Theme: Reciprocity

  • THE LAW ON RECIPROCITY, RESTITUTION, PUNISHMENT, AND PREVENTION Restitution (1x)

    THE LAW ON RECIPROCITY, RESTITUTION, PUNISHMENT, AND PREVENTION

    Restitution (1x) for Accident

    Double (2x) Damages for failure to admit

    Triple (3x) Damages against individuals for harm

    Decuple (10x) Damages against groups for harm.

    The law has three purposes for three parties to any suit.

    1. Restitution (victim)

    2. Punishment (criminal)

    3. Prevention (polity)

    Groups must be HEAVILY incentivized to limit their own behavior since sacrificial actors exist in every group, and can advance group interests if not controlled by the group.

    Hence

    1. Punishment of the individual.

    2. Punishment of the individual’s family (insurers of individuals)

    3. Punishment of the group (insurers of families)


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-25 10:02:00 UTC

  • “CURT: WHAT IS THE ESSENCE OF PROPERTARIANISM?” —“Can you define the essence o

    “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


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-24 18:26:00 UTC

  • photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/52647513_10157010566322264_810926486

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/52647513_10157010566322264_810926486

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/52647513_10157010566322264_8109264868961419264_o_10157010566307264.jpg Bill JoslinAnd generous tit-for-tat doesn’t imply unbound forgiveness, but rather occasional deviations from tit-for-tat towards generousity (forgiveness). It essentially resets the game for cooperation when cooperation has failed.

    Eye-for-an-eye in most things with an occasional “turn the other cheek” to re-establish trust and Cooperation (which would be a second order reciprocal exchange – offering forgiveness now to secure the opportunity to be forgiven in the future if you screw up later) – otherwise known as incremental supression (I see incremental supression as attempting to achieve an optimum between forbearance and prosecution)Feb 24, 2019, 2:39 PMGreg HamiltonI don’t know Freyr is a pretty good role model…Feb 24, 2019, 5:49 PMPaul BardDidn’t Axelrod find the optimal strategy was exhaustive forgiveness, because tit-for-tat may be wrongly triggered by poor or mistaken information about your trading partners?

    In other words, we can’t be sure the other isn’t doing their best to reciprocate, but we can definitively use force to oppose the other from doing harm.Feb 24, 2019, 9:52 PM


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-24 14:11:00 UTC

  • BEN BAKER ‘GETS IT’ —“I’m trying to understand. … Law is then a summary of n

    BEN BAKER ‘GETS IT’

    —“I’m trying to understand. … Law is then a summary of natural (proper and just) consequences for action/inaction.

    As far as it can be enforced depends on the affordability…this would also determine the willingness of men to administer and enforce the law via Incentives.

    It’s an immovable object, or very nearly.

    Government (governance deferred from the individual to a collective specialising in law and violence, held in common somewhat and funded by citizens) is the flexible part, the expression of that described above but adjusted to each population with their endemic characteristics, abilities etc.

    Holy shit.”—Benjamin Baker

    You just graduated my friend. Welcome to the judiciary. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-24 09:52:00 UTC

  • good. i’m glad i provide entertainment value. reciprocity achieved

    good. i’m glad i provide entertainment value. reciprocity achieved…..


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-23 20:39:07 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1099408334560600064

    Reply addressees: @NotYetMyTime @pineapplefundie @EvanPlatinum

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1099407183287107597


    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/1099407183287107597

  • RULE(LAW) VS GOVERNMENT (COMMONS) —“Is it ancap? I searched it it looked like

    RULE(LAW) VS GOVERNMENT (COMMONS)

    —“Is it ancap? I searched it it looked like some minarchy stuff.”–Mick Seppala

    It’s strictly constructed rule of law by test of reciprocity – major difference is you can’t ‘lie’ in political speech – which is the hard problem of converting from free speech to free truthful speech. And … You ‘roll your own’ government with it. I recommend various forms of government for various people. but only one rule of law. P is not ideology, philosophy, or religion. It is LAW.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-23 08:22:00 UTC

  • PROPERTY – FOR THE 1000TH TIME (Not going to repeat every single refutation here

    PROPERTY – FOR THE 1000TH TIME

    (Not going to repeat every single refutation here. If you encounter one where you think you ‘got me’ it won’t happen. sorry. Just ask how we handle it.)

