What Concepts Will We Introduce?
1 – The completion of the innovation of the calculus, of competition, of evolution, of markets by applying it to truth, resulting in the completion of the scientific method.
2 – The merger of science, philosophy, morality, and law into a single consistent science of decidability.
3 – The Age of Operations and Algorithms to replace the age of correlation alone – and all that it entails.
|| Myth and Analogy > Reason and Justification > Rationalism and Consistency > Empiricism and Correspondence > Algorithm and Existence.
4 – The Universal, Discipline Independent, Language of Truthful Speech
“Science is a universal language of truthful speech; reciprocity is a universal ethic; nationalism is an extension of the family and the universal social order. The only meaningful differences between the races, subraces, and tribes, is the size of our underclasses, our degree of neoteny, and our degree of sexual dimorphism. And we can all transcend into the gods we imagine if we practice truth, reciprocity, nationalism, and a gentle reduction of the size of our underclasses“
5 – The extension of rule of law to the requirement for involuntary warranty of truthful speech in matters of the commons. And the application of that requirement to constitution, law, government, politics, education, commerce, and media.
6 – A re-interpretation of history as a competition between eugenic and dysgenic strategies and incentives of peoples with different levels of genetic domestication.
Terminology is the most difficult part of Propertarianism. Once you understand the epistemology you will also understand why we use the terms we do, the sentence structures we do, and the wordiness we do. Here is some help with those terms.
- On The Use and Meaning Of “-ism’s”.
- The Meaning of Fictionalism
- Significant Definitions
- The Glossary
- The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
The Philosophy: Significant Topics
While propertarianism serves as an anti-philosophy system of thought, we rely upon the traditional hierarchy of categories:
Metaphysics:…………….Vitruvianism: Man is the measure of all things man (cog. sci.)
Psychology: ……………..Acquisitionism: Man acquires and defends.
Ethics and Morality:…..Propertarianism. (Reciprocity) The Ethics of Non Imposition, production, and investment.
Epistemology: ………….Testimonialism. The competition between imaginary associations and existential measurements in all dimensions of actionable reality.
Law: ………………………..Algorithmic Natural Law. The Natural Law of Reciprocity. Strictly constructed from the test of reciprocity.
Sociology: ………………..Compatibilism: Intertemporal division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, and advocacy wherein we combine information and calculate compatible means to the achievement of different ends through voluntary conflict, competition, cooperation, and boycott.
Politics: ……………………Markets in Everything. (Which I call “Market Fascism” with tongue in cheek.)
Strategy:………………… Agency: Maximization of agency through Transcendence, Sovereignty, and Heroism
Spirituality:………………Transcendence: Masculine Stoicism, Feminine Epicureanism, Ritual Familialism, Feast Naturalism,…….Festival Nationalism.
Aesthetics:……………….,Truth(Testimonial), Excellence(Density), Goodness(Morality[‘the commons’]) and Beauty(Bounty).
Constitution …………….A Second American Constitution
Revolution………………..The Course and Conduct of a Revolution
. . .
Man is the measure of all things to man. Meaning that man’s categories of cognition are determined by his brain structure and his brain structure is evolved and organized for humans to act at human scale.
Our first resource is time. our development of action, sentience, intelligence, cooperation, division of labor, writing, narrative, numbers, money, accounting, reason, law and science serves to produce increasing returns on time. When we increase our numbers in physical space we decrease opportunity costs (time). When we increase incremental suppression of parasitism and free riding, we decrease transaction costs (time). trades, money, savings, store time – time to trade with others.
All behavior is reducible to the incentive to acquire interests. we can enumerate those categories of interests we seek to acquire. we remember those things we have invested in as costs, and defend those costs. (our complex interests some of which are our possessions )
We provide a list of categories that explain the sum total of what people seek to acquire an ‘interest’ in.
A Short Course in Acquisitionism (psychology)
We increase the precision of the term ‘true’ by asking whether a question is decidable, presumptively good as a general rule, personally preferable, useful, possible, undecidable, or unknowable.
|Decidability| decidable < presumptively good as a general rule < personally preferable < useful < possible <undecidable, < or unknowable
A Very Short Course in Decidability
We reorganize the constitution of language into
- The Grammatical Capacity of the human mind to produce a serialized stream of symbols.
