Author: Curt Doolittle

  • We Need A Name For Propertarian “Politics”.

    [T]HE UNIFICATION OF MORALITY, PHILOSOPHY, SCIENCE, AND LAW


    1) Testimonialism (Epistemology),
    2) Propertarianism(Ethics), and;
    3) Strict-Construction Dissent Liberalism: the multi-house market for the production of commons(Politics).

    (I am trying to figure out a name for propertarian and testimonial Politics)

  • We Need A Name For Propertarian “Politics”.

    [T]HE UNIFICATION OF MORALITY, PHILOSOPHY, SCIENCE, AND LAW


    1) Testimonialism (Epistemology),
    2) Propertarianism(Ethics), and;
    3) Strict-Construction Dissent Liberalism: the multi-house market for the production of commons(Politics).

    (I am trying to figure out a name for propertarian and testimonial Politics)

  • Property Absolutism is Objectively Immoral

    (important) [P]roperty-Absolutism violates the truth test of Full Accounting under Testimonialism; whereas the Non-Imposition of Costs does not. As such Property-Absolutism in Cosmopolitan Libertinism is a falsehood: a deceit for the purposes of theft, that forces retaliation, and violates the prohibition on the imposition of costs that makes rational cooperation preferable to predation.

    Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine (Tallinn, Estonia)
  • Property Absolutism is Objectively Immoral

    (important) [P]roperty-Absolutism violates the truth test of Full Accounting under Testimonialism; whereas the Non-Imposition of Costs does not. As such Property-Absolutism in Cosmopolitan Libertinism is a falsehood: a deceit for the purposes of theft, that forces retaliation, and violates the prohibition on the imposition of costs that makes rational cooperation preferable to predation.

    Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine (Tallinn, Estonia)
  • Property Is Not An Absolute. But The Imposition Of Costs Is.

    (important concept) (learning propertariansm) [T]he informational content of Property Rights is less than the informational content of the Prohibition on the Imposition of Costs Upon the Property-en-toto of Others.

    Property Rights are not an epistemological or decidable absolute in Propertarianism, but the positive assertion of the negative prohibition of the imposition of costs. One possesses rights to restitution for violations of property en toto not to the property itself, which one need no ‘right’ to – one need only acquire it without imposing costs upon others that both generate the demand to retaliate, and that violates the incentive to cooperate, and therefore is merely a moral consideration. So: – property exists prior to cooperation, – morality preserves cooperation, by prohibitions and positive assertions (advice) – law records both positive morality and negative on immorality – law records positive property rights and methods of restitution (or punishment). Property is not an absolute. The imposition of costs is. Property rights are constrained by the reality of temporal existence, and the prohibition on the imposition of costs upon others. The model is that if your store of grain exists during an era of crisis, that you may not use the opportunity to either determine who lives or dies, or to profit from suffering of others. It means that one sells the grain to them at prices that prevent your loss (an imposition of costs upon you). It means that in the example of the value of water in a desert, you will ensure that the sale of water to a dying man is not an imposition of costs, but not a means of increasing profits. It means that if he lacks the money to pay, that you must give him water now, as long as he commits to paying, and that you are due damages from him if you must collect. Profit from suffering violates the principle of productive exchange and the avoidance of retaliation. This fact amounts to a ‘shall-issue service to my kith and kin’, and that I shall seek profit only from mutually productive exchange, and not that I shall maximize profits in all circumstances. It means that one does not take opportunistic profits from the suffering of others without alternative. This fact separates the aristocracy of Propertarianism from the Libertinism of cosmopolitan libertarianism. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine (Tallinn, Estonia)
  • Property Is Not An Absolute. But The Imposition Of Costs Is.

    (important concept) (learning propertariansm) [T]he informational content of Property Rights is less than the informational content of the Prohibition on the Imposition of Costs Upon the Property-en-toto of Others.

    Property Rights are not an epistemological or decidable absolute in Propertarianism, but the positive assertion of the negative prohibition of the imposition of costs. One possesses rights to restitution for violations of property en toto not to the property itself, which one need no ‘right’ to – one need only acquire it without imposing costs upon others that both generate the demand to retaliate, and that violates the incentive to cooperate, and therefore is merely a moral consideration. So: – property exists prior to cooperation, – morality preserves cooperation, by prohibitions and positive assertions (advice) – law records both positive morality and negative on immorality – law records positive property rights and methods of restitution (or punishment). Property is not an absolute. The imposition of costs is. Property rights are constrained by the reality of temporal existence, and the prohibition on the imposition of costs upon others. The model is that if your store of grain exists during an era of crisis, that you may not use the opportunity to either determine who lives or dies, or to profit from suffering of others. It means that one sells the grain to them at prices that prevent your loss (an imposition of costs upon you). It means that in the example of the value of water in a desert, you will ensure that the sale of water to a dying man is not an imposition of costs, but not a means of increasing profits. It means that if he lacks the money to pay, that you must give him water now, as long as he commits to paying, and that you are due damages from him if you must collect. Profit from suffering violates the principle of productive exchange and the avoidance of retaliation. This fact amounts to a ‘shall-issue service to my kith and kin’, and that I shall seek profit only from mutually productive exchange, and not that I shall maximize profits in all circumstances. It means that one does not take opportunistic profits from the suffering of others without alternative. This fact separates the aristocracy of Propertarianism from the Libertinism of cosmopolitan libertarianism. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine (Tallinn, Estonia)
  • Thoughts on Religious Reformation

    [C]hristianity: the gradual expiration of impulsive hatred and its replacement with rational justice. QUESTION: What if the New Testament was our Old Testament and the ‘New’ the Western ethical cannon?

