TO STEFAN MOLYNEUX AND HIS FOLLOWERS: ENDING THE FALSE PROMISE OF THE NAP.
- NAP says only what YOU think is an imposition of costs upon the demonstrated investments of others (Golden Rule). It does not say what THEY think is an imposition of costs on their demonstrated investments (Silver Rule).
SECTION 1 – THE SCOPE OF PROHIBITION ON AGGRESSION
- Humans demonstrate retaliation against the imposition of costs upon their demonstrated interests, and humans individually and collectively retaliate at high cost (higher than loss) to punish those who impose upon the costs of others’ demonstrated interests. (altruistic punishment), in order to preserve the value of cooperation in the group, and maintain threat of defection (cheating) on group members.
The scope of demonstrated interests that humans defend consists of no less than the following (“Property in Toto”)
Demonstrated interests include:
(I) Existential Interests, and (II) Obtained Interests:
I.) Existential Interests Include:
… 1. Self:
Life, Body, Genes,
Memories, Mind, Attention
Time, and Action
… 2. Opportunity for Action, Stimulation, Experience.
… 3. Status and Class (reputation, honor):
Self-Image, Status, Reputation
Social, Sexual, Economic, Political, and Military Market Value
… 4. Kin and Interpersonal (Relationship) Interests:
Mates (access to sex/reproduction), and Marriage
Children (genetic reproduction)
Consanguineous Relations (family, kin, clan, tribal and national relations)
… 5. Sustainable Patterns of Association, Cooperation, Insurance, Reproduction, Production, Distribution and Trade:
Friends, Acquaintances, Neighbors,
Cooperative Relations, Commercial Relations,
Political Relations, and Military Relations.
II.) Obtained Interests include:
Obtained Interest: Interests that are obtained by bearing a cost of opportunity, time, effort, resources, to obtain that interest without imposing upon the previously born costs of others.
Obtained Interests Include:
… 6. Several (Personal) Interests
Personal property: “Things an individual has a Monopoly Of Control over the use of.”
Physical Body and Several Property: Those things we claim a monopoly of control over.
… 7. Shareholder (Fractional) Interests
Shares in property: Recorded And Quantified Shareholder Property (claims for partial ownership)
… 8. Title Interests (Weights and Measures)
Trademarks and Brands (prohibitions on fraudulent transfers within a geography).
… 9. Artificial Interests (Privileges)
Letters of Marque, Patents, Copyrights, Grants of License.
… 10. Common Interests, or “Commons” (Community Property)
Institutional Property: “Those objects into which we have invested our forgone opportunities, our efforts, or our material assets, in order to aggregate capital from multiple individuals for mutual gain.”
… … (i) Informational commons: knowledge. Information.
… … (ii) Informal (Normative) Institutions: Our norms: habits, manners, ethics and morals. Informal institutional property is nearly impossible to quantify and price. The costs are subjective and consist of forgone opportunities.
… … (iii) Formal (Physical) Commons: the territory, it’s waterways, parks, buildings, improvements and infrastructure.
… … (iv) Formal (Procedural) Institutions: Our institutions: Religion, Education, Banking, Treasury, Government, Laws, Courts.
… … (v) Monuments (art and artifacts).
Monuments claim territory, demonstrate wealth, and provide one of the longest most invariable normative and economic returns that any culture can construct as a demonstration of conspicuous production (wealth), and as such, conspicuous excellence. (hence why competing monuments represent an invasion. Temples, Churches, Museums, Sculptures being the most obvious examples of cultural claim or conquest. )
… … (vi) Common Opportunity Interests
When people come together in proximity, and suppress impositions of costs upon the interests of others through the incremental evolution of the law of reciprocity, they decrease the time and effort required to produce voluntary association, cooperation and exchange. As such polities decrease opportunity costs, and generate opportunities. These opportunities are un-homsesteaded (opportunities) until invested in by individuals either by expenditure of time effort and resources, or by forgoing opportunities for consumption. As such the proximity of people and the institution of reciprocity under law produce a commons of opportunities that we seize (homestead) by competition. As such no one may claim interest in an opportunity without conducting and exchange by which to seize it.
- Humans therefore retaliate against an entire spectrum of impositions of cost (aggressions against demonstrated interests), including but not limited to:
… 1. Violence (asymmetry of force)
… 2. Theft (asymmetry of control)
… 3. Extortion (and Blackmail, etc)
… 4. Fraud (false information)
… … Omission (Omitting information)
… … Obscurantism (Obscuring information)
… 5. Undermining (reputation destruction, gossip, libel, slander)
… 6. Obstruction (Inhibiting someone else’s transaction)
… 7. Externalization (externalizing costs of any transaction)
… 8. Free Riding (using externalities for self-benefit)
… 9. Socializing Losses (externalization to commons)
… 10. Privatizing Gains (appropriation of commons)
… 11. Rent Seeking (organizational free riding)
… 12. Corruption ( organized rent seeking)
… 13. Conspiracy (organized indirect theft)
… 14. Conversion (Religious or normative theft of norms)
… 15. Immigration. (dilution of norms, institutions, genes)
… 16. War (organized violence for the purpose of theft)
… 17. Conquest. (reorganization of all property and relations)
… 18. Genocide. (extermination of kin and genetic future)
- And, The only actions by which one can act without the imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others, thus provoking retaliation, is by Reciprocity:
Where Reciprocity consists in:
… Fully Informed
… Voluntary Transfer
… Free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others.