- The Dimensions of reality that man can include in his set of semantic references.
- The Necessary Grammar (Rules of continuous disambiguation, calculation, and transaction ) for each set of Dimensions.
- The Variations in Ordinary Language (Languages)
- The Vocabulary (Semantics) within that Dimensional Grammar
- The Phonetics of that ordinary vocabulary
- Morphology of the vocabulary
- The Pragmatics (rules within the variations of ordinary language.
- The Variations in Ordinary Language (Languages)
- The Necessary Grammar (Rules of continuous disambiguation, calculation, and transaction ) for each set of Dimensions.
- The Dimensions of reality that man can include in his set of semantic references.
These dimensions include the grammars of:
|GRAMMARS| Identity, Logic, Mathematics, Accounting, Algorithms, Recipes Processes and Protocols, science proper(operational), Law, Testimony, description, ordinary language, storytelling, fiction, fictionalisms: The Sophisms, Magic and Pseudoscience, Supernaturalism and Occult.
a PDF of the Gramamars (It’s a Poster. You’ll need to zoom-in to read it.)
THE FICTIONALISMS AND DECEITS
( … )
OPERATIONALISM AND OPERATIONAL LANGUAGE
( … operationalism …. )
Operationalism means speaking in operations or actions, like a recipe or a computer program. Science is operational because a proper, non-pseudoscientific, science paper is basically like a recipe. “Set up this experiment in this way and conduct it just so and you should observe these results.” If someone follows the recipe and observes different results, the conclusion will have to be revisited.
People frequently do NOT speak operationally. They speak in metaphors, analogies, meanings, or existence claims, instead of actions and operations. When you do not speak operationally it is easy to engage in error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, conflation, fraud, or deception.
Consider the phrase “I love you.” There is a lot of moral and emotional content in that short but highly meaningful utterance and I’d wager most people who use it, most times, aren’t thinking about all of that or its many weighty and subtle implications. “I love you” is frequently not an honest statement, either for reasons of willful duplicity or out of simple ignorance. But if we break it down in operational terms we can gain a more precise understanding of its meaning and benefit from employing it more correctly and conscientiously.
I think that “love” (noun) refers to the condition in which one’s happiness depends on another’s.
Therefore “to love” (verb) must mean to act in a manner consistent with this condition prevailing.
So we can put “I love you” in operational terms and say that it means “I promise that if you test the hypothesis that my happiness depends on your own against my actions, you will not find it untrue”.
ECONOMIC LANGUAGE AND ANALYSIS
( … )
TESTIMONY (TESTIMONIAL TRUTH):
Testimonial Truth refers to existentially possible truth, which comes in the form of operationally described testimony, it differs from platonic idealized truth. Testimonialism refers to the set of criticisms that we have to apply if we intend to warrant due diligence to the truthfulness of our testimony. List of criticisms necessary for due diligence:
- Naming Consistency – Non-conflation of identities.
- Internal Consistency – Logical descriptions of theories.
- External Consistency – Empirical observations of theories.
- Existential Consistency – Operational definitions of concepts.
- Scope Consistency – Parsimonious and Fully accounted.
- Moral Consistency – Objectively Moral.
- By applying some of those criticisms to a hypothesis, one gets a theory, once it gets exhaustively tested, one gets either a Fact (observation), Law(explanation), or Recipe (process).
- By operationally describing theories (sequences of physical actions + instruments + measurements), one can achieve testability and repeatability while, at the same time, imposing a prohibitive burden on speech that contains error, biases, wishful thinking, loading, suggestion and deceit. Instruments used in operational descriptions include physical, logical and institutional instruments; where sensors, IQ tests and property serve as examples of each.
- By continued testing of the theories, one eventually finds the limits of a theory (where we “falsified” it), this protects us from using a theory in an invalid scope (where it fails or lacks precision), in matters of cooperation one must add the full accountability of costs upon demonstrated property in order to avoid selection bias.
In addition to testimony by those criticisms, one may issue less reliable warranties of sympathy (understanding of a conceptual relationship), honesty (intuition free of deceits), rationality (subjected to internal consistency), empiricism (subjected to external consistency), and scientific testing (expensive continued testing, but not testimonial).
