I always begin your substacks very intimidated (as I am of the commoner class :)) but as I dig in to your work, I find it so illuminating and ordering of national and global events. I hope your work gets a wide broadcast.
I am concerned about the shattered communities - there is also managerial class that controls local levels and it is a strong sycophant of the national/global managerial class and elites. Seems like a very hard lift for these communities to influence change on the local level.
Good content, and quite thought provoking. At times the article is a bit hard to read. I found your distinctions to be the most valuable part and would like to see them in a list without linking them to citations. They are valuable enough to stand on their own.
One comment on Hayek: the chapter on the Rule of Law is where I see the parallel with Schmitt. For me, I'd describe it as Common Sense and not necessarily Common Law.
The gradual emergence of legitimate law over centuries of community experience has a name. It's called "tradition." English Common Law is but one example.
Doesn't Hoppe write on this? Voluntary society is necessarily right-wing because of innate differences that result in hierarchies as emergent phenomenon? Maybe if we didn't have mass forced schooling we could try to flesh out exactly how voluntary hierarchy functions. Why and how such relationships within a community or society at large can be mutually advantageous. The narrative that all hierarchy is oppressive and must be abolished is a lie that is toxic to the organic development of stable, peaceful communities founded on voluntarism/NAP. Or perhaps I'm just a libertarian ideologue :)
I always begin your substacks very intimidated (as I am of the commoner class :)) but as I dig in to your work, I find it so illuminating and ordering of national and global events. I hope your work gets a wide broadcast.
I am concerned about the shattered communities - there is also managerial class that controls local levels and it is a strong sycophant of the national/global managerial class and elites. Seems like a very hard lift for these communities to influence change on the local level.
Good content, and quite thought provoking. At times the article is a bit hard to read. I found your distinctions to be the most valuable part and would like to see them in a list without linking them to citations. They are valuable enough to stand on their own.
One comment on Hayek: the chapter on the Rule of Law is where I see the parallel with Schmitt. For me, I'd describe it as Common Sense and not necessarily Common Law.
The gradual emergence of legitimate law over centuries of community experience has a name. It's called "tradition." English Common Law is but one example.
Doesn't Hoppe write on this? Voluntary society is necessarily right-wing because of innate differences that result in hierarchies as emergent phenomenon? Maybe if we didn't have mass forced schooling we could try to flesh out exactly how voluntary hierarchy functions. Why and how such relationships within a community or society at large can be mutually advantageous. The narrative that all hierarchy is oppressive and must be abolished is a lie that is toxic to the organic development of stable, peaceful communities founded on voluntarism/NAP. Or perhaps I'm just a libertarian ideologue :)