… … interests are defined by consist in Property In Toto (above),
… And where;
… … Demonstrated Interests consist in those performed by:
… … … Homesteaching (origination),
… … … Voluntary Exchange or Transfer (reciprocity), or
… … … Production (transformation of existing property from one form to another.)
- In our vocabulary, we restate this prohibition (negative)against imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others as a (positive) “Right” to Retaliate , obtain Restitution, Punishment, and Prevention where ‘right’ prohibits others from retaliating in turn, producing a cascade of retaliation cycles – feuds.
And we categorize the scope of that which is demonstrated interest, which we insure, as “Possession, Property, Right, and Title”
… Opportunity: any interest that Man my wish to acquire through investment that has not yet been invested in by others.
… Possession: Possession is a Fact. Possessions are Personally insured. Consisting of that which one has acted to prevent others from consumption or use.
… Normative Property: Property is a norm. Property is collectively insured. Consisting of that which evolves as general rules of non imposition between people with similar kinship, interests, or interdependence.
… Property (proper) is that which is insured against non-imposition by a third party organization.
… Property Rights: Property Rights are dependent upon the existence of an institution that enforces rights and obligations in matters of disputes.
… Title: Title refers to a registry of interests, ascertainable by a third party insurer (the court, etc).
PART II – THE DEMAND FOR SUPPRESSION OF IMPOSITION OF COSTS
- Law and Norm developed as a means of preventing retaliation cycles between kin groups. As such legal enforcement provides the function of insurer of last resort, and standardization of punishments, in pursuit of preventing and insuring against retaliation cycles, in pursuit of preserving the income stream, that makes suppression of parasitism and the returns on commons possible.
The body of law, and therefore the scope of suppression, incrementally evolves through the process of adjudicating cases, and through the process of command(orders), legislation(contracts of commons), and regulation (prior restraints) to incrementally suppress parasitism (imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others).
Demand for authority (The State) is generated by :
(a) the demand for enforcement of prohibition, restitution, punishment and prevention of the above methods of imposition of costs upon the spectrum of demonstrated interests of others.
(b) the cost of enforcing, prohibition, restitution, punishment and prevention of the above methods of impositions of costs upon the spectrum demonstrated interests of others.
Those polities with greater suppression of impositions of costs attract greater risk and produce higher velocity, producing higher returns – and attract more people – particularly women, and family production.
Those politeis that produce higher returns redirect some portion of those returns to commons when those commons would produce multipliers – if only as a means of attracting population capital and trade.
Those polities with the greatest suppression of means of parasitism (imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others, always and everywhere out-compete those polities with lesser suppression of parasitism.
Those polities with lesser parasitism evolve to provide haven to free riders, pirates, and organized criminals – and this is why they are consistently conquered or eradicated by their more prosperous competitors – to eliminate parasitism.
Those polities that cannot compete economically, or who have superior competitive ability by non economic means, compete militarily, demographically, culturally-religiously, to obtain access to territory, resources, capital, population, and trade routes of those who can compete economically.
Therefore the scope of suppression parasitism (scope of property sufficient to preserve sovereignty over the allocation of property) is dependent upon the market forces necessary to compete for territory, resources, capital, population, trade and trade routes against others who compete by economic as well as military, demographic, and cultural-religious means.
There for it is not YOU that determines the scope of property in toto that you are prevented from imposing costs upon the demonstrated interests of others, nor the definition of that which others demand, but the scope of the market forces necessary to maintain the local degree of sovereignty over your property.
In other words, NAP, Libertinism, Libertarianism, Anarchism are impossible arguments, ideologies, and orders – ironically so, because it is the supply and demand of market forces that determines the constitution of, organization of, law and norm of polities.
And this is why there are no, and never will be, such polities, since the production of commons – upon which the success of western civilization rests – including the unique commons of personal freedom, juridical sovereignty, liberty of private property, and duty of testimonial truth-before-face before a jury of peers.
PART III – GROUP COMPETITIVE STRATEGIES
1. THE ORIGINS OF WESTERN SOVEREIGNTY
Every group has a group competitive (evolutionary) strategy. For western indo europeans (europeans) that strategy is:
… Excellence and Heroism (costs);
… Sovereignty(benefit) and Reciprocity (cost);
… Truth and Duty (costs);
… The natural common law of tort and the Jury of Peers (benefit);
… And markets in all aspects of life: association, reproduction, production, commons, polities, and war.
