Curt Doolittle

Theme: Reform

  • CAN YOU SENSE THE CHANGE IN THE AIR? That’s the revolution taking shape

    CAN YOU SENSE THE CHANGE IN THE AIR?

    That’s the revolution taking shape.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-18 02:24:00 UTC

  • DISBAND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY Limbaugh calls for the end of the republican party.

    DISBAND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY

    Limbaugh calls for the end of the republican party.

    We must end the republican party forever, as the party of Traitors.

    Of course I want to end all parties, because I want to end all elections, and have jurors in the houses chosen by lot.

    But ending the party of Traitors is enough for the moment.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-18 02:00:00 UTC

  • Ending Financial Sector Predation

    (still working on this but it’s getting there) [W]e can stop it. The problem is, that the way we stop it is non-trivial: (a) require all issues released at market price with no favoritism (equal starting gate provision). (b) prevent insurance (hedges), require proportional holding of debt, force proportional losses (‘skin in the game’) (c) eliminate protection from liability for all individuals involved in any transaction, and reward (commission) for reporting offenders – (make it profitable to report your boss or peers.) (d) professionalize banking just like law and certified public accounting increasing the quality of people in the industry. (e) require total transparency of all OPM investor transactions. (what I recommend). (f) move all companies to block chain ledgers. (g) tax arbitrage and volatility entirely, while eliminating taxation on dividends, and appreciation. (eliminate trading and force investing) (h) Buy (federally) ‘bottom-feeder’ Mastercard, and redistribute liquidity directly to citizens rather than through the financial sector and interest rates – in exchange for elimination of sales tax and minimum wage. (what I recommend). These cards cannot be attached or indebted for any purpose whatsoever, private or public. The money is split between disposable and retirement security. The retirement funds are investable. (i) Stocks provide no voting or ownership provisions (positive), only legal defense(negative). One may contract for ownership provisions as condition of investment, but one cannot simply buy up control of companies without consent. (j) Eliminate boards of directors – I have not seen any empirical evidence that a board has any value whatsoever that could not be provided by an advisory board that assists in the development of relationships and expertise. But boards appear to have a negative influence on business. Transparency and rule of law are the only material defense. We no longer need political representatives in this age, and we no longer need the private sector equivalent. My experience is that boards that do not consist of material owners are universally damaging to a business. (The Buffett Principle: substantive owners with deep knowledge of the business, only). Both boards of directors and stock voting are hangovers from the paper and pencil era. (k) Elimination of all non-safety employment regulation – voluntary association, merit based. This social engineering is harmful to social cooperation, and a constant source of cost and conflict that encourages the internal equivalent of a black market in information. (l) Eliminate taxation on unrealized profits (this nonsense we go through for options for employees). We go through tons of falsehoods to circumvent the fact that while large transfers may occur almost no profits do. So eliminate the burden of preventing false taxation by simply requiring tax only on realized profits. (j) Move all accounting, banking, and credit, nationally if not world-wide to thirteen four week periods, and off the lunar cycle invented in the age of sail. STRENGTHEN 1) rule of law, individual accountability, civic morality, truth content, 2) encourage more Andresson Horowitz investment organization (innovation producing risk taking) and less Goldman Sachs (systemic parasitism). PRESERVE 1) I want to preserve the lottery effect that the stock market provides to entrepreneur, business, and industry, but to limit the finance sector’s ability to disproportionately privatize issues – which is how it’s done today. With little or no value to the economy, business, and citizenry. ELIMINATE 1) Eliminates the ability of the financial sector to direct the economy, only profit from funding the fulfillment consumer demand, thereby forcing the consumer and the investor to have the same interests. 2) Eliminates financial predation on business and industry. (which if you have been involved in it – and I have – is unimaginable ) 3) Eliminates costly burdens on organizations that must preserve multiple fallacies: a) that tax, credit, and operational accounting differ because credit cycles demand stability that does not exist, taxes demand returns that do not exist. b) social engineering compliance is costly and we merely work hard to circumvent it. c) fallacy that the financial sector works in our interest. d) if we distribute liquidity directly outside of the financial system then minimum wage is unnecessary, and the incentive to limit immigration will exist. ( more… but I’m out of time for this today. ) Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Ending Financial Sector Predation

