We Are Equal In Our Tribal Capacity For Transcendence

There are good Jews bad Jews, good Christians, bad Christians, good and bad in each race, and good and bad everyone. A quote from my favorite Rabbi and a man I love dearly, and always will.

We can use the positive or we can exercise the negative. In the matters of good and bad, we can suppress parasitism, and advance our family and tribe. We need not treat groups as negative, only seek to advance our kin as a positive.

The logical conflict occurs whenever any group attempts to assert universalism. But any universalism (equality) will sort groups into natural orders according to the median of their abilities – and force them to function by those natural orders according to the median of their abilities.

The only universal law of cooperation between groups is not to force others to bear costs, while advancing your kin toward transcendence.

The mandate that we are in fact equal forces us not to be.

Curt Doolittle
The Philosophy Of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev Ukraine


While it would appear he who specialize in both the “visible efficiencies” and “invisible vulnerabilities”. Or the nation – state that does, would very likely be better placed to equilibrate indicatively and so anticipate, prevent, mitigate theconsequential fall were there to be unfavourable imbalance, which do you think is the least costly of the alternate two:

? Strength, specialisation in the visible efficiencies. While unable to accurately map the invisible weaknesses of the individual, a corporation, nation – state, empire.

? Visible efficiency deficiencies while strong, considerable expert in invisible vulnerability per person, a given corporation, nation – state, empire.

(damn, you write elegantly.)

I don’t know if I agree with the dichotomy. I would say that at all times one needs the strength to prevent external conquests or internal rents, while still producing commons.

It is very clear that the centralization of rents is necessary to pay for the local suppression of rents, thereby freeing property and trade.

it is very clear that it is hard to prevent the centralization of rents (fees, taxes or whatever) from internal parasitism, and it appears militaries do this better than political and commercial ordganizations. Or rather that militaries do it best, commercial less so, and political terribly.

It is also very clear that once the internal rents are established that it is equally difficult to suppress them by converting from monopoly rent beuraucdracy to competitive service providing privatization.

It is also not clear that total conversion from monopolistic to competitive is as advantageous as we theorized. And instead that a mix of private public funding, outsourced management, limited competition, and a judiciary with universal standing for defense by the population, seems to be a complex, expensive, yet optimum solution.

So like any evolutionary system we must grow from simple to complex over time with only one ambition: elminate all parasitism while continuing to produce commons.

Leave a Reply