MacDonald, Sunic, Duchesne, Doolittle roundtab.e

This is a podcast, at a high level, on our law, it's influence our our civilization, the frailties of our constitution, and how to correct them. This discussion does not include changes to the articles of the constitution or the bill of rights. I'll provide that in a later video. After listening (more than once) you should understand why we need strictly constructed law starting with the first principle of reciprocity.

The secret to the uniqueness of western civilization in under two minutes. ;)

0) A militia consisting of shareholders who reciprocally and unconditionally, insure one another's property-in-toto from the involuntary imposition of costs by both members and non.
1) A contract (constitution) between those shareholders for that reciprocal insurance, consisting of Rule of law, natural law, universal standing, universal applicability, absence of discretion through strict construction, with a monarchy as a judge (veto) of last resort. And providing for:
2) A market for polities in which many small polities compete by the production of different commons. (btw: what polities will attract not only the most, but the best women?)
3) A market for the production of commons within any given polity, by exchange between the classes (those with different reproductive strategies, capabilities, and capital interests)
4) A Market for the production of goods and services within any given polity by exchanges between individuals and organizations OTHER than those that exclusively produce commons.
5) A market for the production of generations (marriage) within any given polity, within any given market for commons, within any given market for production of goods, services, and information.
6) A market for association and cooperation, within the market for polities, the market for commons, the market for private goods, the market for reproduction.
7) A market for the resolution of disputes over property in toto by application and strict construction of the natural law of cooperation: reciprocity. (Judiciary)
8) A market for the production of contracts (agreements) in all markets (lawyers)
9) An insurer of last resort consisting of: A military of last resort, A treasury of last resort (shares in the nation), An insurer against acts of nature, age, and incompetence of last resort.

Here is why (a) it takes me so long (b) why I don't 'go deep' (anchoring vs discovery), (c) and how I approach my work, and (d) the evolution of the goal.

If I look at the works of others who have tried to accomplish something of this scale, it appears to take on average ten years. Some of these people publish incrementally(marx), some in topics (smith and hume), and some of them publish all at once (kant). I conceived of the problem in 1992, wasn't able to devote much time to it until 2001, but by 2006 understood what would be required to solve it. Starting in 2006 I was lucky enough to devote part time to working on it, so that by 2009, I understood propertarianism, the concepts i must cover and framework for doing so but not how to solve the problem of truthfulness in law. By 2012 I was able to work full time on it, and by 2014 I had the outline worked out for the whole work, and solve the problem of truthfulness. In 2015 the Nietzcheans pressured me into answering the problems of religion and aesthetics. And since 2012 my secondary objective has been to learn to speak increasingly clearly.

I'm working my way through each step of philosophy and social science.
metaphysics, psychology, epistemology, ethics, norms, politics, law, group evolutionary strategy, war, and aesthetics. This is a tremendous project, and honestly, it is not what I set out to do. But it is what I feel compelled to do now that I understand it.

I don't go deep immediately on subjects because the work exists by others. I don't feel the need to restate it. I leave it to others to do that. that's a 'teacher' job not a 'scientist' job. And partly because I understand the problem of anchoring and overinvestment. So as a self-defense measure, I try move the entire framework together just as if I was working on an old master painting, from the underpainting through to the last tiny details.

I have to admit to another basic fear - that I have survived three serious illnesses and I am hopeful that if I produce the overall framework, that if something happens to me, followers can (like most followers do in all other fields) both expand then teach then distribute the ideas. Whereas if something happens to me and I touch on only a piece of it, then the principle theory - the Wilsonian synthesis - will not come into being.

If communicating in terms even marginally comprehensible to others wasn't such an issue for me, and I could retreat into the conflation of continental philosophers, then I suppose it would be better if I did not work in public at all. But the truth is that the practice of communicating (teaching) what I am trying to convey is the tool I use to learn to simplify as best as I can, the transformation of collectivist coalescent moral thought, into collective, critical, scientific thought. So I work in public and I spend lots of time with people because it is hard work to find a way of bridging between totalitarian moral argument and libertarian scientific truth.

When I started out, my objective was to produce an amoral (scientific) language for the comparison and contrast of different political and group strategies. SO that I could give conservatives and 'whacky' libertarians a rational and scientific language. This is what i found in Locke, Mises, Rothbard and Hoppe: the reduction to property rights and voluntary exchange, an amoral language. But what I also found in them, was a middle class bourgeoise ethic that could not survive competition from those with superior political orders.

So I had to reform that method such that it applied to high trust orders (property in toto, and non-retaliation).

And once I understood this, then I wanted to know how to put it into law. And once I understood I must put it into law I understood I had to solve the problem of truth. And then I had to produce an argument defending it. And thus, a full framework that consolidated the philosophical, moral, legal, political, competitive, aesthetic, and physical.

This provides a full defense against any attack upon it.

Anyway, that's why I do what I do.
Like it or not.