    MAN – God (Truth). – Gods (perfection in individual virtues). – Those humans who were godlike (demonstrated perfection in life). – Those humans who worked to be godlike. (but whose names we do not always remember) – Those humans who refrained from being ungodly. – Those humans who were ungodly. – And those humans who were evil. GODS – Center: God (perfection), Man, Woman, 2boys, 2girls, Earth. (Family + earth) – North:Sun: Truth, Law, Justice, (War. Masculine) – East:Fire: Contract, Production, Distribution, Trade – West:Water: Art, Invention, Knowledge, Craft – South:Earth: Love, Caretaking, Nurture, Charity (Feminine) NOT ONE BUT MANY – Monotheism is the folly of conformity to tyranny: that we must be identical slaves, rather than specialists who participate in a division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor and advocacy and inform one another through voluntary cooperation. – Pick your saint and seek to live as your saint. – The religion of specialists for an economy of specialists in a heterogeneous polity.
  • Thoughts on Religious Reformation

    [C]hristianity: the gradual expiration of impulsive hatred and its replacement with rational justice. QUESTION: What if the New Testament was our Old Testament and the ‘New’ the Western ethical cannon?

    MAN – God (Truth). – Gods (perfection in individual virtues). – Those humans who were godlike (demonstrated perfection in life). – Those humans who worked to be godlike. (but whose names we do not always remember) – Those humans who refrained from being ungodly. – Those humans who were ungodly. – And those humans who were evil. GODS – Center: God (perfection), Man, Woman, 2boys, 2girls, Earth. (Family + earth) – North:Sun: Truth, Law, Justice, (War. Masculine) – East:Fire: Contract, Production, Distribution, Trade – West:Water: Art, Invention, Knowledge, Craft – South:Earth: Love, Caretaking, Nurture, Charity (Feminine) NOT ONE BUT MANY – Monotheism is the folly of conformity to tyranny: that we must be identical slaves, rather than specialists who participate in a division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor and advocacy and inform one another through voluntary cooperation. – Pick your saint and seek to live as your saint. – The religion of specialists for an economy of specialists in a heterogeneous polity.
  • Untruth is comforting but not always empowering; Truth is empowering but not oft

    Untruth is comforting but not always empowering; Truth is empowering but not often comforting. Weak:comfort. Strong:action. #NRx #tcot #tlot


    Source date (UTC): 2015-08-07 11:08:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/629610178443390976

  • THINKING. TRUST. RUSSIA. Despite my criticism of Russian politics and culture si

    THINKING. TRUST. RUSSIA.

    Despite my criticism of Russian politics and culture since the invasion of Ukraine for purely dishonest reasons, I tend to have deep affection for Russian people, even when I think they are absurd, superstitious and crazy.

    Because I love that they are brave. Americans are brave by and large *outside of the millennial generation. Some brits are brave, if a minority. But continentals seem submissive and feminized to the core.

    So that is why I love Russians. Every crazy, lunatic, superstitious, conspiracy-theorizing, pseudoscientific, one of them – at least in the middle and upper classes. Russian working class is as boorish as the come, and the saddest example of white people( outside of California. lol).

    The wonderful thing about Russians is personal craftsmanship – pride in cunning in particular (which blows up as frequently as it succeeds). But they are very proud of their work, and very prideful in judging it. I find them very American in this regard.

    Unlike americans they do not easily trust one another, so while individual work is exceptional, collective work must be managed. And management is universally poor among Russians.

    The most obvious obstacle to Russian (and Ukrainian) trust is that admitting ignorance to others places you at the mercy of those who claim to possess knowledge that they almost always don’t have, but seek as a means of obtaining status, control, and as a consequence, work avoidance. Achieving ‘rest’ (laziness) is somehow seen as a reward, or bonus, or status symbol (Mafia Ethics – Russia is a Mafia Culture, just as Judaism is a Mafia Culture, and the two are closely related in that Judaism relies on cunning and Russian culture relies upon force).

    Russians ‘fence’ to demonstrate who should be in control. They lack the socratic and jesuit, and anglo technique of slowly ‘seeking to understand’ one another’s position. Women do this all the time. Instead Russian men seek to trip one another up or argue for position of authority rather than seek to collect Knowledge from each other and come to a consensus. Men do this all the time.

    This is how trust is built between peers. But Russians, like the Chinese and muslims, always seek hierarchy.

    The reason to do business with anglos and germans is because they are trustworthy and honest, and friction and risk are reduced. The reason other cultures like to work with their own is that they understand one another’s lie-signals and so they can lie honestly with one another and consider it manners. It is less economically productive but more comfortable for them. Conversely, when working with higher trust peoples, the feel weaker, or more nervous.

    Now, Muscovites are not equal to Russians. Many Moscow business people are like very poor versions of Germans. They are highly empirical, and work very hard. But they live in a world of corruption and theft, and fragile infrastructure. So they must be more skeptical than the westerners.

    I have more than a few times tripped up using anglo french political language with Russians and they view it as dishonest or patronizing. I must keep it in mind at all times.

    I am not an authority on this subject. I write so that I can understand it. I think I have come to understand, a bit, the Russian character. But I can only empathize so far. I know who I am and where I come from. We are the most trusting people on earth – to our own detriment.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-08-07 10:37:00 UTC