    (still working on this but it’s getting there) [W]e can stop it. The problem is, that the way we stop it is non-trivial: (a) require all issues released at market price with no favoritism (equal starting gate provision). (b) prevent insurance (hedges), require proportional holding of debt, force proportional losses (‘skin in the game’) (c) eliminate protection from liability for all individuals involved in any transaction, and reward (commission) for reporting offenders – (make it profitable to report your boss or peers.) (d) professionalize banking just like law and certified public accounting increasing the quality of people in the industry. (e) require total transparency of all OPM investor transactions. (what I recommend). (f) move all companies to block chain ledgers. (g) tax arbitrage and volatility entirely, while eliminating taxation on dividends, and appreciation. (eliminate trading and force investing) (h) Buy (federally) ‘bottom-feeder’ Mastercard, and redistribute liquidity directly to citizens rather than through the financial sector and interest rates – in exchange for elimination of sales tax and minimum wage. (what I recommend). These cards cannot be attached or indebted for any purpose whatsoever, private or public. The money is split between disposable and retirement security. The retirement funds are investable. (i) Stocks provide no voting or ownership provisions (positive), only legal defense(negative). One may contract for ownership provisions as condition of investment, but one cannot simply buy up control of companies without consent. (j) Eliminate boards of directors – I have not seen any empirical evidence that a board has any value whatsoever that could not be provided by an advisory board that assists in the development of relationships and expertise. But boards appear to have a negative influence on business. Transparency and rule of law are the only material defense. We no longer need political representatives in this age, and we no longer need the private sector equivalent. My experience is that boards that do not consist of material owners are universally damaging to a business. (The Buffett Principle: substantive owners with deep knowledge of the business, only). Both boards of directors and stock voting are hangovers from the paper and pencil era. (k) Elimination of all non-safety employment regulation – voluntary association, merit based. This social engineering is harmful to social cooperation, and a constant source of cost and conflict that encourages the internal equivalent of a black market in information. (l) Eliminate taxation on unrealized profits (this nonsense we go through for options for employees). We go through tons of falsehoods to circumvent the fact that while large transfers may occur almost no profits do. So eliminate the burden of preventing false taxation by simply requiring tax only on realized profits. (j) Move all accounting, banking, and credit, nationally if not world-wide to thirteen four week periods, and off the lunar cycle invented in the age of sail. STRENGTHEN 1) rule of law, individual accountability, civic morality, truth content, 2) encourage more Andresson Horowitz investment organization (innovation producing risk taking) and less Goldman Sachs (systemic parasitism). PRESERVE 1) I want to preserve the lottery effect that the stock market provides to entrepreneur, business, and industry, but to limit the finance sector’s ability to disproportionately privatize issues – which is how it’s done today. With little or no value to the economy, business, and citizenry. ELIMINATE 1) Eliminates the ability of the financial sector to direct the economy, only profit from funding the fulfillment consumer demand, thereby forcing the consumer and the investor to have the same interests. 2) Eliminates financial predation on business and industry. (which if you have been involved in it – and I have – is unimaginable ) 3) Eliminates costly burdens on organizations that must preserve multiple fallacies: a) that tax, credit, and operational accounting differ because credit cycles demand stability that does not exist, taxes demand returns that do not exist. b) social engineering compliance is costly and we merely work hard to circumvent it. c) fallacy that the financial sector works in our interest. d) if we distribute liquidity directly outside of the financial system then minimum wage is unnecessary, and the incentive to limit immigration will exist. ( more… but I’m out of time for this today. ) Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • FINANCIAL PREDATION (still working on this but it’s getting there) We can stop i

    FINANCIAL PREDATION

    (still working on this but it’s getting there)

    We can stop it. The problem is, that the way we stop it is non-trivial:

    (a) require all issues released at market price with no favoritism (equal starting gate provision).

    (b) prevent insurance (hedges), require proportional holding of debt, force proportional losses (‘skin in the game’)

    (c) eliminate protection from liability for all individuals involved in any transaction, and reward (commission) for reporting offenders – (make it profitable to report your boss or peers.)