Humans evolved to negotiate. Negotiate given three options: avoidance, conflict, or cooperation. We did not evolve to speak truthfully, but pragmatically.
However, we can learn to speak truthfully just as we can learn to read using symbols, write using symbols, grammar, and vocabulary, do arithmetic and mathematics answer logical questions, and write computer software.
The reason being, that just as there are only so many existential dimensions to the universe (point, line, space, geometry, change (time/space)), there there are only so many actionable dimensions to the universe (categorical, logical, empirical, operational, rational, moral, and scope-completeness).
Just as we can use different levels of mathematics to test our theories (count, arithmetic, accounting, ratios (‘math’), geometry and trigonometry, calculus, and algebraic geometry), we can we can test each of those actionable dimensions of reality.
Just as it is very difficult for a statement of constant relations in mathematics to be false if it meets all the necessary dimensional criteria, it is very difficult for a statement of truth in ordinary language to be false if it meets all the necessary dimensions of criteria.
As such, while it is almost impossible to know if we speak truth proper – meaning, the most informationally parsimonious description possible – we can however warranty we have done all available due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, deception and lies. (WARRANTY OF DUE DILIGENCE)
So while it does take some practice to meet these criteria, the only novel dimension is the ‘operational’, which requires a very limited grammar.
But if we use this grammar it is literally almost impossible to err, just as it is nearly impossible to write a program that will run and not err.
Just as it is nearly impossible to construct certain proofs and still err.
To a significant degree it is possible to construct a language, vocabulary, grammar, and syntax of truthful speech: Testimonialism.
A Short Course in Testimonial Truth
The Due Diligence Necessary for A Warranty of Truthfulness
THE COMPETITION BETWEEN VIA-POSITIVA, VIA-NEGATIVA
VIA-POSITIVA MORAL JUSTIFICATION, VIA POSITIVA LEGAL JUSTIFICATION, AND VIA-NEGATIVA TESTIMONIALISM
TRANSFORMATION OF APRIORISM TO SCIENTIFIC TERMS
MAN IS RATIONAL – NOT MORAL OR IMMORAL
MAN IS A VICTIM OF HIS GENETIC BIASES
( … lack of agency … illusion of the range of free will … rider and the elephant and the genes )
We can empathize with intent and therefore cooperate. We can remember, so we can exchange cooperation over time, as well as forgo cooperation if it’s irreciprocal. Cooperation is so much more productive than individual action that it is an un-substitutable good. So preservation of incentive to cooperate requires profitable(productive) reciprocity.
That which we have borne costs to obtain an interest without imposing costs on the interests of others does not violate reciprocity. All non-criminal/criminal, unethical/ethical, and moral/immoral behavior can be reduced to statements of reciprocity.
We reduce most questions to “at this moment, what is a person attempting to acquire?” And then “how reciprocal(moral) or ir-reciprocal(immoral) is his action?
NON IMPOSITION AGAINST DEMONSTRATED PROPERTY (“PROPERTY IN TOTO”)
Propertarian ethics proposes the question of the rationality of cooperation and answers that human agents consider cooperation as a rational choice (instead of parasitism and predation) only if it does not impose costs upon that which they consider their property.
Humans, as with other organisms, need to acquire resources in order to survive and reproduce, this requirement led to the development of an instinct to acquire and inventory many types of capital (physical, monetary, territorial, normative, genetic, etc.).
Humans intuit that capital upon which they have invested, without imposing costs upon their groups, as their property, and retaliate to any attempt of imposing costs to that which they consider their property, this constitutes their demonstrated property. We can divide those into the following types of property:
- Self-Property – Body, Time, Actions, Memory, Concepts, Status, etc.
- Personal Property – Houses, Cars, “Things”, etc.
- Kinship Property – Mates, Children, Family, Friends, etc.
- Cooperative Property – Organizational and Knowledge ties.
- Shareholder Property – Recorded and Quantified shares. Citizenship.
- Common Property – Territorial and capital interests, Artificial Property.
- Informal Institutional Property – Manners, Ethics, Morals, Myths, Rituals.
- Formal Institutional Property – Religion, Government, Laws.
One can also state the principle of non-imposition as the requirement that all transactions have the following properties:
- Symmetry of knowledge,
- Without externalities of the same (previous) criteria.