    ;

    DEMAND FOR POSSESSION, PROPERTY, PROPERTY RIGHTS.

    1) Cooperation provides disproportionate returns necessary for survival

    2) Division of labor multiplies disproportionate returns on cooperation.

    3) Reciprocity incentivizes cooperation. Cheating disincentivizes cooperation.

    4) Humans engage in both retaliation, and altruistic (costly) punishment of cheaters in order to preserve the disproportionate returns on cooperation and cooperation at scale.

    5) Morality consists of reciprocity within the local limits of proportionality. Man is amoral and acts in hist interests it is just nearly always in his better long term interests to act morally.

    6) Law evolved to prevent retaliation cycles, to standardize means of conflict resolution, to maintain maximum returns for the majority of the polity, and to increase the revenues of taxing authorities.

    7) Law uses a single measure: demonstrated investment which we call interests or ‘property’ to resolve conflicts and preserve the peace (returns on cooperation), and a single test: reciprocity. Ths law is called ‘tort’ or ‘natural law’.

    8) Law evolves through the continuous evolutionary suppression of violations of reciprocity, through the continuous discovery of findings of law. It is a purely empirical process.

    9) All social science can be expressed in terms of identification, acquisition, transformation, transfer, consumption, and loss of interests in property.

    10) All human cognition can be expressed as reward system responses to that same identification, acquisition, transformation, transfer, consumption, and loss of interests in property.

    THEREFORE;

    Ergo PROPERTARIANISM consist of a universal language of linguistic, psychological, and social sciences that makes use of a standard of measure we commonly call property.

    WHEREAS;

    “Property” refers to:

    1) MEASUREMENT: A category of measurements, within that category we call weights and measures, that provides commensurability and therefore decidability, over the use of all possible human interests, in matters of conflict over those interests, where those interests satisfy any demonstrated human demand.

    AND WHERE;

    Property consists in that series:

    1) POSSESSION(IN FACT): That which I have acted to prevent others from consumption or use.

    2) PROPERTY(NORMATIVE: That which you and I agree not to use or consume from one another.

    3) PROPERTY RIGHTS(INSURED): that which a third party will insure we do not use or consume from one another.

    AND WHERE;

    Rights include no less than:

    1) Constituo – Homesteading: Convert into property through bearing a cost of transformation.

    2) Transitus – Transit: passage through 3d space.

    3) Usus – Use: setting up a stall.

    4) Fructus – Fruits: (blackberries, wood, profits)

    5) Mancipio – Emancipation: (sale, transfer)

    6) Abusus – Abuse: (Consumption or Destruction) Opposite of Constituo.

    AND WHERE;

    Property includes any INTEREST we observe by:

    1) DEFENSE: Men are willing to defend with violence

    2) INVESTMENT: Have a demonstrable investment in

    3) NON-IMPOSITION: Acquired that investment without imposing a cost on others. (via john Zebley)

    WHERE Interests are demonstrated by:

    EITHER

    … 0) Origination (Homesteading, “Constituo”)

    OR

    … 1) Productive (no blackmail etc)

    … 2) Fully informed (no asymmetric knowledge)

    … 3) Warrantied (responsible fo asymmetric knowledge)

    … 4) Voluntary transfer (non coercive)

    AND IN BOTH CASES, WHERE

    … 5) Such action is free of violation of the same by externality. (unharmful)

    AND WHERE;

    Man demonstrates interest and defends the following categories of his means of production:

    1) MEANS OF PRODUCTION OF EXISTENCE

    Personal property: “Things an individual has a Monopoly Of Control over the use of.”

    – Physical Body

    – Actions and Time

    – Memories, Concepts and Identities: tools that enable us to plan and act. In the consumer economy this includes brands.

    – Knowledge ties (skills, crafts)

    – Several Property: Those things we claim a monopoly of control over.

    AND;

    2) MEANS OF PRODUCTION OF REPRODUCTION

    Means of Reproduction: “relationships with others and tools of relationships upon which we reciprocally depend.”

