Liberty exists only when every man’s a sheriff: speak the truth, impose no cost, pay the cost of suppressing the parasitism of others.
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-09 05:54:13 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/740784042946236417
Liberty exists only when every man’s a sheriff: speak the truth, impose no cost, pay the cost of suppressing the parasitism of others.
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-09 05:54:13 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/740784042946236417
You can’t create liberty by shaming and rallying.You create liberty when every man acts a sheriff and informs, punishes, or kills parasites.
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-09 05:51:02 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/740783242022903813
The most ‘sovereign’ action you can perform is to judge the actions of yourself and others, and act the Sheriff of yourself and others.
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-09 02:04:00 UTC
Liberty exists only when every man’s a sheriff: speak the truth, impose no cost, pay the cost of suppressing the parasitism of others.
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-09 01:54:00 UTC
So absolutely, groups must EARN individualism by policing their own, or they will never adopt high trust norms. The opposite.
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-07 01:44:02 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/739996305322332161
Reply addressees: @ThomasEWoods
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/739489237251194882
IN REPLY TO:
@ThomasEWoods
.@rarey4 That’s your comeback? You’re defending the internment of a group based on race.I think your response should be a teensy bit better.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/739489237251194882
We worked for centuries to reduce conflict first by holding groups accountable for their members, then families, then individ.
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-07 01:40:17 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/739995361348059136
Reply addressees: @ThomasEWoods
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/739489237251194882
IN REPLY TO:
@ThomasEWoods
.@rarey4 That’s your comeback? You’re defending the internment of a group based on race.I think your response should be a teensy bit better.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/739489237251194882
Groups must be held accountable for the actions of their members rather than exporting the cost and retaining benefits
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-07 01:38:48 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/739994987618836481
Reply addressees: @ThomasEWoods @rarey4
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/739489237251194882
IN REPLY TO:
@ThomasEWoods
.@rarey4 That’s your comeback? You’re defending the internment of a group based on race.I think your response should be a teensy bit better.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/739489237251194882
(Profoundly Important Concept)
@ThomasEWoodsThe Westphalian peace was a unique western invention making STATES accountable for their members. Individualism = Statism.
States created individualism. Throughout all history groups have been accountable for the actions of their members.
Families, clans, tribes, nations.
To do otherwise is to force the host population to bear the cost of domesticating a culture.
One cannot advocate individualism without advocating statism, and the export of costs onto host communities.
There is a reason authors of libertarianism were from disaporic tribes not land holders that had to pay the high cost of holding territory against invaders.
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-06 21:41:00 UTC
Those occupations we perform are measures of our gifts.
Those commons we produce measures of our character.
While we are unequal in the potential use of our gifts, we are equal in our potential construction of our character.
Because while production consists of chat we choose to do, character and commons consist of what we choose not to do.
Doing costs resources. Not doing costs will.
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-05 08:39:00 UTC
Free Speech?
– We don’t allow ‘free’ violence: extortion, retaliation, punishment, enforcement.
– We don’t allow ‘free’ remuneration: blackmail, bribery,
– So, why should we allow free speech: libel, slander, defamation, violation of privacy?
Instead:
– We allow constructive violence: self-defense, defense of the commons, citizens arrest, deputizing, military service.
– We allow constructive remuneration: payment for goods and services that produce productivity for the commons.
– We allow constructive speech: that one speaks the truth, and that when speaking the truth one defends a commons or individuals from parasitism and predation.
Why?
Becuase the only actions we must tolerate are those that consist of
– Productive
– Fully Informed
– Warrantied
– Voluntary Transfers
– Limited to externalities of the same criteria.
– Or at a minimum, productive externalities (increases in capital).
Where:
– that which we tolerate is defined as those words and deeds that might cause another to retaliate against an imposition of costs by others.
Reversal:
But are not forgone opportunities for reward a cost?
– Of course they are – to one party. But they are not lost opportunities to BOTH parties. And that is what cooperation requires: reciprocal benefit. Unless benefit is reciprocal, productive, fully informed, and warrantied, and limited to externalities of the same, then the action is not a benefit to both parties. Man under threat from torture, blackmail, or defamation, libel and slander, may consent, but it is not voluntary. Why? because he does not have the option to refuse. And no deal in which a man has no option to refuse without harm, can be voluntary. He can refuse and forgo a gain, but he cannot refuse and be subject to harm while at the same time claiming the choice was voluntary.
– It is not rational to grant one the right to unqualified profit or gain – that would allow for parasitism and predation, which renders cooperation irrational and conflict preferable.
– It is rational to grant on qualified right to profit or gain – where the profit results from productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary, transfer limited to externalities of the same.
Libertine ethics are based upon the falsehood of volition rather than the truth of preventing retaliation. Volition does not limit the actions that cause retaliation. Only volition in favor of production that cannot produce retaliation is a logical and demonstrable criteria for preventing retaliation.
The purpose of rule of law is to prevent actions that produce retaliations (costs) leaving only actions that produce production (gains).
The history of the common law consists of the accumulated rules by which we incrementally expand the prohibitions against newly discovered means of circumventing the requirement for productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer, limited to externalities of the same.
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-05 05:17:00 UTC