The principle of non-imposition in combination with demonstrated property allows a polity to construct law in a way that eliminates the need of discretionary interpretation, that means it provides decidability for all questions of law and contract.
Humans evolved most of its emotions as reactions to change in their inventory of property, but they vary in their perception of what constitutes property, with different classes of humans prioritizing different moral intuitions.
A SHORT COURSE IN PROPERTARIAN MORALITY
A SHORT COURSE IN PROPERTARIAN REASONING
LAW: ALGORITHMIC NATURAL LAW.
NATURAL LAW AND COMMON LAW
There is only one law of universal morality, and that is the law of reciprocity. It is possible to construct all laws as derivations of this one law of reciprocity, using the vocabulary, grammar, and syntax of testimonial speech, producing strictly constructed original intent and textualism. If all law is written as such it is closed to interpretation on one hand, and false, dishonest, immoral, insufficient, and incomplete laws can be identified and sunset by competitive argument.
This ends judicial activism and circumvention of the law on one hand, and limits the construction of legislation (contracts of the commons) to that which does not violate reciprocity.
Conversely, it is possible for judges to discover new applications of the natural law of reciprocity – whether they start from the history of judgements (common law) or they start from pre-calculated judgements (canon law), or a combination of the two (common law of judgements on top of canon law).
And for this reason, innovations in free riding, parasitism, and predation can be eradicated and added to the legal canon as soon as the first case is adjudicated.
Moreover, the legislation can be falsified and removed, court findings can be falsified and removed.
A Short Course in Natural Law
INCREMENTAL SUPPRESSION OF PARASITISM
In order to cooperate and expand cooperation, humans require incremental suppression of impositions of cost upon their demonstrated property as relationships move from local to global and become anonymous.
At first humans organize in order to partially suppress imposition of costs (criminal), namely violence, this results in innovations on parasitism that moves to theft and fraud (ethical), as those get suppressed, we have private property, but parasitism evolves towards deception and organized forms of parasitism (moral and conspiratorial).
As such one can judge the moral state of a polity by comparison with the list of all forms of free-riding and those which they actually suppress by their law.
By near total suppression of imposed costs and the absolute nuclear family, we force individuals into market cooperation instead of parasitism (which limits parasitism even within the family), this results in a highly eugenic (meritocratic) civilization which suppresses lower class reproduction.
In order to create incentives for the lower classes to abide by rule of law, they’re compensated with dividends obtained in exchange for forgone opportunities of parasitism and for the policing of the commons.
The Evolution of Suppression via Common Law
THE INFORMATIONAL COMMONS:
Humans defend commons into which they have invested resources, that follows from the definition of demonstrated property, as such, we can consider information as a commons and prohibit the “pollution” of that commons as we do with other commons such as rivers.
As such, a requirement of truthful speech (testimonialism) forms a new kind of warranty, just like warranties given to the quality of goods and services, we must now warrant any information we use in public discourse about matters of commons. This does not mean that we must prohibit conflationary and inspirational discourse in private, for pedagogical, aesthetic and hypothetical (meaningful) purposes.
Testimonialism stands as a warranty in matters of law (and contract), where the discovery of law must pass through all of the criticisms, for this reason we have both empiricism (as in the common law) and operationalism (strict construction).
While we protect the life, and property, the contract of marriage, the physical commons (land, water, air, infrastructure), our institutional commons (govts, laws, even traditions), and even fine arts and monuments; and while we protect the market of products and the market for services, one thing we do not protect is the market for information. We can extend the demand for due diligence that we require in the markets for goods and services to the market for information. But that requires a test of truthful speech: a warranty of due diligence.
Once we can test for due diligence in truthful speech, we can counter-act the media revolution’s industrialization of lying (academy, state, and media-advertising), by extending the demand for warranty of due diligence in products and services to a demand for warranty of due diligence in public speech, and grant universal standing to all citizens in defense of the ‘informational commons’.
This means that anyone will be able to sue anyone for speech that fails the tests of due diligence. While this will not need to apply to private speech, it means that business, finance, media, academy, and state can no longer use the power of mass communications to lie and deceive the people. (This may sound strange until you have some experience with it, but it works.