    – Mates (access to sex/reproduction)

    – Children (genetic reproduction)

    – Familial Relations (security)

    – Consanguineous Relations (tribal and family ties)

    – Racial property (racial ties)

    – Status and Class (reputation)

    AND;

    3). MEANS OF PRIVATE PRODUCTION

    Relational Property

    – Non-Familial Relations (utility)

    – Organizational ties (work)

    Cooperative Property

    – Shares in property: Recorded And Quantified Shareholder Property (claims for partial ownership)

    Artificial Property

    – Monopoly Property such as intellectual property. (grants of limited monopoly within a geography)

    – Trademarks and Brands (prohibitions on fraudulent transfers within a geography).

    AND;

    4). MEANS OF COMMONS PRODUCTION

    (Community) Property

    – Institutional Property: “Those objects into which we have invested our forgone opportunities, our efforts, or our material assets, in order to aggregate capital from multiple individuals for mutual gain.”

    – Informal (Normative) Institutions: Our norms: manners, ethics and morals. Informal institutional property is nearly impossible to quantify and price. The costs are subjective and consists of forgone opportunities.

    – Formal (Procedural) Institutions: Our institutions: Religion (including the secular religion), Government, Laws. Formal institutional property is easy to price. costs are visible. And the productivity of the social order is at least marginally measurable.

    – Territory and attendant resources.

    —-END—


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-21 16:06:00 UTC

  • (2- So just as ‘Do not debate with women, they argue by intuition, and proportio

    (2- So just as ‘Do not debate with women, they argue by intuition, and proportionality while men argue by testimony and reciprocity’ the faithful rely on the tactic of females: outcasting those who will not conform to myth, vs men outcasting those who will not conform to Truth.)


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-21 15:07:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1098600045656662023

    Reply addressees: @mauritian_strug @DataDistribute

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1098553063575572480


    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/1098553063575572480

  • YOUR JOB (THE GOOD) VS MY JOB (THE TRUE) Your job is ‘inspiring, good and prefer

    YOUR JOB (THE GOOD) VS MY JOB (THE TRUE)

    Your job is ‘inspiring, good and preferable’, Mine is ‘False, Un-testifiable, and Ir-reciprocal’. Anything that is not false, testifiable, and reciprocal is by definition not open to interference from the law.

    Your job is the via positiva market for goods, services, and information, and my job is the via negativa market for prosecution of the imposition of costs against the demonstrated interests of others.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-20 14:31:00 UTC

  • Rothbard (Jewish Pale) and Hoppe (German Free Cities) via positiva, via rational

    Rothbard (Jewish Pale) and Hoppe (German Free Cities) via positiva, via rationalism. Doolittle(Rights of Englishmen) via negativa, via empiricism. Construct a value system by appeal(RH), or prohibit an anti-value system with violence (D). Inspiration and indoctrination (RH) vs prohibition and market for prosecution(D). Unlimited suppression of parasitic behavior that generates retaliation (D), suppression limited to intersubjectively verifiable property (RH). Suppression of blackmail, defamation, public sophism, supernaturalism pseudoscience( marxism, postmodernism, feminism, denialism). Doolittle: existential survivable without imperial protection, vs Rothbard and Hoppe: dependent, non existential without imperial protection. Doolittle: demonstrated, vs Rothbard and Hoppe: not demonstrated, not modelable, not survivable under competition. RH not possible due to praxeological incentives, and D possible because of praxeological testable incentives. No RH community can form or survive market for polities without parasitic dependence upon an empire because of insufficient incentives for defense and production of commons and their resulting multipliers in competition with free riders. vs Any D community can survive in the market for polities because it does not depend upon an external empire because of sufficient incentives for defense and production of commons and their resulting multipliers in competition with free riders. Crusoe’s island depends upon the ‘free’ protection of a vast ocean. The ghetto depends upon the host city or state. And the Free Cities, The Pale (european wildlands), The American/Australian wildlands, and Iceland/Greenland – all depend upon the host empire, and are economically subsidized by lack of political competition, and the availability of cheap and settleable land. The ghetto ethics of the jews and being exterminated for it on a regular basis versus the high trust ethics of the people who dragged humanity kicking and screaming out of ignorance superstition poverty starvation disease hard labor early death…. and the quality of life that people seek despite the costs of commons required to do so. ie: RH consists of pretense that ‘children’ polities, subsidized by parents, can compete against adult polities on their own merits in competition by military, political, economic, religious, demographic, warfare that never ends.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-20 08:21:00 UTC