Published on Aug 17, 2015

American Utopianism, British Moral Righteousness, German Duty, Ashkenazi Propagandism, and Russian Paranoia, are all expressions of competing and failed enlightenment strategies. All are false in one way or another.

If we all speak the truth, and all adhere to rule of law, under Propertarian ethics, both the damage of American Utopianism, and the Paranoia and Propagandism of Russian Nihilism, can be constrained and we can achieve the unity of the circumpolar peoples : Universal truth, universal resolution of disputes, and regional government that suits the needs of the intertemporal division of labor that runs from the most conservative Russian to the most risky American. Our differences are a mutual benefit, not a problem. The problem of heterogeneous cultures is solve by homogeneous rule of law.

Published on Nov 21, 2014

Moral Specialization in the Inter-temporal Reproductive Division of Labor, and Voluntary Exchange as our information system.

Published on Aug 16, 2014

Conversations on aristocratic egalitarian philosophy with Roman
Skaskiw and Curt Doolittle.

As long as people demonstrate demand for the state, the market will provide a state. In this conversation we discuss how humans use organized application of power to suppress the transaction costs of criminal. unethical, immoral and conspiratorial behavior -but in doing so create the state, with high indirect costs. So we trade high local transaction costs for high indirect costs of bureaucracy. To continue eliminating parasitism (free riding) we must then subject the state's bureaucratic monopoly to competition.

Westerners succeeded. prior to the first world war, in suppressing
more parasitism (tree riding) than any other civilization, and created the ‘high trust society‘ through out-breeding, homogeneity, and property rights enforced under common law.

(Memories: This is one of our first experiments with simple
unstructured conversation. We shot two videos - one short and one
long. It was a hot sunny day. and uncomfortably hot in the studio.)

Progress on Propertarianism in 2014: Twelve points of progress on Curt Doolittle's efforts to articulate western civilization's evolutionary strategy as the struggle to speak the truth so that we can produce commons.

(Topic list - provided by by Joe Howard)

1. 1:05 Ending Apriorism
2. 5:32 Nap/IVP Immoral and Insufficient
3. 11:17 Praxeology was a failed attempt at Operationalism
4. 14:05 Economics is Empirical, Instrumental and Operational
5. 15:40 Testimonial Truth (TT)
6. 17:53 TT is Not Limited to Science
7. 20:44 Science and Philosophy Merging
8. 22:03 Truth-Speaking as an Evolutionary Strategy
9. 24:12 The Genetic Defect of Altruism
10. 28:05 Individual Law but Family Policy
11. 33:05 Law and the Velocity of Progress
12. 38:05 All Voluntary Exchanges are a Transfer of Information
Bonus: 39:35 My Favorite Part

Conversations on aristocratic egalitarian philosophy with Roman
Skaskiw and Curt Doolittle. Published on Aug 16, 2014

Hayek stated that the 20th century would be remembered as a new
era of mysticism. In this video. we discuss, using economics. math and physics. how this mysticism was the result of pseudoscientific and verbalistic thought; how Mises created an economic and political pseudoscience; and how we can use Operationalism, lnstrumentalism, Empiricism and Testimonial Truth to cure pseudoscience in every possible field.

(Memories: This is one of our first experiments with simple
unstructured conversation. We shot two videos - one short and one
long. It was a sunny day. and uncomfortably hot in the studio.)


Created 1 year, 3 months ago.

14 videos

Category Education

In 2012 we formed the institute as a think tank for funding, producing, and holding the assets of the project.

In the fall of 2018 we decided that the education to make use of Natural Law wasn’t taught any longer, so we changed the mission of the Institute from research to formal education.

So the purpose of the institute is to teach the natural law and dependent subjects to those who would build a better world on one hand, and prevent another dark age on the other.

“Propertarianism consists of the completion of the Scientific Method; its application to the totality of human knowledge; a universally commensurable language of all thought; its embodiment in the common law of tort; and as a consequence the eradication of superstition, pseudoscience, sophism, fraud, and deceit from the commercial, financial, economic, political, and informational commons.”

A Moral License (Prevention of Genocide)
A Beneficial Solution (Devolution,Decentralization)
A Set of Demands (A New Constitution)
A Plan of Transition ( Organized Incremental Restructuring )
A Strategy for Altering the Status Quo (Infrastructure Fragility)
An Intellectual Vanguard (Skilled in Natural Law)
An Informed Populace (promoting the benefits not the science)
An Organized Body Of Men ( < 1%, and we have at least 6% already. )
A Deterministic Victory. (Federal durability is less than 90 days)
A System of Perpetuation (the Judicial Cult of the Natural Law)

The Natural Law of Reciprocity of Sovereign Peoples

The Talmud to deceive
The Bible to enslave
The Koran to conquer
The Usuries to weaken
The Manifesto to steal
The General-Theory to impoverish
The Critique to exterminate

The Truth to make us free.
The Law to keep us free

No More Lies:
Revolt, Separate, Prosper, Speciate
Let A Thousand Nations Bloom