    (d) professionalize banking just like law and certified public accounting increasing the quality of people in the industry.

    (e) require total transparency of all OPM investor transactions. (what I recommend).

    (f) move all companies to block chain ledgers.

    (g) tax arbitrage and volatility entirely, while eliminating taxation on dividends, and appreciation. (eliminate trading and force investing)

    (h) Buy (federally) ‘bottom-feeder’ Mastercard, and redistribute liquidity directly to citizens rather than through the financial sector and interest rates – in exchange for elimination of sales tax and minimum wage. (what I recommend). These cards cannot be attached or indebted for any purpose whatsoever, private or public. The money is split between disposable and retirement security. The retirement funds are investable.

    (i) Stocks provide no voting or ownership provisions (positive), only legal defense(negative). One may contract for ownership provisions as condition of investment, but one cannot simply buy up control of companies without consent.

    (j) Eliminate boards of directors – I have not seen any empirical evidence that a board has any value whatsoever that could not be provided by an advisory board that assists in the development of relationships and expertise. But boards appear to have a negative influence on business. Transparency and rule of law are the only material defense. We no longer need political representatives in this age, and we no longer need the private sector equivalent. My experience is that boards that do not consist of material owners are universally damaging to a business. (The Buffett Principle: substantive owners with deep knowledge of the business, only). Both boards of directors and stock voting are hangovers from the paper and pencil era.

    (k) Elimination of all non-safety employment regulation – voluntary association, merit based. This social engineering is harmful to social cooperation, and a constant source of cost and conflict that encourages the internal equivalent of a black market in information.

    (l) Eliminate taxation on unrealized profits (this nonsense we go through for options for employees). We go through tons of falsehoods to circumvent the fact that while large transfers may occur almost no profits do. So eliminate the burden of preventing false taxation by simply requiring tax only on realized profits.

    (j) Move all accounting, banking, and credit, nationally if not world-wide to thirteen four week periods, and off the lunar cycle invented in the age of sail.

    STRENGTHEN

    1) rule of law, individual accountability, civic morality, truth content,

    2) encourage more Andresson Horowitz investment organization (innovation producing risk taking) and less Goldman Sachs (systemic parasitism).

    PRESERVE

    1) I want to preserve the lottery effect that the stock market provides to entrepreneur, business, and industry, but to limit the finance sector’s ability to disproportionately privatize issues – which is how it’s done today. With little or no value to the economy, business, and citizenry.

    ELIMINATE

    1) Eliminates the ability of the financial sector to direct the economy, only profit from funding the fulfillment consumer demand, thereby forcing the consumer and the investor to have the same interests.

    2) Eliminates financial predation on business and industry. (which if you have been involved in it – and I have – is unimaginable )

    3) Eliminates costly burdens on organizations that must preserve multiple fallacies:

    a) that tax, credit, and operational accounting differ because credit cycles demand stability that does not exist, taxes demand returns that do not exist.

    b) social engineering compliance is costly and we merely work hard to circumvent it.

    c) fallacy that the financial sector works in our interest.

    d) if we distribute liquidity directly outside of the financial system then minimum wage is unnecessary, and the incentive to limit immigration will exist.

    ( more… but I’m out of time for this today. )

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-14 03:43:00 UTC

  • Q&A: “HOW DOES THE REVOLUTION OCCUR IN EUROPE?” (from a private message) Q: “How

    Q&A: “HOW DOES THE REVOLUTION OCCUR IN EUROPE?”

    (from a private message)

    Q: “How does propertarianism fit into a world of increasing network technology without previous geographic constraints?”

    Representatives are no longer necessary. We can instead return to the jury system, with jurors selected by lot. This makes corruption nearly impossible.

    The rest is quite complicated, and I don’t know if I want to go into it here but (a) title registries are now possible, (b) liquidity can be directly distributed to individuals (citizens) circumventing distribution through the financial system, (c) proposals can published online and subject to public scrutiny, (d) “full accounting” is possible, (e) a prohibition on ‘pooling and laundering’ is possible, … well, a lot of transparency is possible. And that’s the most of it. We can eliminate discretion from government (commons).

