Curt Doolittle

Author: Curt Doolittle

  • PSEUDOSCIENCE REIGNS Sorry, but it doesn’t fly. All costs are opportunity costs.

    https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/2014/10/causes-war-peace/ OBJECTIVIST PSEUDOSCIENCE REIGNS Sorry, but it doesn’t fly. All costs are opportunity costs. We can look at each war, and say, the accumulated effect of containing world communism, and estimate thh difference in costs. But the assumption that our condition would be equal or better than that of today is very hard to imagine. Objectivism is merely eastern european ashkenazi border-region philosophy. The reason the ashkenazi do not have eastern europe as a homeland, and the reason they did not hold israel as a homeland, and the reason they are losing israel as a homeland, is the same: they are unwilling to pay the high costs of territorial defense. If you want to live as a migratory pastoralist, or unlanded trader, you are welcome to. But you will be at the mercy of the warriors who give you permission. And you will never be, and can never be, free. Because liberty is not a matter of permission it is a matter of power.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-16 11:36:00 UTC

  • (Yeah. What you see me doing is constructing markets that create commons without

    (Yeah. What you see me doing is constructing markets that create commons without the possibility of discretion. Libertinism avoids commons. But commons are the consequence of western high trust. And our competitive strategy.)

    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-16 07:24:00 UTC

  • AGAINST POLYCENTRIC LAW AND IN FAVOR OF INSURERS. The reason that Americans can

    AGAINST POLYCENTRIC LAW AND IN FAVOR OF INSURERS.

    The reason that Americans can trust you by default in business is because our courts will punish the HELL out of you if you act in an untrustworthy fashion. American courts largely function as lie detectors more so than truth detectors.

    This is what separates Common law courts from Napoleonic law courts: There is (or should be) no difference between state and civic action; and we punish the hell out of violators, rather than regulate actions.

    That this produces superior economic velocity for the middle and upper classes while allowing the lower classes enough rope to constantly hang themselves is not obvious. For this reason – difficulty for the proletarians – I do not see the necessity of a monopoly homogenous set of rules of operation.

    If I am willing to operate by aristocratic (outcome based) common law, then I should be able to. If I prefer to have the protection of regulatory law (as instruction and guidance relieving the burden of knowledge) then I should be able to enjoy it.

    But despite propter-hoc regulatory law, or post-hoc common law, in neither of these cases are the laws of dispute resolution in matters of property different. What differs is the form of insurance I expect in defense of them.

    This differs from polycentric law, in the sense that there is no difference whatsoever in law, only difference in the requirements of the insurer. As such, the governmental ‘houses’ function as insurance agencies – insurers of last resort – rather than polycentric legal houses.

    This difference separates Propertarianism from Libertinism (Cosmopolitan libertarianism) permanently. There is but one law of cooperation necessary for the preservation of cooperation as preferable to predation: non-parasitism (non-imposition of costs). There is but one positive expression insuring the victim: property rights to property en-toto. And therefore all conflict is decidable, and all law universal regardless of polity. But the means by which we insure one another, and the contracts we enter into one another, are something quite different. (We merely lie and equate legislation and regulation with law so that the government can claim false legitimacy for its actions. One can violate a political contract, but that is a contract violation not a legal violation. Whether one can issue regulation is not a question as long as it meets testimonial and propertarian criteria, and citizens have universal standing in juridical defense – which they don’t have today.)

    The classical liberal model of houses that represent the interests of the classes and force exchanges between the classes was very close. The first mistake was investing power in the parliament rather than in the houses of parliament, and the second mistake was failing to add a house of labor and a house of dependents so that we could conduct trades between the newly enfranchised classes. Just as the British error was its failure to add a house of colonies to the government, rather than equal participation in the parliament.

    SIMPLE RULES FOR COMPLEX LAW

    There is but one cause of law, that is the facilitation and preservation of the incentive of cooperation and non-retaliation. There are no other causes of law other than the principle of non-parasitism that preserves the incentive of cooperation and non-retalitation.

    There is but one law and that is property en toto. There i

    All legislation consists of contract. No legislation consist of law.

    All legislation must apply universally. All standing must mirror any application.

    All legislation may only carry forward. No legislation may be retroactively imposed.

    All legislation must consist of voluntary transfers. No legislation may force involuntary transfer.

    All regulation is refinement of legislation. No regulation may extend beyond its governing legislation.

    All regulation consists of contract modifications. No regulation may violate contract provisions.

    All propertarian and testimonial contracts assent. No non-propertarian, non-testimonial contracts may assent.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-16 07:22:00 UTC

  • Question for you. The Guardian put out a story the other day about “unaffordable

    Question for you. The Guardian put out a story the other day about “unaffordable Brittain” – although looking at the interactive map they published (shown below), they’re only really talking about England and Wales. Do you have a view on this? Will have a look for the parent article and post it below.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-16 06:53:00 UTC

  • ( Overhearing conversations: I know it’s just empirically true that most african

    ( Overhearing conversations: I know it’s just empirically true that most africans instinctually retain a fear of deep water. But for some reason I just can’t imagine it. Any more than I can imagine the asian fascination with youth bordering on pedophilia. Any more than I can imagine the European fascination with altrusim.Any more than I can imagine what it’s like to think like a woman. It’s just one of those things. )

    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-16 06:52:00 UTC

  • THE POLITICAL VIRTUES OF MILITARY SERVICE The military does an exceptional job o

    THE POLITICAL VIRTUES OF MILITARY SERVICE

    The military does an exceptional job of converting upper proletarian and lower middle class men who would otherwise be selfish and useless into useful cogs in an amazingly large and complex machine. It is a very organized pseudo-society, but it does form a society. I am surrounded by these guys at the moment and it’s amazing how GOOD FOR YOU that military service is in making you a less selfish and capable member of the polity. I still think public service and basic training in the militial model should be required. I would have sucked at it. It would have been very hard on me. But I would have done it. And I think I would have been the better for it. A lot of men would happily join companies that would ‘take care of them for life’ at very low disposable income, and be perfectly happy to not fend for themselves in the labor market directly. The military (service), Guild (professional union), and entrepreneurial(independent) models all work, as long as we do not try to make them universals.