Now, if you have some idea of the difference in mankind caused by the scientific revolution in the physical sciences, you might be able to imagine the vast improvement in our lives by the scientific revolution in the social and information sciences.
Imagine if no organization could use media to lie to you. Imagine how consumer protections would evolve. Imagine how politicians and professors would have to speak to us.
We cannot know what is true, but we can know what is false.
And that is enough.
MARKETS IN EVERYTHING:
Once we rely on natural law for the resolution of differences, then our only means of cooperation is in markets – markets in everything. Including association, cooperation, reproduction, production of goods, services and information, production of commons, production of polities, and production of group evolutionary strategies.
SOCIOLOGY : COMPATIBILISM
INTERTEMPORAL DIVISION OF PERCEPTION :
Intertemporal Division of Perception, Cognition, Knowledge, Labor, and Advocacy
Humans form a division of perception in that progressives and libertarians have specialist moral intuitions suited to their roles in the community, whereas conservatives give equal weight to the six moral dimensions of (care, fairness, liberty, loyalty, authority, purity). These differences on moral intuitions suit individuals to different roles in a polity:
- “Conservatives” – Voluntary Organization of Cooperation.
- “Libertarians” – Voluntary Organization of Production.
- “Progressives” – Voluntary Organization of Reproduction.
Humans form a division of cognition in that we can classify people with different levels of ability, from those that learn by repetition, to those that learn by imitation, to those that learn by instruction, to those that learn by reading, to those that can model machines,to those that can synthesize ideas, to those that can model abstractions.
Humans form a division of knowledge with each containing local information about their inventories of property and specialist knowledge upon which others depend. As we depend more upon the memories and actions of third parties, trust becomes necessary for complex information networks to evolve between humans.
Humans form multiple divisions of labor, a reproductive division of labor between the genders in the production of new generations and a productive division of labor in the production of goods and services, as well as the production of commons.
Humans form a division of advocacy where conservatives advocate total constraint on consumption (saving), libertarians advocate meritocratic constraint on consumption (production), and progressives advocate consumption (nurture).
THE THREE COERCIVE TECHNOLOGIES
Each of the three classes, into which humans divide, specialize in one of the following three coercive technologies:
- Moral Coercive Power – The use of “words and signals” in order to influence people to behave in a way by the threat of imposition of social costs (opportunity costs).
- Economic Coercive Power – The use of “money and assets” in order to compel people to behave in a way by the promise of material rewards (good and services).
- Physical Coercive Power – The use of “armies and weapons” in order to coerce people to behave in a way under the threat of physical violence (physical costs).
By combined use of the three weapons, a group can coerce quite effectively, the government can use all those weapons to keep control of its subjects, with most people being controlled by propaganda and lies (moral coercion), others being bought with a position in the bureaucracy (economic coercion) and the rest of the malcontents being suppressed by police force (physical coercion).
Intertemporal Division of Reproductive Perception Knowledge Labor and Advocacy: The difference between the feminine (short term), libertarian (medium term) and conservative (long term) moral biases constitutes an intertemporal division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, and advocacy.
The way we ‘calculate’ what is ‘good’ is through voluntary exchanges: cooperation. So the fact that we have different biases provides necessary and advantageous specializations, and our principal problem then is providing ‘markets’ by which we can cooperate and ‘calculate’ group needs through constant exchanges.
By choice of individual sovereignty, we limit ourselves to natural law. By the choice of natural law we limit ourselves to markets in everything. By limiting ourselves to markets in everything we produce markets for association, cooperation, mating and reproduction, production commerce and trade, the production of commons (government), and the production of polities (Armies and Territories and Rule).
VERTICAL CLASSES (ABILITY):
Instead of one class hierarchy there are three. Societies are dominated by some arrangement of these three methods of coercion (Military and law, finance and commerce, priesthood and public intellectuals). Each fights for power, with the core of the population shifting under who best serves them, while at the same time protecting them from outside competition.
Within those classes we see genetic, social, and economic classes. Genetic roughly reflecting reproductive desirability. Social roughly reflecting manners, norms, and education, and economic/political reflecting achievements.
HORIZONTAL CLASSES (VALUE):
For all intents and purposes, with wide individual variation, physical attractiveness (which yes, is a universal), fitness, IQ, and personality, serve as a rough indicator of class.