    Q: “You are American and a lot of what I interpret of the revolution appears to apply mostly, or be aimed at the American context. Have you written on how the revolution would differ in the various European countries? “

    America is just the most likely first candidate, because as a large heterogeneous polity reaching the point of revolution, it’s easiest to occur there.

    The value of propertarianism is the suppression of corruption and the increase in cooperation between the groups and classes creating an optimistic rather than pessimistic political economy. So I would expect that just as we need only ONE SECESSION to prove ‘smaller is better’, we need only ONE REVOLUTION to prove that market government is better.

    So I suspect that europeans will (as usual) be laggards and adopt it later on out of pressure from the people.

    What we will always be challenged with is the american desire for everyone to get ahead and that it’s heroic, and the european desire to keep everyone from getting ahead of them and that success is somehow immoral.

    (The hardest part I see, is the burden it puts on economists who lie through a conspiracy of ignorance today. The burden on people who talk pseudoscientific nonsense in the academy will be life altering for the pseudoscientists in all the social sciences..)

    Q:”Philosophically, in a vacuum your ideas seem universal but in application I’m sure the execution would differ nation to nation. I’m English. I don’t see or experience the spirit of revolution in the people here compared to what I sense in the US. The history of the nations explains the difference I am sure. Conservatives in the US aim to conserve the revolutionary defiance where as conservatives in the UK want to conserve order. (Basically counter revolutionary) day to day on the ground in the UK the only revolutionaries I meet are on the left where as in the US it is the reverse. Given this difference I have no idea how to network with these ideas in the UK/European context. Projecting from an American standpoint gets me blank faces.

    Q: “Is the revolution in Europe political or violent?

    Hopefully both. The right always does the fighting. I expect them to do it. As always. While the others free ride on the right’s risk. But I suspect europeans will find violence marginally unnecessary if it’s used elsewhere. The example will be enough.

    Q: “What groups do you know of with whom I can network with in the UK or Europe.”

    If I knew I wouldn’t say. My group feels we can do it alone. That’s probably not true. I don’t like single points of failure. My preference is to arm everyone with the moral justification for constitutional change, and to force it through violence and disruption if not. So I don’t care who gets it done or how it gets done, but we have to put an end to lies and pseudoscience and return western civilization to the path of excellence.

    Q: “I appreciate it. Thanks”

    I appreciate the opportunity to answer questions. 🙂 So thanks for asking.

    Cheers.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-12 11:38:00 UTC

  • As a owner of tech companies in USA, Canada, UK, And Ukraine, and less in Estoni

    As a owner of tech companies in USA, Canada, UK, And Ukraine, and less in Estonia – other than Estonia, Governments act anti-startup.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-12 10:29:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/675623422626541568

    Reply addressees: @wef

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/675616196671221760

    IN REPLY TO:

    @wef

    Can #Europe ever build its own Silicon Valley? https://t.co/Yg2c68VzkH #tech https://t.co/n5pwtNqPhd

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/675616196671221760

  • La única forma de eliminar el estado y construir libertad

    Original Article by Curt Doolittle: http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/04/23/the-only-means-of-eliminating-the-state-and-constructing-liberty/Translation by Alberto R. Zambrano U. [L]a única forma de eliminar al estado, es eliminar la existencia de demanda para que éste exista. Para eliminar al estado, debemos primero construir instituciones que provean los servicios estatales sin el aprovechamiento injusto endémico e inherente a la función estatal. El estado provee sólo estos servicios:

    1. La asignación o reparto de la propiedad y de los derechos de propiedad y sus medios de transferencia.
    2. Medios para resolver todas las diferencias que lleven a conflictos.
    3. Medios para construir y proteger bienes comunes del aprovechamiento injusto.
    4. Medios para la exclusión de asignaciones competitivas, medios de resolución y medios de construcción.

    Los únicas formas de proveer estos servicios sin la existencia del estado, es construir instituciones que no requieran de la figura estatal.

