Feb 24, 2020, 10:55 AM The Via- Positiva Small, homogenous, low power distance, polities under rule of law, and their naturally limited capacity for fiat currency inflation demonstrate the optimum mixed economies for both trade and redistribution. The optimum organization of such a polity is by Sovereignty, Rule of law of Reciprocity, an independent cult of the judiciary, a universal militia, a standing professional army of warriors, a monarchy as a judge of last resort, houses for the classes demonstrating contribution to the commons for the production of commons. And markets in everything. Ethnocentrism is the optimum group strategy because kin selection favors – or at least doesn’t resist – loyalty, high trust, commons, and redistribution. Ethno-supremacism is a necessary property of ethnocentrism. Europeans are demonstrably superior genetically, culturally, scientifically, medically, technologically, institutionally, civilizationally to all other civilizations in the ancient and modern worlds. And we are so for one reason: sovereignty. Everything in our civilization descends from it.
Theme: Sovereignty
-
Libertarianism Is Evolving Into Propertarianism (Sovereigntarianism)
Mar 26, 2020, 12:30 PM “Freedom and Liberty are had by permission, sovereignty is a fact.”
—“Libertarianism ain’t gonna survive this crisis. It will be seen as, not just foolish, but shockingly immoral when this is over.”—Spencer —“It’s going to evolve into Propertarianism. You two should debate about this, I’m serious.”—Dark Horse
The structure and development of the human brain forces three classes of people, demanding different means of understanding and incentive: empathic (religious, secular religious – demand), balanced (pragmatic – follow ), and intellectual (executive – operational). The faithful use the feminine theological demand, Richard uses the masculine secular-theological demand, Greg uses the pragmatic intuitive, the civnats the pragmatic, and the executive use the empirical military and law. These are rough class diffs reflecting power structures. The failure of the theological and secular theological programs are obvious. We are in the process of seeing the failure of the civnat belief system. So that leaves the provision of material incentives and an operational means of achieving them by non-majoritarian means. What’s necessary for action is for the theological, secular theological, and pragmatic leaderships to recognize that they can only act on the ACTIONABLE rather than the intuitive and inspirational – and those incentives are material, familial, social, and political. I cannot, have no interest in, and no time to, inspire the theological, or secular theological (meaning emotional) with sophistry. There is only one way out of our condition and only three choices: conquest, separatism, or defeat. That choice is determined by numbers leaders recruit. In the last revolution I was ‘involved’ in, the feminine religious mass in the face of the government, the civnats supply them, and fight. And the hard liners take on the strong points. The executive make demands. They do it TOGETHER. There is only one operational solution to our condition because the world runs on the military, economy to fund it, bureaucracy to operate it, and laws to manage it. There is only one permanent way of ending the strategy of the enemy both within our people and without: the law. Libertarianism was always a cowardly pacifism. There is only one source of liberty: sovereignty created by men who fight to construct it – and to construct it with rules: Law. The rest is just toggling between distributive, market, martial government as needed in circumstance Libertarians are beggars – boys begging men to fight for them.
-
Libertarianism Is Evolving Into Propertarianism (Sovereigntarianism)
Mar 26, 2020, 12:30 PM “Freedom and Liberty are had by permission, sovereignty is a fact.”
—“Libertarianism ain’t gonna survive this crisis. It will be seen as, not just foolish, but shockingly immoral when this is over.”—Spencer —“It’s going to evolve into Propertarianism. You two should debate about this, I’m serious.”—Dark Horse
The structure and development of the human brain forces three classes of people, demanding different means of understanding and incentive: empathic (religious, secular religious – demand), balanced (pragmatic – follow ), and intellectual (executive – operational). The faithful use the feminine theological demand, Richard uses the masculine secular-theological demand, Greg uses the pragmatic intuitive, the civnats the pragmatic, and the executive use the empirical military and law. These are rough class diffs reflecting power structures. The failure of the theological and secular theological programs are obvious. We are in the process of seeing the failure of the civnat belief system. So that leaves the provision of material incentives and an operational means of achieving them by non-majoritarian means. What’s necessary for action is for the theological, secular theological, and pragmatic leaderships to recognize that they can only act on the ACTIONABLE rather than the intuitive and inspirational – and those incentives are material, familial, social, and political. I cannot, have no interest in, and no time to, inspire the theological, or secular theological (meaning emotional) with sophistry. There is only one way out of our condition and only three choices: conquest, separatism, or defeat. That choice is determined by numbers leaders recruit. In the last revolution I was ‘involved’ in, the feminine religious mass in the face of the government, the civnats supply them, and fight. And the hard liners take on the strong points. The executive make demands. They do it TOGETHER. There is only one operational solution to our condition because the world runs on the military, economy to fund it, bureaucracy to operate it, and laws to manage it. There is only one permanent way of ending the strategy of the enemy both within our people and without: the law. Libertarianism was always a cowardly pacifism. There is only one source of liberty: sovereignty created by men who fight to construct it – and to construct it with rules: Law. The rest is just toggling between distributive, market, martial government as needed in circumstance Libertarians are beggars – boys begging men to fight for them.
