Dennis Hackethal’s Blog
My blog about philosophy, coding, and anything else that interests me.
Tweets
An archive of my tweets and retweets through . They may be formatted slightly differently than on Twitter. API access has since gotten prohibitively expensive – I don't know whether or when I'll be able to update this archive.
But in case I will, you can subscribe via RSS – without a Twitter account. Rationale
I investigate this more here: blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/a-progra…
We also know some things about how to get there. The change can't come over night, it has to be piecemeal and reversible. Also, some avenues are more prudent than others – like, don't open the borders without getting rid of the welfare state first.
I did not claim to know how to implement libertarianism. We DO know, thanks to optimism, that it's possible – and, if done, that it will be the political implementation of Deutsch's optimism.
Nobody's talking about subjective knowledge.
Deutsch's optimism states that all evils are due to a lack of knowledge. For that to be true one does not need to know, specifically, how to solve each and every problem.
Libertarianism can, and hopefully will be, the political implementation of Deutsch's optimism – one day, when we know how. It is not currently.
Say you're not a programmer. You don't know how to implement addition in some programming language. That doesn't make you question that addition can be implemented, as long as you know how, does it?
I was of the opinion that we don't (yet!) know how to implement libertarianism long before this discussion started. This again shows that you understand little about my stance and are arguing against strawmen.
Asking "[w]here does inexplicit knowledge end and force begin?" doesn't make sense as those are largely orthogonal concepts. It's like asking 'where does chewing gum end and sugar begin?'
Inexplicit knowledge (per Deutsch) is knowledge not (yet) put into words.
Force (per TCS) is enacting an idea when a conflicting idea is still present in the (thus forced) mind.
it doesn't sound like you understand what inexplicit knowledge and force are
maybe you're referring to the fact that one shouldn't favor explicit knowledge over inexplicit knowledge just for being explicit (and vice versa)
I mean 'purest form of' as in 'the fullest implementation of' – nothing to do with essentialism
western democracy's institutions are violent
that's the difference between the west and libertarianism
(yes, yes, in the west we can remove bad leaders without violence, but somehow we haven't figured out how to have political institutions that don't operate on violence) twitter.com/codybaldwin/st…
@MatMcGann @bnielson01 @jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
How you weren't able to assume that already given that you know I'm a Popperian is a mystery to me, but there you go
@MatMcGann @bnielson01 @jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Then let me state that I think institutionalized coercion is a problem – one of the big problems of our time, but yes, still 'just' one of countless other problems –, that its solution does not usher in some utopia, and that there will always be more problems to solve.
I've listened to both, yes. IIRC, the first one was about what Sarah called the fetishizing of consent.
RT @SJobs_Stories:
"Anytime I find something I like, I can just turn it around, and play something. It’s that easy. It’s that simple. Isn’t…
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
I suspect there's more than one sense in which institutions can be fundamental
Here we go
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Lol right, those who love peace and peaceable cooperation and prefer it over violence are the psychos
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
This entire thread is reminding me how desperately I need to finish writing my blog post about Popper's criterion of democracy being grossly insufficient
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
It's non libertarians who love violence, not libertarians
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Rand wasn't a libertarian btw, in fact she rather disliked libertarians.
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Unless you're going to bend over backwards, as most people do, and refer to various laws or the 'common good' or what have you to justify this particular kind of violence.
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
If you dislike "invasions of private property" you should acknowledge taxation (and its enforcement) as a huge problem of aggressive violence perpetrated by your beloved political institutions against their peaceful subjects.
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
correct
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
I think you're much more of a sadist than you admit to yourself, as are >99% of all the people who love living in a violent society in the name of the collective.
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
No, it was partly learning epistemology that made me a libertarian.
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Hmm. What other kinds of violence could one mention that would make your erection for it go flaccid?
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
As if violence not being "particular to political institutions" made it any less of a problem. Violence is not particular to any one person or institution, yes, but you just don't want to change your attitude toward violence because you got such a hard-on for it.
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
You do not aim to solve violence, yes, that has become abundantly clear
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Political institutions employ violence on a grand scale no private corporation could
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
You're fucking up your spelling again
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Non violently as in not needing to use violence against politicians, yes.
But if you're going to use violence as a yardstick then it goes both ways. Violence should have no place in a civilized society – political institutions should not use violence against peaceful people.