For all intents and purposes, intelligence serves as a personality trait – and perhaps the dominant personality trait.
For all intents and purposes, personality and physique require exercise in order to produce individual fitness. (This being the primary failure of the 20th century – personality training. )
A SHORT COURSE IN GROUP ORGANIZATION (SOCIOLOGY)
POLITICS: PRODUCTION OF COMMONS
IT ALL BEGINS WITH THE MILITIA:
TRANSACTION COST EVOLUTION OF GOVERNMENT
At first humans had to deal with small communities where the threat of ostracism almost equals a death threat, but as those groups grew in distance of relationships, so did the incentives to impose costs upon others in favor of oneself and of one’s family.
The growth of transaction costs led to a demand for an authority in order to provide dispute resolution, from this, people formed governments as a way to suppress local transaction costs and replace it with a global cost (taxation).
The opportunities for rational cooperation created by government resulted in great wealth, a lot of which went into the hands of government. Ideally, suppression of the centralized costs (bureaucratic and political parasitism) would follow, while retaining suppression of the local costs and the commons built under this suppression (particularly, the property definitions themselves).
In reality, a class warfare for the control of government went on, which led to democracy, that in practice results in redistribution of the rents to the lower classes (the majority) in a winner takes all contest. From this point on, dysgenia and demand for authority follow.
P.S.: To any propertarian that reads this, I know about other topics such as the axiomatic vs theoretical knowledge issue, group evolutionary strategies, family structures, the failure of the enlightenment, the great lies, heroism, personality (autistic vs solipsistic and other issues), demonstrated intelligence, and so on, but I do not feel confident enough on those issues to even try writing about them yet.
The Transaction Cost Theory of Government
STRICT CONSTRUCTION OF LAW AND MARKET GOVERNMENT
Propertarian law evolves by incremental suppression of new forms of parasitism, where the judge discovered common law provides the least time lapse between the invention of parasitism and the construction of law prohibiting it.
Strictly constructed law follows from the first principle of non-imposition of costs against demonstrated property, we can use this method of construction to specify contracts, as long as the later (contract) does not infringe upon the former (law).
One can think of strict construction as the programming of law and of contracts, where those may refer to other documents, use libraries of operational definitions, define actionable clauses and conditions upon which the involved parties execute those clauses.
MARKET GOVERNMENT IS PERFECT GOVERNMENT
Market Government refers to the Voluntary Organization of Commons by trade between houses of government, where this trade takes place only when all houses of government agree with the terms. Each of the three classes into which humans divide form a house of market government.
Commons refer to material goods and services as well as norms of behavior to which people must comply, in contrast with private goods, humans want to preserve commons, not to consume them, in case of consumption, humans lack incentives to invest in them.
(List of commons: https://propertarianism.com/2016/06/17/institutional-commons-list/)
There is no reason for monopoly (majoritarianism) in the production of commons: once all legislation must satisfy the natural law of reciprocity, written testimonially, and therefore truthfully, we can construct trades between the interests (classes), and all ‘legislation’ can ascend as long as it survives the tests of natural law of reciprocity that is constructed testimonially. Likewise we can agree upon norms without imposing norms. So we can ascend agreements without ascending disagreements. As such we can change from monopoly allocation of proceeds of the commons (profits/taxes) to equidistributed allocation of proceeds (everyone votes their share of the pot), or progressive allocation of proceeds (everyone votes their contribution to the pot), and eliminate representatives.
This makes it extremely difficult to engage in corruption since the possibility of lobbying a politician is eliminated, and the cost of lobbying the population is prohibitive, plus the requirement for truthful speech and strict construction places heavy burdens political proposals.
Ending monopoly means that people can produce the commons they choose to fund rather than produce those commons that they don’t choose to fund.
This eliminates the ability of politicians to subvert the population as has been done during the 20th century.
Meanwhile it makes it almost impossible for groups of citizens to circumvent the natural law.
– Majority rule is a sufficient means of decision making for small homogenous groups who must select priorities to achieve using limited resources. Majority rule is insufficient means of decision making for large heterogeneous groups with conflicting preferences. In heterogeneous groups monopoly rule by majority rule, is merely a vehicle for justifying thefts. Homogenous groups may need to select priorities among desirable ends, but because heterogeneous groups have incompatible ends, heterogeneous groups need means of cooperation on means despite incompatible ends: agreements by which difference can be mitigated through mutually beneficial exchanges. As such the purpose of government is the construction of commons by creating a market for the contractual production of commons.