-
Propertarianism is the best case for individualism
Mar 27, 2020, 11:36 AM
—“Propertarianism is the best case for individualism as it establishes the costs. Sovereignty requires agency requires the aptitude to incur and manage the costs.”—Rick Tavi
(CD: Well done. I set out to restore ability, responsibility, un-substitutability, and cost to search for Freedom and Liberty by permission at other’s discretion – resulting in creation of Sovereignty in fact by our decision. I did so because when working on Hoppe I understood argumentation ethics were nonsense. Violence, like boycott, is never, ever, ever off the political table.)
-
Propertarianism is the best case for individualism
Mar 27, 2020, 11:36 AM
—“Propertarianism is the best case for individualism as it establishes the costs. Sovereignty requires agency requires the aptitude to incur and manage the costs.”—Rick Tavi
(CD: Well done. I set out to restore ability, responsibility, un-substitutability, and cost to search for Freedom and Liberty by permission at other’s discretion – resulting in creation of Sovereignty in fact by our decision. I did so because when working on Hoppe I understood argumentation ethics were nonsense. Violence, like boycott, is never, ever, ever off the political table.)
-
Why Is Curt Doolittle so Hostile in Reforming Libertarianism Into Sovereigntarianism?
Mar 27, 2020, 4:38 PM
—“UPB It’s built on non-contradiction. Making it’s epistemology rationalism; thereby ignoring: natural law, game theory, prisoner’s dilemma, etc.”—Andrew M Gilmour —“UPB is Kantianism (Hoppeanism) for fever-level IQs. It is the language of an adolescent just learning to venture beyond his mother’s purview. This has been his project from the outset (DEFOOing). He never completed the developmental arc. … Man requires information, not imperative.”—James Krieger —“I can only unite the libertarian, conservative, and religious if I restore responsibility of the militia of every able bodied man to bear the cost of the organized use of violence to enforce our demand for sovereignty and reciprocity, truth and duty, excellence and beauty, jury and law, family and kin, commons and capitalization as the central objects of social organization and political policy. To do that we require an intellectual vanguard. The classical libertarians have always been our intellectual wing, the conservatives decidedly anti-intellectual, and the religious conservatives hostile to the intellectual. I have to deprive the libertarian intellectual class of false promise of freedom from the cost of organized violence in a universal militia of kin, and to together we must bear the cost of depriving the left of freedom from the cost of hyper-consumption and dysgenic reproduction and the hedonism of the individual’s maximization of consumption as the central object of policy and social organization. The left is cancerous growth of man on both this planet, mankind, man’s future, and the possibility of the transcendence of man into the gods we might yet be.”— Curt Doolittle
Sovereignty = Responsibility.
-
Why Is Curt Doolittle so Hostile in Reforming Libertarianism Into Sovereigntarianism?
Mar 27, 2020, 4:38 PM
—“UPB It’s built on non-contradiction. Making it’s epistemology rationalism; thereby ignoring: natural law, game theory, prisoner’s dilemma, etc.”—Andrew M Gilmour —“UPB is Kantianism (Hoppeanism) for fever-level IQs. It is the language of an adolescent just learning to venture beyond his mother’s purview. This has been his project from the outset (DEFOOing). He never completed the developmental arc. … Man requires information, not imperative.”—James Krieger —“I can only unite the libertarian, conservative, and religious if I restore responsibility of the militia of every able bodied man to bear the cost of the organized use of violence to enforce our demand for sovereignty and reciprocity, truth and duty, excellence and beauty, jury and law, family and kin, commons and capitalization as the central objects of social organization and political policy. To do that we require an intellectual vanguard. The classical libertarians have always been our intellectual wing, the conservatives decidedly anti-intellectual, and the religious conservatives hostile to the intellectual. I have to deprive the libertarian intellectual class of false promise of freedom from the cost of organized violence in a universal militia of kin, and to together we must bear the cost of depriving the left of freedom from the cost of hyper-consumption and dysgenic reproduction and the hedonism of the individual’s maximization of consumption as the central object of policy and social organization. The left is cancerous growth of man on both this planet, mankind, man’s future, and the possibility of the transcendence of man into the gods we might yet be.”— Curt Doolittle
Sovereignty = Responsibility.
-
Propertarianism Fits, but Sovereigntarianism and Rule of Law Fit Better.