    1. La ley del no parasitismo positivamente expresada como “propiedad en todo”, el derecho consuetudinario orgánico, un sistema judicial profesional independiente, EN VEZ de una burocracia profesional independiente- por ejemplo: la cuarta ola.
    2. Un mercado de bienes que consista en casas de bienes e intereses en las cuales los contratos que no sean monopolios son negociados para la creación de bienes.
    3. Una milicia universal (o cuasi universal), cuidadores, de emergencia y rescate, para poder participar en el mercado de bienes- la participación debe ser ganada, incluso para proteger a la milicia de los males del parasitismo.

    Un estado burocrático entonces, es evidencia del fracaso de construir instituciones necesarias para la provisión de servicios que permitan a grupos competir contra otros.- [F]ukuyama no ha identificado la alternativa a la socialdemocracia ni ha identificado la naturaleza transitoria del monopolio institucional como entidades necesarias para la construcciones de bienes previos al desarrollo de un mercado competitivo para la provisión de esos bienes. El fracasó en dar con la diferencia entre investigación y desarrollo de costosas instituciones de bienes., y la conversión de esas instituciones monopolistas en instituciones no-monopolistas que excluyen a las otras instituciones con las que tengan conflictos, toda vez que dichas instituciones compitan en la provisión efectiva de servicios. El fin la historia es bastante distinto a lo que Fukuyama imaginó y lo que la academia (como una forma de iglesia con fines de lucro) evoca y desea. Hay una alternativa a los gobiernos monopolistas, si no una alternativa al monopolio de los derechos de propiedad articulada como “propiedad en todo”. Fukuyama es un producto de la academia y la historia a pesar de sus intereses intelectuales honestos- porque Fukuyama no es un producto de la economía y la ley: economía política, él es perdonable así como lo son también los estudiantes de la historia, de mirar hacia atrás, contemplando otros patrones distintos sin el entendimiento de las propiedades causales de la cooperación humana y la necesidad de cada vez mayores y más complejos métodos de cálculo. [C]omo defensores de la libertad, es nuestra función, nuestra misión el proveer soluciones superiores al problema de la cooperación a una escala que podamos llamar “gubernamental”, por la invención, defensa, demanda, y rebelión en búsqueda de instituciones formales que prohiban la tiranía y preserven nuestra tasa occidental de innovación, al prohibir todo parasitismo (aprovechamiento injusto) en cualquier momento.

    1. El el requerimiento universal de la productividad es el anverso de la prohibición de parasitismo.
    2. La institucionalización de esa regla como derechos de propiedad que abarquen la “propiedad en todo”.
    3. El derecho consuetudinario orgánico, un sistema judicial profesional independiente, jurado, decir la verdad, restitución, castigo y exclusión (encarcelamiento).
    4. La familia nuclear (y quizá no la nuclear absoluta) es el primer bien en el cual la competencia de género se resuelva fuera de la producción de otros bienes.
    5. Un monarca hereditario (jefe de estado) con poder de veto, pero sin poder positivo.
    6. Un set de cámaras que representen a las distintas clases, pobladas por selección aleatoria, quienes actúan como jurados, en la selección de contratos propuestos para duración anual, y con prohibiciones específicas de la construcción legal.
    7. La inclusión de bienes informativos en derechos de propiedad y por ende (a) el requerimiento de tener un discurso honesto de derechos propietarios y científicos en la materia de bienes. (b) la necesidad de un lenguaje operativo. (c ) la prohibición de la transferencia del compromiso y (e) la responsabilidad de los jurados (representantes y votantes) por sus acciones de parte de otros.

    La única defensa es el requerimiento de producción, el derecho consuetudinario, el jurado, la verdad, la universalidad, la responsabilidad universal, y los mercados competitivos. Esto produce la menor cantidad de oportunidades para aprovechamiento injusto y la privatización de todas la fuerzas en un mercado de producción de bienes y servicios necesarios para poder sobrevivir y reproducirnos. El aseguramiento contra el error y el fracaso y el límite de tener un niño a aquellos incapaces de reproducirse solventa el problema de la caridad sin el problema de la eugenesia inmoral.   Curt Doolittle Kiev, Ucrania Instituto Propietarista

