“Hi Curt, I’ve been reading your posts & your blog. I find it really interesting since I share a similar opinion about Rothbardian ethics. However, from your articles&posts, it is difficult to understand what is your concept of “Aristocratic”? Why is it “protestant”? I find it rather unnecessary to link the last one to propertarianism.
Also, I would like to ask you if you understand parasitism&involuntary transfers&free riding as synonyms. You probably don’t. Then it intrigues me why do you think free riding is immoral?. I don’t believe free riding necessarily involves involuntary transfers. Then, if it doesn’t enter the circle of “will”, why should it be included in “morality”?.” — Alejandro Veintimilla
Thanks for the question. Unfortunately, libertarians tend not to be all that well read outside of libertarianism. They aren’t special. Most people aren’t all that well read.
I hope what follows helps.
Aristocracy / Aristocratic / Aristocratic Egalitarian / Aristocratic Egalitarianism. (See Ricardo Duchesne’s The Uniqueness of Western Civilization)
High trust property rights are obtained reciprocally with others who promise to insure each other’s property rights by committing to defend them by the organized application of violence. This says that property rights are obtained by the act of entering into contract to protect the property rights of other contract members. Aristocratic egalitarianism simply implies that this contract is open to all who will voluntarily agree to it.
(a) this reflects the origins of western civilization’s aristocracy of peers.
(b) this eliminates the necessity for, an fallacy of natural laws, or intrinsic rights.
(c) this illustrates that libertarians who are unwilling to enter into such a contract are attempting to obtain their property rights by appeals arbitrarily moral or supernatural means, rather than as mere rights and obligations of a contract.
The protestant peoples are the only peoples to have adopted high trust ethics (high trust property rights) nearly universally throughout their societies. Neither those ethics, nor aristocracy are dependent upon protestantism. Instead, protestant cultures were simply more outbred, with higher trust, than catholic peoples. (They made use of the absolute nuclear family, not the traditional family). And those cultures that were higher trust and more outbred, adopted protestantism as a means of rebelling against the less outbred, lower trust, (parasitic) south.
Parasitism, Discounts, Involuntary Transfer, Free Riding, Jan Lester’s “Imposed Cost”, : I treat these as synonyms, yes. When any two or more organisms cooperate, the only way that cooperation is beneficial for all involved, is if net contribution is required of each member. I say, two benefit and one does not, then cooperation is a cost to the third, not a benefit. Rothbardian ethics, by not prohibiting unethical and immoral actions, implicitly allow immoral and unethical actions, and as such allow for parasitism. In fact, encourage parasitism. Because the incentive for free riding is ever present. Production is much harder than free riding.
4) THE DARK ENLIGHTENMENT
Over the past decade we’ve seen the rise of the Dark Enlightenment movement out of the libertarian movement. This movement is a reactionary (conservative) set of ideas to fight the “Cathedral’ (the union of state, bureaucracy, university, and corporate interests). The movement rejects universalism, multi-culturalsm, diversity. equality, feminism, and the state. And argues that the enlightenment project that sought to grant all people the rights of aristocracy, and to create an aristocracy of everybody, has been a failure. Instead, they embrace tribal particularism, homogeneity, and genetic differences, hoppe’s monarchy (as well as other models.). One thing they reject is rothbardian libertarianism. For reasons I think I articulate pretty clearly: it’s impossible, it’s immoral, and it is not sufficiently useful for particularists.
Rather than relying upon Kantian rationalism and the Continental form of argument, or jewish Cosmopolitanism and its variation on the continental form of argument, the Dark Enlightenment, in typical anglo tradition, relies upon the recent findings of science.
Unfortunately, the Dark Enlightenment merely provides a criticism of the “Cathedral”, and Rothbardian “Ghetto” Libertarianism. Not necessarily any solutions. (They might argue otherwise.)
So I have attempted:
(a) To restate Hoppes arguments in contemporary scientific terms, rather than the “antique” reliance on cosmopolitanism.
(b) To Develop a language for the description of all moral codes (Propertarianism) including those that are necessary for the high trust society.
(c) To correctly state the origin of rights as obtained in contract.
(d) To provide an institutional solution to the problem of government, by allowing all matters of conflict to be settled by law.
5) GETTING UP TO DATE
PROPERTARIANISM AND ARISTOCRATIC EGALITARIANISM
A COMPARISON OF ARISTOCRATIC VS GHETTO ETHICS
THE CULTURE OF THE NORT SEA PEOPLES