Mar 28, 2020, 2:32 PM (in response to hate from a universalist libertarian)
—“Doolittle needs to come up with his own descriptor. By his own admission, Propertarianism no longer fits. He long ago abandoned any propertarian roots he may have had, denying any propositional aspects of human culture in favor of racial collectivism. A ludicrous course down a blind alley, easily exposed by observing the changes in European behavior effected by the Frankfurt School’s “long march through the institutions”.— Karl Brooks
If you mean I attack every sacred cow, and address every taboo in my search for the truth as a means of ending the current attack on western civilization – then that’s true. If you mean I am no longer a universalist – I never was. If you mean I ever denied the reality of human differences given the vast disparity in the size of the underclasses, and the vast evidence of racial competition in heterogeneous societies, or the failure of every heterogeneous society in history – I never did. If you mean by “propertarian” a system of measurement created by reducing all questions of social science to tests of property – I still am. If you mean I am a universal nationalist – I am. If you mean I have come to the conclusion that western civlization is demonstrably superior and articulated why in great detail -I have. If you mean I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that the genetic differences between groups are insurmountable in a heterogeneous polity – then I have. I If you mean separatism is the only method of preserving that civlization because of demographic disparities – yes it does.If you mean I want other than the best for all other people – no it doesn’t. If you mean to suggest that there is any better way of life for all people without imposing costs upon others, than low power distance of many small nation states is the optimum human order – then you err. PREMISE: our differences in demand for commons can only be ameliorated by political separation, and our satisfaction for goods services and information can be satisfied by international trade. This is a purely empirical statement. I can find no evidence in history to counter it. “All People Demonstrate Kin Selection and Kin Preference. All heterogeneous groups self sort, and in proximity come into conflict. So separate and Carry Your Own Weight”
-
Propertarianism Fits, but Sovereigntarianism and Rule of Law Fit Better.
Mar 28, 2020, 2:32 PM (in response to hate from a universalist libertarian)
—“Doolittle needs to come up with his own descriptor. By his own admission, Propertarianism no longer fits. He long ago abandoned any propertarian roots he may have had, denying any propositional aspects of human culture in favor of racial collectivism. A ludicrous course down a blind alley, easily exposed by observing the changes in European behavior effected by the Frankfurt School’s “long march through the institutions”.— Karl Brooks
If you mean I attack every sacred cow, and address every taboo in my search for the truth as a means of ending the current attack on western civilization – then that’s true. If you mean I am no longer a universalist – I never was. If you mean I ever denied the reality of human differences given the vast disparity in the size of the underclasses, and the vast evidence of racial competition in heterogeneous societies, or the failure of every heterogeneous society in history – I never did. If you mean by “propertarian” a system of measurement created by reducing all questions of social science to tests of property – I still am. If you mean I am a universal nationalist – I am. If you mean I have come to the conclusion that western civlization is demonstrably superior and articulated why in great detail -I have. If you mean I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that the genetic differences between groups are insurmountable in a heterogeneous polity – then I have. I If you mean separatism is the only method of preserving that civlization because of demographic disparities – yes it does.If you mean I want other than the best for all other people – no it doesn’t. If you mean to suggest that there is any better way of life for all people without imposing costs upon others, than low power distance of many small nation states is the optimum human order – then you err. PREMISE: our differences in demand for commons can only be ameliorated by political separation, and our satisfaction for goods services and information can be satisfied by international trade. This is a purely empirical statement. I can find no evidence in history to counter it. “All People Demonstrate Kin Selection and Kin Preference. All heterogeneous groups self sort, and in proximity come into conflict. So separate and Carry Your Own Weight”
-
So What’s Next?
Mar 29, 2020, 12:06 PM
—“So what’s next? Will secession and decentralization take root as the wave of the political future? Or are we facing even further entrenchment of the centralized state authoritarian paradigm?”— Josh Deel
It depends if you me and 1M other men make the choice. I’m going to make the choice. Will you make the choice???
—“How then to mobilize and move it forward? We need approx. 3-4% of the greater population to pull it off. No? Or could that number be revised downward in our given “opportunity” of circumstance(s)?”— Josh Deel
We’d need 10-100k to start it, 2M+ to force it. 3-4% to support it, and a quarter of the people to at least not resist it, and provide intel and cover. In simple terms if all the happy christians went to DC with a set of demands, and 1M of us are mobile elsewhere creating pressure then it’s over. But we have to offer a solution that at least 1/4 of the people will want. My view is more than half will want it. That’s enough. In other words, as I understand it, you cannot resist the P-constitution unless you want to impose irreciprocity on others. If you do then we have moral license to impose irreciprocity too. Question is. Can I tolerate producing a podcast to take this to market. Can john and the others take it down market. And can we make it popular enough a conversation (“help us build a new constitution”) that we can get the numbers above.