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
The reason we shouldn't demolish our political institutions is that changes should be piecemeal because we're fallible, not that they solve problems without violence (again, they are highly violent, in fact they're embarrassingly incompetent at being peaceful).
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Also I thought you didn't want to continue this over Twitter?
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
You don't seem to understand Popperian libertarianism very much. As a result you argue against strawmen. It's ironic to claim our political institutions are "the only known way to solve problems without violence" when they use violence against citizens every day.
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Popperian libertarians don't really see a state of zero institutionalized coercion as a goal of political systems as a matter of theory.
I'm one, and I do.
@jchalupa_ @MatMcGann @bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
that sounds like a great explanation unless you're in the business of worshipping violence as you have been judging by your tweets
@MatMcGann @bnielson01 @jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Imagine talking about a different problem – world hunger, say – and a Popperian not being 'allowed' to speak of a world in which that problem has been solved because that makes him a utopian or something. Bonkers
@MatMcGann @bnielson01 @jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Being a Popperian does not require one to shit on liberty – quite the opposite is the case as coercion is anathema to problem solving. The recognition of that doesn't make one a utopian.
@MatMcGann @bnielson01 @jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Popperian libertarians are agnostic as to what comes after a 'state' of zero institutionalized coercion has been reached. They're also open as to how to get to that state, as long as that road is not revolutionary.
@MatMcGann @bnielson01 @jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Indeed, insisting by implication that institutionalized coercion should be entrenched or else one isn't really a crit rat is a perversion of Popperian epistemology.
@MatMcGann @bnielson01 @jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
You can absolutely solve a problem (institutionalized coercion) without being a utopian. While utopian libertarians exist, Popperian libertarians are not among them.
Case in point that the enemies of liberty are deeply pessimistic; they cannot imagine a world without coercion. twitter.com/bnielson01/sta…
Chat with Damian about Abortion: blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/chat-wit…
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @bnielson01 @DoqxaScott
Indeed, social contracts are different because they don't exist whereas natural rights do.
@ClimateWarrior7 @dahn_jennifer
Yass kween! So glad to see Belgium is being properly decolonized.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @bnielson01 @DoqxaScott
But government-given rights and lofty social contracts you’ll accept?
But without government, who’d be regulating shower heads? twitter.com/dvassallo/stat…
Bezahlung vom Service abhaengig machen. Dann geht das auf einmal ganz schnell.
RT @michaelmalice:
The Trudeaus of the world are the reason pic.twitter.com/VYlm7ajuLv
Toll, mehr Futter fuer die Panikmache, freut Sie sicher.
@ThunderHermit @BTC_SNEK @jchalupa_ @bnielson01 @falibilista @DoqxaScott
In fact, sewers and water are already private in many places – even in commie Germany, there's countless sewer and water companies.
@ThunderHermit @BTC_SNEK @jchalupa_ @bnielson01 @falibilista @DoqxaScott
There are companies (plural, so not a monopoly) that provide the internet infrastructure on top of which Netflix can offer its shared plans.
There could be something just like that for roads, sewers, water...
Die verstehen augenscheinlich nicht, was Kapitalismus ist. twitter.com/RosarotePanzer…
@ThunderHermit @BTC_SNEK @jchalupa_ @bnielson01 @falibilista @DoqxaScott
What about them?
Doesn’t Netflix (or something like it) offer shared/family accounts?
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
but addressed and refuted/solved by libertarians long before you were even alive and could develop your hard-on for authority.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
with the implication that without government nobody in the world could provide those services — so who’s the one not getting the epistemology?), when ALL of these arguments have not only been made before
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
In this discussion, you’ve gone from ‘most ppl don’t mind paying taxes so it’s not theft’ to ‘our institutions need money so taxation is not theft’ to ‘if you don’t like it move to the African jungle’ to ‘government helps the poor’ to ‘government keeps you safe’ (the last two
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
You repeatedly accuse me of either not knowing things I do know, or of making arguments I haven’t made.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
I have been careful, in the past, to point again and again out how much knowledge our political institutions hold and how we cannot get rid of them overnight.
But I also understand that this is regrettable.
