I KNOW WHAT BOTHERS YOU ABOUT MY WORK.
—“
I don’t propose a good, or a preference. I state a truth, and I state it prosecutorially, as natural law, that is not open to choice or dispute…. https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=493393164590912&id=100017606988153
Source date (UTC): 2019-10-26 20:34:11 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188192120034725888
—“I usually tell myself it’s cynical to think MOST women don’t reciprocate enough – but it’s a common enough occurrence that it’s important to test such things before any commitments.
One… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=493348134595415&id=100017606988153
Source date (UTC): 2019-10-26 18:55:51 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188167372877848583
I KNOW WHAT BOTHERS YOU ABOUT MY WORK.
—“
I don’t propose a good, or a preference. I state a truth, and I state it prosecutorially, as natural law, that is not open to choice or dispute.
Why? The Victorians civilized greek prose in continuation of their virtue signalling by overextension of christianity to justify their conquest.
The marxists, feminist, postmodernists, and denialists took advantage of our kindness. They took advantage of our virtue signaling. Conservatives failed to resist them, Libertarians only resisted them in the economy, and science has only now falsified them. And they have sought to achieve by immigration and conflict
I don’t make the same mistake.
I don’t write appealing theology you want. I don’t write appeals empathically in moral philosophy to suggest. I don’t write empathic and rational appeals in secular philosophy to persuade.
I write the law. The natural law. The only terms under which cooperation and compromise are preferable to conquest. I’m stating the only terms under which it is rational for us NOT to conquer, rule, tax, enserf, or enslave you, or worse.
Europeans are done asking. They’re done tolerating. They’re done hoping. Science is proving us correct in human differences, just as it proved us correct in economics; just as it has proved us correct in politics.
These are the terms of non conflict.
And honestly, we are hoping you don’t accept them.
You owe us 100M lives. I hope you are are ready to pay the debt.
“—
Source date (UTC): 2019-10-26 16:34:00 UTC
Caution: P-Law only tests for reciprocity. But,our proposed US constitution’s Prohibitions are: Lawyers, Govt., Immigrants w/o 6 generations, and Foreign Nationals; restores houses for the classes and genders; and requires demonstrated achievement in military, family, biz.
Source date (UTC): 2019-10-26 15:54:55 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188121840700526592
Reply addressees: @KurtKurtking @JohnMarkSays
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188119409975541760
IN REPLY TO:
@KurtKurtking
@CurtDoolittle @JohnMarkSays
Does the P constitution support citizen legislatures by prohibiting lawyers, foreign nationals, and secret society membership? The original #13A
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188119409975541760
—“I usually tell myself it’s cynical to think MOST women don’t reciprocate enough – but it’s a common enough occurrence that it’s important to test such things before any commitments.
One of the points I’m driving at is that even if all high value men control SMP (sexual marketplace) and espouse P, it STILL doesn’t grant an ability societal to control what mothers actually believe.
In this case, I think coercion fails and instead women who willfully support these concepts are necessary because as Bill said “personality solidifies by age 6-8. those years largely engaged with the mother.”—Alain Dwight
Source date (UTC): 2019-10-26 14:55:00 UTC
Yep, Contract makers yes. Law no. There is only one law: the natural law of reciprocity.
Source date (UTC): 2019-10-26 01:33:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187905170740523008
Reply addressees: @JohnMarkSays @directdemocrac7
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187848039169482752
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187848039169482752
WE HAVE NO CHOICE. EQUALITY IN RECIPROCITY OR IN POVERTY
Our only possibilities are equality in reciprocity or equality in ignorance, superstition, and absolute poverty. There is no choice. It’s just physics. Humans have memories, predictions from memories, and ability to choose to act on those predictions, so that we can outwit time in ways physical processes lacking memory, prediction, choice, and action cannot. However that only allows us to benefit from physical processes not deny or circumvent them. We are as physically constrained as is the rest of the universe. And our only substantial advantage is that the ability to imitate, empathize, sympathize, predict futures from them, and choose to cooperate on those possible futures, is so much more efficient and provides so many greater returns, that we can do a bit better than the rest of life forms – at least with our limits – to convert more calories, and continuously increase our consumption through continuous expansion of cooperation. But in doing so we form Pareto distributions of influence, in order to obtain Nash equilibriums of rewards. And that is a physical necessity of physical reality. We don’t have any choice. We are not wealthier than cave men, our only asset is time. Through cooperation we have made the purchasing power of time increase over and over again throughout history, although disproportionately so with the invention of aristotielainsim, and even more so with the mastery of heat, steam, electricity, chemistry, and now information.
Source date (UTC): 2019-10-25 11:51:00 UTC
RECIPROCITY ENTERING THE MAINSTREAM
—“There’s that word reciprocity again… Where have I heard that before?!?”— JWarren Warren
We will get there. We will standardize that term as the central object of conflict, thereby replacing equality. We probably wont get credit for it. But we will get there. Everyone will use the term. It is the foundation of western civilization. It’s the reason for our success. Its true and it’s moral. But the harder problem in the future will be preventing the use of abrahamic deceit to undermine that term. And every time they try we will have an opportunity to train the world about abrahamic deceit ,and its cause of past present conflcit dark age, and destruction.
THE BIG HISTORY IN P
This is the ‘big history’ (as someone said yesterday) provided by my research into Propertarianism. It’s that the war between the masculine eugenic indo-europea, the feminine dysgenic semitic, the masculine eugenic east asian, remains with India providing the most interesting compromise position at the expense of continuous failure to evolve.
Source date (UTC): 2019-10-25 11:39:00 UTC
(Which is how Rothbard, in typical fashion, leaves the door open for voluntary, but otherwise ir-reciprocal parasitism, by such means of blackmail, baiting into hazard, the sufficiency of volition alone, despite externalities, and plausible deniability of having done so.)
Source date (UTC): 2019-10-24 23:39:44 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187514040303706112
Reply addressees: @NSKinsella
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187513124183777281
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@NSKinsella Reciprocity: Productive, Fully informed, Warrantied, Voluntary Transfer of Demonstrated Interests, Free of imposition of Costs upon the Demonstrated interests of the others by externality. This describes all property possible, not just intersubjectively verifiable, or subjective.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1187513124183777281
IN REPLY TO:
@curtdoolittle
@NSKinsella Reciprocity: Productive, Fully informed, Warrantied, Voluntary Transfer of Demonstrated Interests, Free of imposition of Costs upon the Demonstrated interests of the others by externality. This describes all property possible, not just intersubjectively verifiable, or subjective.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1187513124183777281
Reciprocity: Productive, Fully informed, Warrantied, Voluntary Transfer of Demonstrated Interests, Free of imposition of Costs upon the Demonstrated interests of the others by externality. This describes all property possible, not just intersubjectively verifiable, or subjective.
Source date (UTC): 2019-10-24 23:36:06 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187513124183777281
Reply addressees: @NSKinsella
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187512359084011527
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@NSKinsella I can’t tell if you’re trolling, intellectually dishonest, or overlooking the obvious. How can one claim action in defense of, and retaliation for, ir-reciprocity, is an aggression? How can one construct a condition of sovereignty and reciprocity, otherwise? Wishful thinking?
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1187512359084011527
IN REPLY TO:
@curtdoolittle
@NSKinsella I can’t tell if you’re trolling, intellectually dishonest, or overlooking the obvious. How can one claim action in defense of, and retaliation for, ir-reciprocity, is an aggression? How can one construct a condition of sovereignty and reciprocity, otherwise? Wishful thinking?
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1187512359084011527