laws.

    • Children did not work as a collective family unit and left home, often marrying late.

    • Households were predominantly nuclear, with little evidence of multiple married couples sharing the same dwelling (typical for collectivist societies).

    • Marriage tended to be later.

    • In 13th Century England, single women, married women and widows all had very considerable property rights as individual persons.

    • In the period prior to the Black Death up to half the adult population were primarily hired labourers, which is incompatible wth notions of a peasant economy.

    • The exchange of labour services for cash was widespread by the middle of the 12th Century.

    • Production was often for exchange rather than personal use.

    • Strong evidence of individual mobility, in marked distinction to typical peasant societies.

    “Evidence for this re-assessment comes primarily from local and legal records. It is based on what happened in particular villages and the nature of the law. It reveals a picture of a social and economic structure greatly at variance even with what we know of most of continental countries in the 19th Century, let alone Asian or other peasantries.” Travel diaries of the time made frequent comment on the peculiar system in England with its absence of communities, family ties etc. Montesquieu observed in 1729 that England “hardly resembles the rest of Europe” Other writers commented on the peculiar independence, individuality and freedom of the English. The primary comparative historians of the 19th Century stress the differences between the legal, economic and social structure of medieval England. Only in England was the concept of indivisible, individually held, private property present by the 13th Century. A difference which made England “wholly exceptional in Europe”.

  • Emotions Are Measures of Changes in State of Property

    Emotions Are Measures of Changes in State of Property. https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/emotions-are-measures-of-changes-in-state-of-property/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 04:23:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265498793904164864

  • Emotions Are Measures of Changes in State of Property.

    Dec 19, 2019, 7:25 PM Emotions are measures of changes in state of property. by Martin Štěpán ( Brandon Hayes)

    Emotions are measures of changes in state of property. When they tell you hate or any other emotion is a crime, they’re trying to convince you your measurements are erroneous and to get you to stop measuring so that they can change the state of your property without obstacle.

  • Emotions Are Measures of Changes in State of Property.

    Dec 19, 2019, 7:25 PM Emotions are measures of changes in state of property. by Martin Štěpán ( Brandon Hayes)

    Emotions are measures of changes in state of property. When they tell you hate or any other emotion is a crime, they’re trying to convince you your measurements are erroneous and to get you to stop measuring so that they can change the state of your property without obstacle.

  • “Propertarianism Consists of ….”

    “Propertarianism Consists of ….” https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/propertarianism-consists-of/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 04:18:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265497663832821761

  • “Propertarianism Consists of ….”

    Dec 26, 2019, 2:12 PM

    —“This is a very vague non-answer that tries to appear smart by using a big word salad and sounds like something the typical libertarian atheist who’s sure of his own intellect would say. I still don’t understand what Propertarianism is.”— Ryan Chapman

    Always an overconfident moron in the bunch. What’s the difference between aristotelianism, platonism, and abrahamism? What’s the difference between reason, logic, rationalism? What’s the difference between Aristotelian, enlightenment(empirical) and scientific, revolutions? Whats the difference between math, logic, programming, recipes, and protocols? So what is the difference between aristotelianism, empiricism, science, and testimonialism (propertarianism)? Well, the difference is from the rational to the empirical to the operational. What does operational mean? It means the difference between logic (Sets) and programming (operations). It means the difference between logic (language), empiricism (observation), and operations (actions). Propertarianism completes the scientific method. The culmination of the philosophical program of the 20th century was that there is no via positiva scientific method. Instead, The scientific method is a via negativa method: falsificationary. There are only so many dimensions humans can cognitively imagine and cognitively falsify by tests of consistency: categorical, logical, operational, empirical, rational, reciprocal, complete in scope with defined limits, and consistent and therefore coherent across those dimensions, where one warranties such due diligence, and is liable for the consequence of his displays words and deeds resulting from such statements. By using this method we can create a universally commensurable, value neutral, operational language and as such a universally commensurable logic, across all fields: a system of measurement for the truthfulness of speech. We can then use this language and this method to restate the constitution, and our law, in scientific, and operational language, closed to interpretation (legislation from the bench). Moreover we can use this law to outlaw the primary innovation in organized crime that was used to undermine western civilization: false promise; baiting into hazard, using pilpul (sophism) and critique(undermining, straw manning) under cover of plausible deniability to profit from the imposition of harms upon others by financialization (innumeracy), pseudoscience, sophism, supernaturalism, denialism, including the false promises, pseudo-mathematics, pseudoscience, sophistry, and denial of marx, boas, freud, Cantor, Adorno et al, Gramsci et al, Derrida et al, Friedan et al, rand/rothbard, and the neocons. And yes, we can even use it to reform and obtain insight into the failures of Bohr ad Einstein that hilbert predicted, and we can explain the 20th century of mysticism and deceit that hayek warned us of. In other words we can end the jewish-muslim, marxist-postmodernis-feminist program of lying by false promise, and explain why it’s a crime. So, hopefully you can understand why this brief passage here is not something I would stick on the front page for marketing purposes. And if you can’t comprehend it – it doesn’t matter. You probably don’t know calculus, analysis, algebraic geometry, relativity, quantum mechanics, or the difference between hierarchical, relational, functional, object oriented, and bayesian programming, or the design patterns in each. Or the fundamental problems of mathematical economics, categories, use of symmetries as intermediary systems of economic measurement. Or even the problem of protein folding or why all of those questions are related by the problem a lack of an operational logic of geometries that replaces the operational logic of lines and curves using positional names that we call mathematics. I know what the fuck I”m doing.Don’t shit on my doorstep.