Which is the optimum group evolutionary strategy for producing adaptive velocity, when pursued by a small population, on the edge of the bronze age, who still, by their numbers, not only conquered the entire eurasian plain, and the new world, but dragged humanity kicking and screaming out of semitic ignorance, superstition, poverty, starvation, hard labor, disease, early death, child mortality, early death and the vicissitudes of a nature all but hostile to human life.
The origin of the west is nothing more complicated than the initiatic brotherhood of warriors (the militia) who insure one another in every ‘market’ of life, from the imposition of costs upon their demonstrated interests, in exchange for doing the same for them. From this demand we developed, the above strategy of western civilization. We are first and foremost a militia of individual sovereigns choosing the first among us as a judge and leader of last resort.
When we look to a civilization for it’s truthful operations, ignore its self congratulations, theology, philosophy, literature, propaganda and lies, we look to its laws, it’s commerce, and it’s means of competition against other groups. It is a group’s laws (demonstrated evidence), commerce (demonstrated evidence) and competitive record (demonstrated evidence) that tell us everything about a people. The rest is propaganda.
2. THE ORIGINS OF LIBERTINISM (LIBERTARIANISM)
The origins of the NAP, libertinism (libertarianism) and are in the jewish diaspora, and the jewish diasporic ethics, which require only “volition”, are limited to private property (no commons exist for the diasporic), do not require productivity, do not require full information (disclosure), no warranty is provided (bazaar ethics), no externality limited.
These ethics evolved as traders, as ghetto dwellers, as separatists, and as members of the Pale.
Test of Reciprocity:
… Productive (fail)
… Fully informed (fail)
… Warrantied (fail)
… Voluntary Transfer (success)
… Free of externality (fail).
Communism consists in the elimination of private property and a monopoly of commons, theoretically in the absence of authority (impossible)
Socialism consists of the elimination of private property, and a monopoly of commons under control of a bureaucracy, enabling free riding on producers. (Temporarily possible)
Libertarianism consists in a monopoly on the the elimination of the costs of commons, enabling free riding (parasitism) on those who produce commons.(Impossible).
Rothbard tried to recreate the pale.
Hoppe tried to recreate free cities.
Sovereigns along created sovereignty, reciprocity, and markets in all aspects of life, including the continuous conflict between theology, philosophy, law, and science
Sovereigntarianism (Rule of Law, of Reciprocity (tort), or Natural Law ) consists in non parasitism.
This is antithetical to all who want to preserve their means of parasitism upon others.
COUNTER- REVOLUTIONS AGAINST THE RESTORATION OF TRUTHFUL SPEECH
- The french revolted against the scientific revolution (Rousseau et al).
- The germans revolted against the scientific revolution(kant-hegel-et-al).
- The Russians did not they wrote literature (Dostoyevsky et al). The Ashkenazi produced marxism, leninism-trotskyism-neoconservatism, feminism, and jewish-french postmodernism, Randian-Rothbardian-Hoppeian anarchism.
- The Muslims (arabs) are producing what they always have, doubling down in the 12th century fundamentalism that was the end of the persian attempt at restoration of knowledge.
THE ABRAHAMIC TECHNIQUE OF DECEIT:
… 1. False promise (desirable untestable optimistic)
… 2. Bait into moral hazard (negative externalities)
… 3. Pilpul (defense by sophism, pseudoscience, mysticism) using suggestion, loading, framing, overloading, obscurantism,
… 4. Critique: straw manning, undermining rather than debating or arguing by substituting disapproval for argument (gossiping, rallying, shaming, ridiculing, reputation destruction, history destruction, moral destruction, truth destruction. And heaping of undue praise on individuals and ideas.
… 6. Environmental Saturation through prolific production of falsehoods, which are far cheaper than goods.
Which if you understand is the human female conflict strategy. Relentless undermining until the enemy is destroyed.
But the NAP (libertarianism) is just another Ashkenazi Abrahamic version of marxism, feminism, postmodernism. It’s a false promise, an incomplete sentence, baits you into moral hazard, is defended by pilpul and critique, and allows you to be conquered through continuous appropriation of all common capital until it is too late. The underclasses and women were suckers for socialism, academics for marxism, merchants for libertarianism, and rulers for neo-conservativsm. These are all false promises. They are all attempts to destroy western civilization for the second time: by undermining rule of law, from which markets in everything evolve, and eugenics, high trust, prosperity, and the transcendence of the condition of man are a consequence.
PART IV – CLOSING
ONCE YOU SEE IT, YOU CAN’T UNSEE IT.
If you understand what I have written here you will undrestand 2000 years of conflict between the female reproductive strategy (semitic) and its method of conflict, and the male reproductive strategy (indo european) and it’s method of conflict (competition for position), and the primary difference being the polar opposition of the semitic strategy of the herd (monopoly, equality, dysgenic), and the european strategy of the packs (market, meritocracy, soft eugenics).
The Propertarian Institute
The Groups Strategy of Western Civilization In Scientific terms.
Saturday May 25, 2019