    Monopoly is the enemy. Not government. Not state. But monopoly. Because we are vastly unequal.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-16 06:44:00 UTC

  • POLITICIANS ARE AN UNNECESSARY EVIL We no longer need politicians and representa

    POLITICIANS ARE AN UNNECESSARY EVIL

    We no longer need politicians and representatives, and no longer need democratic assent to pass something, and to divide a budget equally, and to vote with money where it is required. In fact, all politicians do is to create hazards. So given that distance no longer impacts ability to cooperate and communicate in real time; and given that concentration of politicians in one place merely creates a perfect environment for lobbying and corruption; and given that running for office produces nothing but negative externalities exacerbating corruption; it seems much wiser to let anyone post proposals (contracts), to reject any proposal of involuntary transfer(propertarianism), to hold debates in public over them with the best public intellectuals contributing to the discourse; to require truthful speech in such deliberation (testimonialism), and to select a jury by lot from each house to spend those budgets, and enter into those contracts. Politicians are an unnecessary evil in a world of instantaneous communication.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-16 06:34:00 UTC

  • EXPLAINING AMERICAN DIRECTNESS AND VOLUME TO FOREINGNERS —“The speaking volume

    EXPLAINING AMERICAN DIRECTNESS AND VOLUME TO FOREINGNERS

    —“The speaking volume in the United States for most conversations is very loud, which in many other countries would be considered rude. … Also, business people in the United States use very direct language and tight time management when communicating and running meetings, which people from many other countries might find off-putting.” –Raj Patel

    ON VOLUME

    It’s counter-intuitive, but our volume is an expression of high trust: that if I can be said, it can be said in public, and with confidence or it should not be said. Or conversely, quiet people who speak in whispers may have other nasty habits.

    ORIGINS

    It is beneficial to remember that Anglo and Germanic civilizations only split in 1830, and that america was founded by pre-1830 anglos, and that the majority of white americans are at least of partial german decent. America is an english speaking germanic country. That is what separates English speaking America from english speaking Britain, Canada and Australia. (This insight is rather profound and you will find that it explains many american cultural peculiarities. America is a Tudor,German, Civilization with english institutions, law and language).

    We can also recall that the world now operates Military, Aircraft, and Seas in English (germanic english) using English commands and manners, because we found out that the rest of the world operates on face (lying), hierarchical(untrue), indirect(untrue), and permissive (untrue), language suitable for village life but not for running DANGEROUS environments where truth, clarity, and directness save lives.

    But the question is, why did germanic anglos invent this kind of direct language?

    BECAUSE WESTERNERS WERE ALL MEMBERS OF THE MILITIA. German evolved as an aristocratic, martial, language. And westerners have been practicing decentralized (militia) warfare for over 5000 years – at least since they invented the Chariot.

    So even today, the first thing you are taught in basic training is to speak clearly, loudly, confidently, and TESTIMONIALLY (truthfully), regardless of the social impact of your speech – because otherwise PEOPLE DIE.

    Americans and Germans retain (Germans more so) this military culture in daily life: speak directly, clearly and truthfully. Quiet speech means you are not to be trusted, and not a fully mature adult.

    Until the last few generations, we were taught GRAMMAR AND RHETORIC (public speaking) as a requirement.

    COMPARISON FOR HINDUS

    You are correct in stating that this directness eliminates cooperative economic friction, decreases the necessity of developing trust (it’s assumed) and increases the use of litigation when it fails. That is because america does not regulate what we do, it punishes what we do if we fail. (This is profound difference between the napoleonic ‘parental and permission” model of law.

    It is not obvious but while we have very similar genetic origins, and while we both have inherited the common law, that the reason India is so pervasively corrupt, is that it is not a high trust society that has succeeded in creating a universal militia independent of class, tribe and family biases. (and the decline in truth telling in favor of political correctness and postmodern argument in all walks of life is the reason for increasing corruption in america.)

    The west has been through a 5000 year meat grinder military service and the relative success of the west in all fields – science, commerce, and law – is because we tell the testimonial truth regardless of cost to anyone. Because as a martial people, doing so is your path to status and enfranchisement. And because in a martial people, the truth means people live in battle. And martial people were led by martial aristocracy.

    It has only been since the enfranchisement of women that these requirements for disciplined truth telling have been systematically undermined. And just as martial truth-telling (testimony) is the secret of the west’s evolutionary velocity compared to older civilizations, the secret of our downfall is the decline of this tradition of martial truth telling due to the inclusion of women in the electorate. (Look at the voting data. Look at today’s voting data. American white men vote red everywhere other than main and Seattle.)

    And that’s pretty scary really.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-16 05:56:00 UTC

  • (someone’s finally home in aspie-land. my magic box is talking to me again. so t

    (someone’s finally home in aspie-land. my magic box is talking to me again. so the bug I caught must be nearly over with. I asked around and no one seems to know what made hayek unable to work for so long. I wonder if it was a similar experience.)

    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-16 04:09:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    http://heterodoxacademy.org/2015/09/14/bbs-paper-on-lack-of-political-diversity/

    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-15 22:35:00 UTC