  • “Propertarianism Consists of ….”

    Dec 26, 2019, 2:12 PM

    —“This is a very vague non-answer that tries to appear smart by using a big word salad and sounds like something the typical libertarian atheist who’s sure of his own intellect would say. I still don’t understand what Propertarianism is.”— Ryan Chapman

    Always an overconfident moron in the bunch. What’s the difference between aristotelianism, platonism, and abrahamism? What’s the difference between reason, logic, rationalism? What’s the difference between Aristotelian, enlightenment(empirical) and scientific, revolutions? Whats the difference between math, logic, programming, recipes, and protocols? So what is the difference between aristotelianism, empiricism, science, and testimonialism (propertarianism)? Well, the difference is from the rational to the empirical to the operational. What does operational mean? It means the difference between logic (Sets) and programming (operations). It means the difference between logic (language), empiricism (observation), and operations (actions). Propertarianism completes the scientific method. The culmination of the philosophical program of the 20th century was that there is no via positiva scientific method. Instead, The scientific method is a via negativa method: falsificationary. There are only so many dimensions humans can cognitively imagine and cognitively falsify by tests of consistency: categorical, logical, operational, empirical, rational, reciprocal, complete in scope with defined limits, and consistent and therefore coherent across those dimensions, where one warranties such due diligence, and is liable for the consequence of his displays words and deeds resulting from such statements. By using this method we can create a universally commensurable, value neutral, operational language and as such a universally commensurable logic, across all fields: a system of measurement for the truthfulness of speech. We can then use this language and this method to restate the constitution, and our law, in scientific, and operational language, closed to interpretation (legislation from the bench). Moreover we can use this law to outlaw the primary innovation in organized crime that was used to undermine western civilization: false promise; baiting into hazard, using pilpul (sophism) and critique(undermining, straw manning) under cover of plausible deniability to profit from the imposition of harms upon others by financialization (innumeracy), pseudoscience, sophism, supernaturalism, denialism, including the false promises, pseudo-mathematics, pseudoscience, sophistry, and denial of marx, boas, freud, Cantor, Adorno et al, Gramsci et al, Derrida et al, Friedan et al, rand/rothbard, and the neocons. And yes, we can even use it to reform and obtain insight into the failures of Bohr ad Einstein that hilbert predicted, and we can explain the 20th century of mysticism and deceit that hayek warned us of. In other words we can end the jewish-muslim, marxist-postmodernis-feminist program of lying by false promise, and explain why it’s a crime. So, hopefully you can understand why this brief passage here is not something I would stick on the front page for marketing purposes. And if you can’t comprehend it – it doesn’t matter. You probably don’t know calculus, analysis, algebraic geometry, relativity, quantum mechanics, or the difference between hierarchical, relational, functional, object oriented, and bayesian programming, or the design patterns in each. Or the fundamental problems of mathematical economics, categories, use of symmetries as intermediary systems of economic measurement. Or even the problem of protein folding or why all of those questions are related by the problem a lack of an operational logic of geometries that replaces the operational logic of lines and curves using positional names that we call mathematics. I know what the fuck I”m doing.Don’t shit on my doorstep.

  • Why Does Common Law Marriage Exist?

    Dec 27, 2019, 5:34 PM Common law marriage is the origin of all marriage. The question is, why do church ceremonies, state marriages, and state licenses exist? Traditional european marriage required only both parties agree to it, but technically speaking, it was an agreement between families, not just the husband and wife. A marriage agreement (promise, contract) is not only between the husband and wife, between their families, but is insured by the polity. Meaning that if you interfered in a marriage you were liable for damages (Yes really). We are very comfortable today but it was not long ago that life was precarious and reciprocally insured each other, so a failed marriage ment that parental families would absorb costs they might not be able to carry. Marriage licenses began so that otherwise illegal marriages could be conducted. In the USA the puritans in Massachusetts began requiring them (I don’t know why) – most likely to maintain their version of eugenic mating which is an unspoken tenet of the protestant ethic. The present reason for marriage licenses, registrations, and ceremonies is the prevention of illegal marriages, and the resolution of property and inheritance disputes by the court now that we have enough wealth to worry about.

  • Why Does Common Law Marriage Exist?

    Dec 27, 2019, 5:34 PM Common law marriage is the origin of all marriage. The question is, why do church ceremonies, state marriages, and state licenses exist? Traditional european marriage required only both parties agree to it, but technically speaking, it was an agreement between families, not just the husband and wife. A marriage agreement (promise, contract) is not only between the husband and wife, between their families, but is insured by the polity. Meaning that if you interfered in a marriage you were liable for damages (Yes really). We are very comfortable today but it was not long ago that life was precarious and reciprocally insured each other, so a failed marriage ment that parental families would absorb costs they might not be able to carry. Marriage licenses began so that otherwise illegal marriages could be conducted. In the USA the puritans in Massachusetts began requiring them (I don’t know why) – most likely to maintain their version of eugenic mating which is an unspoken tenet of the protestant ethic. The present reason for marriage licenses, registrations, and ceremonies is the prevention of illegal marriages, and the resolution of property and inheritance disputes by the court now that we have enough wealth to worry about.

  • Why Anglos Think European Bureaucracy and Law Is Idiotic

    Why Anglos Think European Bureaucracy and Law Is Idiotic https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/why-anglos-think-european-bureaucracy-and-law-is-idiotic/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 04:17:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265497247262953474