  • La única forma de eliminar el estado y construir libertad

    Original Article by Curt Doolittle: http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/04/23/the-only-means-of-eliminating-the-state-and-constructing-liberty/Translation by Alberto R. Zambrano U. [L]a única forma de eliminar al estado, es eliminar la existencia de demanda para que éste exista. Para eliminar al estado, debemos primero construir instituciones que provean los servicios estatales sin el aprovechamiento injusto endémico e inherente a la función estatal. El estado provee sólo estos servicios:

    1. La asignación o reparto de la propiedad y de los derechos de propiedad y sus medios de transferencia.
    2. Medios para resolver todas las diferencias que lleven a conflictos.
    3. Medios para construir y proteger bienes comunes del aprovechamiento injusto.
    4. Medios para la exclusión de asignaciones competitivas, medios de resolución y medios de construcción.

    Los únicas formas de proveer estos servicios sin la existencia del estado, es construir instituciones que no requieran de la figura estatal.

    1. La ley del no parasitismo positivamente expresada como “propiedad en todo”, el derecho consuetudinario orgánico, un sistema judicial profesional independiente, EN VEZ de una burocracia profesional independiente- por ejemplo: la cuarta ola.
    2. Un mercado de bienes que consista en casas de bienes e intereses en las cuales los contratos que no sean monopolios son negociados para la creación de bienes.
    3. Una milicia universal (o cuasi universal), cuidadores, de emergencia y rescate, para poder participar en el mercado de bienes- la participación debe ser ganada, incluso para proteger a la milicia de los males del parasitismo.

    Un estado burocrático entonces, es evidencia del fracaso de construir instituciones necesarias para la provisión de servicios que permitan a grupos competir contra otros.- [F]ukuyama no ha identificado la alternativa a la socialdemocracia ni ha identificado la naturaleza transitoria del monopolio institucional como entidades necesarias para la construcciones de bienes previos al desarrollo de un mercado competitivo para la provisión de esos bienes. El fracasó en dar con la diferencia entre investigación y desarrollo de costosas instituciones de bienes., y la conversión de esas instituciones monopolistas en instituciones no-monopolistas que excluyen a las otras instituciones con las que tengan conflictos, toda vez que dichas instituciones compitan en la provisión efectiva de servicios. El fin la historia es bastante distinto a lo que Fukuyama imaginó y lo que la academia (como una forma de iglesia con fines de lucro) evoca y desea. Hay una alternativa a los gobiernos monopolistas, si no una alternativa al monopolio de los derechos de propiedad articulada como “propiedad en todo”. Fukuyama es un producto de la academia y la historia a pesar de sus intereses intelectuales honestos- porque Fukuyama no es un producto de la economía y la ley: economía política, él es perdonable así como lo son también los estudiantes de la historia, de mirar hacia atrás, contemplando otros patrones distintos sin el entendimiento de las propiedades causales de la cooperación humana y la necesidad de cada vez mayores y más complejos métodos de cálculo. [C]omo defensores de la libertad, es nuestra función, nuestra misión el proveer soluciones superiores al problema de la cooperación a una escala que podamos llamar “gubernamental”, por la invención, defensa, demanda, y rebelión en búsqueda de instituciones formales que prohiban la tiranía y preserven nuestra tasa occidental de innovación, al prohibir todo parasitismo (aprovechamiento injusto) en cualquier momento.

    1. El el requerimiento universal de la productividad es el anverso de la prohibición de parasitismo.
    2. La institucionalización de esa regla como derechos de propiedad que abarquen la “propiedad en todo”.
    3. El derecho consuetudinario orgánico, un sistema judicial profesional independiente, jurado, decir la verdad, restitución, castigo y exclusión (encarcelamiento).
    4. La familia nuclear (y quizá no la nuclear absoluta) es el primer bien en el cual la competencia de género se resuelva fuera de la producción de otros bienes.
    5. Un monarca hereditario (jefe de estado) con poder de veto, pero sin poder positivo.
    6. Un set de cámaras que representen a las distintas clases, pobladas por selección aleatoria, quienes actúan como jurados, en la selección de contratos propuestos para duración anual, y con prohibiciones específicas de la construcción legal.
    7. La inclusión de bienes informativos en derechos de propiedad y por ende (a) el requerimiento de tener un discurso honesto de derechos propietarios y científicos en la materia de bienes. (b) la necesidad de un lenguaje operativo. (c ) la prohibición de la transferencia del compromiso y (e) la responsabilidad de los jurados (representantes y votantes) por sus acciones de parte de otros.