@bnielson01 @BTC_SNEK @jchalupa_ @DoqxaScott
Your go-to criticism of ~anything is that it’s easy to vary. Discussing with you has become predictable and boring.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DorfGinger @falibilista @bnielson01 @DoqxaScott
So they can hire security companies. It’s really not that difficult.
RT @michaelmalice:
We've all forgotten that a judge struck down the plane mask mandate and the blue-pilled lost their shit and Biden said h…
RT @michaelmalice:
WHITE PILL
In the last decade the gun-rights side has shifted from "I need guns to keep my home safe from criminals" to…
RT @chillywillers:
Wow shocking result pic.twitter.com/B0wntzGnAv
RT @michaelmalice:
Since then your entire population has been imprisoned in their homes relatively easily
RT @ben_brechtken:
Wann endlich in Deutschland? pic.twitter.com/EBuBkhI4Gn
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Government exploitation of poverty is built on an altruistic lie: youtube.com/watch?v=7RFlPm…
Again, problems are soluble. Poor people can be helped without robbing others.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
'But government helps those less fortunate' is the statists' oldest trick in the book. The government helps people poorly, if at all, crowds out free-market help, and creates the illusion that without government, poor people would be lost.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Similar to how some of the worst parents have some of the best intentions.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
In dennis' picture of all this, powerful governments conspire to make people pay taxes [...].
No. I have mentioned the concept of benevolent authority. Conspiracies happen rarely – most politicians believe they're doing what's right and necessary.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
"When you taxes though"
You keep missing words and making typos. You should proofread your tweets before sending them. Discussions are difficult enough without such errors.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
I think you're using 'irrationality' wrong. I do think there are some people who gladly pay taxes btw (in fact I know at least one), but regardless it's disgusting to force even one person who doesn't.
Now you're trying exceptionally hard to make theft work.
There is freedom to be found yet, all you gotta do is leave civilization! twitter.com/jchalupa_/stat…
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
By services I mean the maintenance of infrastructure, or the policing of areas.
Sure
But as you point out with the African jungle or Antarctica, there are places you could go to avoid governments.
lolol
@mgoldingmd @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Private arbiters are already a thing used with some frequency, no?
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
They won't let you stop paying taxes by renouncing their 'services'. You have to pay them even if you never use their services. And unless you want to live in the African jungle or Antarctica, I really don't know anywhere you could go where you'd pay truly no taxes whatsoever.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
First there's the cases where he institutions tolerate that people not pay taxes, and have even evolved to accommodate it and support people in situations where they can't afford to pay them.
your slave masters sound very generous
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
It's not meant as an insult, and it is an argument.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Taxes are used to finance your precious institutions. Taxes are violently obtained. (Yes, yes, some people don't mind paying them, but think about what happens once they DO mind and refuse.) So whatever solutions such institutions bring about have blood in their past.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
I, on the other hand, find them absolutely disgusting, which you interpret as exaggeration. It's a difference in attitude.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
We can keep arguing specifics but I think the main difference between us is that you're not as disgusted by violence and coercion as you should be. You wish to accommodate them, at least to some degree, because 'institutions'.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
I JUST said institutions are financed with blood money so they can't possibly solve problems without violence.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Solving interpersonally, meaning actual positive-sum transactions, is what happens in markets – in politics there's always some loser somewhere.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Not to mention that ~all of these grand institutions, including courts, are financed using blood money.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Psychologically I agree – I thought of just that point yesterday and failed to mention it – but there's still a conflict between taxation and man's natural rights, be he aware of his rights or not.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Sometimes, but poorly, and rarely. Most of the time they steamroll, and it takes years to correct an error (courts are sloooow), with much more steamrolling happening in the meantime (see covid policies, for example).
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
Well, only if I'm right. But GIVEN that I'm wrong it should, again, be easy to meet Logan's and my challenge.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
TCS definition of coercion: web.archive.org/web/2019032822…
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
So it's not quite as simple as the 'inversion' of consent, since the absence of consent does not necessarily imply coercion. For example, if nobody has asked you about X but you also don't mind X at all, you haven't consented but you also aren't being coerced.
@jchalupa_ @BTC_SNEK @DoqxaScott
My conception of coercion is the TCS one: the enacting of one idea while there's still a conflicting one present in one's mind.
Or, across minds, one idea steamrolling over others without solving the conflict interpersonally first.