– Moral, and therefore non-parasitic, agreements between parties that are productive, fully informed, voluntary, and warrantied need no assent (approval) from third parties. Instead, all such agreements need only refrain from externalities: the imposition of costs on the property-en-toto of third parties. As such, in any market for the production of commons, assent is not necessary for the construction of exhanges between classes with differing interests. Instead such contracts must only survive criticism: adjudication. As such anyone can sue to invalidate a contract. But no one’s approval is necessary for such contracts. As such the construction of commons requires not ascent. Instead, the prevention of a contract requires dissent that survives adjudication.
– Division of houses by cognitive labor — (undone)
– (summary: dissent and adjudication not assent and confirmation)
A Short Course in Market Government (“Perfect Government”, “Markets in Everything”, and sarcastically: “Market Fascism”)
NOT CAPITALISM VS SOCIALISM – BUT RULE OF LAW VS RULE BY DISCRETION(undone)
FASCISM (intolerant state capitalist nationalism) WON THE BATTLE OF THE 20th CENTURY
( … )
VARIABLE GOVERNMENT: Fascism – Liberalism – Social Democracy…
COMPETITION: GROUP EVOLUTIONARY STRATEGY
CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN TRUTH, ARGUMENT, AND NARRATIVE METHOD – (each uses its own)
CIRCUMPOLAR CIVILIZATION (division of trust / truth)
Race and Group differences are attributable almost entirely to the local ability to engage in Neotonic reproduction thereby reducing the depth of physical maturity and effectively preserving youthfulness – and therefore aggression and impulsivity PLUS the ability to cull the lower classes. Europeans aggressively culled the lower classes for almost 1000 years, as did the Chinese and Japanese, both through manorialism and aggressive hanging. Between Neotonic reproduction and culling of the underclasses some groups are ‘more evolved’ than others. However, this means that almost all groups can ‘domesticate their populations and develop advanced societies if they are able to use policy to reduce underclass rates of reproduction below the replacement level.
Genetic Reservoir: because we can adapt very rapidly by reproductive selection for different environments, different political hierarchies, and different gender traits, humans can adapt to nearly any circumstance within a few generations by modifying little more than status associated with particular traits. So our current gene pools provide a deep reservoir of reproductive adaptability.
THE EXCEPTIONAL RETURNS ON ETHNOCENTRIC COOPERATION
Ethenocentricity and homogenous polities under rule of law by natural law and market government will provide the optimum returns for any and every people. There is no comparison whatsoever. The only problem is reversing asymmetric reproduction between the classes which forces us into continuous devolution by regression to the mean.
TRANSCENDENCE (EVOLUTION) REQUIRES COMPETITION (CALCULATIONS)
A Short Course in The Western (aristocratic) Group Evolutionary Strategy
( … )
A Short Course in Group Evolutionary Strategy (cooperation/competition/war)
( … )
THE FESTIVALS, RELIGION, AND EDUCATION
We restate religion as the demand for mindfulness, and then analyze how the different civilizations have used different methods and different ‘religions’ to provide that mindfulness – with emphasis on the external and long term consequences of the means of providing ‘opiates to the masses’.
Our conclusion is that a more modern version of Stoicism, Reformed Education, Reformed ‘Worship’ consisting of Ancestors and Heroes, Nature and the Universe, and the development of agency to produce the Transcendence of Man into the gods we imagine will serve the function optimally.
Religion was, and remains, the ‘hard problem’ of social science simply because it functions by precognitive training and is understood pre-cognitively (felt) rather than thought. And as such it is difficult for us to discuss with any degree of reason, despite the fact that it is as understandable as the need for math, money, maps, and law.
Everything You Need to Understand About Religion in Less Than 1500 Words.
Religion is a Poor Substitute for the Hunt – But A Necessary One.
The Strategies of the Abrahamic Monotheistic Religions
Truth is The Most Intolerant Religion of All
. . .