    La única defensa es el requerimiento de producción, el derecho consuetudinario, el jurado, la verdad, la universalidad, la responsabilidad universal, y los mercados competitivos. Esto produce la menor cantidad de oportunidades para aprovechamiento injusto y la privatización de todas la fuerzas en un mercado de producción de bienes y servicios necesarios para poder sobrevivir y reproducirnos. El aseguramiento contra el error y el fracaso y el límite de tener un niño a aquellos incapaces de reproducirse solventa el problema de la caridad sin el problema de la eugenesia inmoral.   Curt Doolittle Kiev, Ucrania Instituto Propietarista

  • Tucker as a Rationalist In The Age of Science

    [N]ote: I’m not anti-Tucker. I see him as a very good man with good intentions but part of a prior generation’s thinking whose time has long passed, and methods have long failed. But I have no reason to believe that he is anything other than a good man with good intentions. I like him quite a bit and always have.

    —“The media is a business meaning that they can’t coerce you, tax you, bomb you, deport you, kill you. All they can do is write articles and make shows that sell advertising. And you are willing to celebrate a would-be dictator because he foils some reporters???”—Jeffrey A. Tucker

    (a) Regarding the media, are you rationalizing what the media can do, or are you relying upon empirical evidence of what the media can do? Because the evidence is that they create opinion in sufficient voters to do precisely what you say they cannot. (b) I have a hard time seeing the difference between the current president and a trump presidency or any other presidency in the absence of rule of law. And given the evidence of (a), its logical to prefer a president who will continue to undermine (a). Liberty is produced by rule of law(universal application) demanding the total prohibition on parasitism(imposition of costs) in the private (morality) and public (liberty) spheres of action, constructed by individual enforcement of norms, individual enforcement of law under universal standing, organized enforcement of the law under an independent judiciary, and organized prevention of usurpation of that law by the militia. And liberty is (again, empirically not just rationally) a preference of and only of a limited number of individuals in limited family structures, with limited cultural traditions, with limited legal traditions. All others systematically seek to undermine it in every polity on earth. Man was not kept down and oppressed by his betters. Man was incrementally civilized by his betters, much against his will. He was forced to abandon murder, violence, theft, fraud, fraud by asymmetry, fraud by indirection, fraud by obscurantism, free riding, privatization of commons, socialization of losses, conspiracy, conversion, immigration, war, and conquest. By being forced to abandon all unproductive and parasitic actions, the only venue left for man was the burden of participation in the market through productive, fully informed, voluntary exchange free of imposition of cost by externality. But the arts of production are difficult, and the arts of lying, defrauding, cheating, stealing, blackmailing, free riding, privatization of commons, socialization of losses, conspiracy are much easier. Liberty requires meritocracy and meritocracy is not a matter of belief it is a mater of ability. Genes matter. Open immigration is empirically destructive. While we can estimate the decline in anglo intelligence since 1850, we can measure the decline in French intelligence due to immigration just since 1950. The Flynn effect can be reversed through degradation of the gene pool. It is the gene pool that establishes the degree of liberty, the degree of truth telling, the degree of productivity, the norms and traditions of a polity. It is a romantic amateurism to pursue liberty as a philosophical choice – a religion or cult – versus an empirical problem to be solved. The age of rationalization has ended just as the age of mysticism ended. The current era is one of science: requiring both internal consistency(logical and rational) and external correspondence(empirical) as well as existentially possible (operationally articulable) and morality (voluntary transfers) bounded by full accounting (of all costs to all capital) and parsimony (defined limits of falsification). Time for the adult version of liberty: Aristocratic(meritocratic) Egalitarian(meritocratic) Eugenic(meritocratic) Nomocracy(rule of law) assisted by a market for the production of commons using the exception of legal dissent, rather than the requirement of universal assent by majority rule. Trump is a tool of progress. That is all. Liberty requires progress. Moreover it requires we repress the rates of reproduction of the underclasses who will not and cannot participate in liberty.