Revolution and Reformation
DE-DISCRETIONISM (restoration of rule of law/courts)
( undone )
(power via the state)
DE-PROPAGADISM (copyright / testimony)
Propaganda is intentionally defective product, produced for the purpose of obtaining power, delivered with intent to persuade by deception, using rhetorical devices including: conflation, loading, framing, overloading, obscurantism, straw-men, outright lying, and dependent upon repetition as a means of creating confirmatory “evidence”, to produce an intuitive rather than rational response.
The traditional, consensus argument has been that we are all smart enough to dismiss propaganda, to learn to distrust arguments, but history says that this isn’t true. Instead, we seek to confirm our moral biases. Not only because it is in our reproductive interest, because those biases reflect our reproductive interests, but because we have invested so heavily in our biases that the cost of training our intuition – intuition that we rely upon to decrease the burden of reasoning – is simply too high. In the kaleidic universe, without prejudices (biases) decisions are not decidable. We MUST rely upon intuition – we have no other choice.
The various pseudoscientific and rationalist movements, from Marxist ‘scientific socialism’, to Freudian Psychology, to Keynesian economics, the Anthropology of Franz Boas, to the outright fabrications of the Frankfurt School, to the postmodern philosophers, to American Feminism, to today’s political correctness – all relied, and continue to rely upon, deception by the use of conflation, loading, framing, overloading, obscurantism, straw man, outright lying and cumulate in the use of Critique: confirmation based straw men as vehicles for criticism of opposing propositions, heaping of undue praise, piling-on of opponents with false arguments, and repeated chanting of falsehoods through the media.
These groups all make use of constant repetition of false statements consisting of various uses of conflation, loading, framing, obscurantism, straw men, and Marxist ‘Critique’ to stimulate our intuitions, and generate confirmation bias, via normative awareness, rather than rational persuasion by truthful means.
In other words, its a very complex and innovative form of deception using suggestion, in order to confirm our moral cognitive biases, rather than education and persuasion by reason. It is an organized, intentional, systematic war against truth, reason, and science and morality for the purpose of establishing control of our thoughts, actions, and resources, and to justify theft from us, consumption of our historic commons.
We call this war by various names: the counter-enlightenment, the postmodern movement, socialism, Marxist critique, pseudoscience. But these names give neutral moral judgment on what is an objectively immoral activity: deception for the purpose of control, theft, and virtual servitude. The truthful, rational, scientific name for these movements is ‘deception’.
The Media (undone)
The Academy (undone)
The Arts (undone)
Advertising and Marketing (undone)
Definancialization of the Financial System. There is no reason we pay interest on consumer loans (and every reason we pay it on business and industrial loans).
By nationalizing Mastercard, and issuing one every LEGAL AND FULLY INTEGRATED citizen, we can distribute liquidity (increase the money supply) by direct redistribution to the citizenry (in which case our homes would all be paid for because of the last recession), and consumer loans can be provided directly from the treasury.
Furthermore, by professionalizing ‘banking’ (basically requiring series 7 for issuing loans via the treasury, and licensing as we do CPA’s), we can eliminate consumer interest, and cut payment periods in half or to one third. Additionally we make universities carry the zero interest loans on behalf of any student, and to obtain payment as a payroll deduction over a period of no more than ten years.
This combination will mean that after about 15 years, the first time home owner will own his home free and clear, and the universities will no longer be able to offer junk degrees. I won’t go into the various extraordinary (wonderful) other consequences but this will restore the american people’s way of life and destroy the predatory financial, academic, and government sectors. There will be no other way to profit than the Silicon Valley (monarchy) model of investment in research, development, and industry.
Financialism will be destroyed forever.
DE-DISINTERMEDIATION OF LEGAL STANDING
(restoration of universal standing in matters of the commons) (undone)
DE-INDIVIDUALISM-CORPORATIZATION AND RE-FAMILIALISM
( undone )
. . .
A New Constitution
A New Constitution of Natural Law
A constitution of natural law that completes the anglo law tradition and the Jeffersonian/Adams experiment by providing means of constructing and preserving natural law and market government.
The Second American Constitution (Many Parts)
The Course and Conduct of A Revolution
To Restore the Constitution
AND IF NECESSARY, A REVOLUTION BY A MINORITY OF MEN:
We will save strategy and tactics for when events demand them.