Curt Doolittle

Author: Curt Doolittle

  • Another on Aristocracy(criticism) vs Republicanism(Justification)

    Science=critical.  Morality=justificationary. [I] have been working on the series: ‘obverse/revers, justification/criticism, morality/science, property-right/prohibition, GoldenRule/SilverRule, that is the western innovative alternative to eastern static ying-and-yang. Where they match sides, we only overlap in a venn diagram. Where they have a balance of equality and necessary cooperation, we have a division of labor and voluntary cooperation.

    OBVERSE: Positive Government uses Justification and ascent (republic) – the objective is to do good. Concentrate all resources behind single ideas: monopoly provision of commons: the government society. But we cannot know good, or agree on good. Napoleonic law of prior restraint. Scope of Property is limited. Standing is limited. Rule is by Coercive Government (ascent). Judgements are ideological and hypothetical. And this creates opportunity for rent seeking(parasitism). At best, this strategy is useful for transitioning a failed people.

    REVERSE: Negative Government uses Criticism and prosecution (aristocracy) – the objective is to do no harm. Distribute all resources according to preferences of the contributors: market provision of commons: the civic society. And we can know harm. Common law of dispute resolution. Scope is Property-en-toto, Standing is universal. Rule is by prohibitionary judgement (veto). Decisions are empirical and operational. And this strategy creates no opportunity for rent seeking (parasitism). At worst, this strategy is useful for maintaining a successful people.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine
    (London, July 16, 2015)

  • Another on Aristocracy(criticism) vs Republicanism(Justification)

    Science=critical.  Morality=justificationary. [I] have been working on the series: ‘obverse/revers, justification/criticism, morality/science, property-right/prohibition, GoldenRule/SilverRule, that is the western innovative alternative to eastern static ying-and-yang. Where they match sides, we only overlap in a venn diagram. Where they have a balance of equality and necessary cooperation, we have a division of labor and voluntary cooperation.

    OBVERSE: Positive Government uses Justification and ascent (republic) – the objective is to do good. Concentrate all resources behind single ideas: monopoly provision of commons: the government society. But we cannot know good, or agree on good. Napoleonic law of prior restraint. Scope of Property is limited. Standing is limited. Rule is by Coercive Government (ascent). Judgements are ideological and hypothetical. And this creates opportunity for rent seeking(parasitism). At best, this strategy is useful for transitioning a failed people.

    REVERSE: Negative Government uses Criticism and prosecution (aristocracy) – the objective is to do no harm. Distribute all resources according to preferences of the contributors: market provision of commons: the civic society. And we can know harm. Common law of dispute resolution. Scope is Property-en-toto, Standing is universal. Rule is by prohibitionary judgement (veto). Decisions are empirical and operational. And this strategy creates no opportunity for rent seeking (parasitism). At worst, this strategy is useful for maintaining a successful people.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine
    (London, July 16, 2015)

  • Q&A: Aristocracy vs Republic? It’s Criticism vs Justification.

    —“I’m a bit ignorant on this. What makes an aristocracy different from a republic. With leaders or rulers representing a population.”—

    [G]reat question. Thanks for asking it. Because you gave me the nudge I needed to write a first draft of aristocratic government that circumvents problems in libertarian thought.

    I have been working on the series: ‘obverse/revers, justification/criticism, morality/science, propertyright/prohibition, GoldenRule/SilverRule, that is the western innovative alternative to eastern static ying-and-yang. Where they match sides, we only overlap in a venn diagram. Where they have a balance of equality and necessary cooperation, we have a division of labor and voluntary cooperation. OBVERSE: Positive Government uses Justification and ascent (republic) – the objective is to do good. Concentrate all resources behind single ideas: monopoly provision of commons: the government society. But we cannot know good, or agree on good. Napoleonic law of prior restraint. Scope of Property is limited. Standing is limited. Rule is by Coercive Government (ascent). Judgements are ideological and hypothetical. And this creates opportunity for rent seeking(parasitism). At best, this strategy is useful for transitioning a failed people. REVERSE: Negative Government uses Criticism and prosecution (aristocracy) – the objective is to do no harm. Distribute all resources according to preferences of the contributors: market provision of commons: the civic society. And we can know harm. Common law of dispute resolution. Scope is Property-en-toto, Standing is universal. Rule is by prohibitionary judgement (veto). Decisions are empirical and operational. And this strategy creates no opportunity for rent seeking (parasitism). At worst, this strategy is useful for maintaining a successful people. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine (London, July 16, 2015)

  • Q&A: Aristocracy vs Republic? It’s Criticism vs Justification.

    —“I’m a bit ignorant on this. What makes an aristocracy different from a republic. With leaders or rulers representing a population.”—

    [G]reat question. Thanks for asking it. Because you gave me the nudge I needed to write a first draft of aristocratic government that circumvents problems in libertarian thought.

    I have been working on the series: ‘obverse/revers, justification/criticism, morality/science, propertyright/prohibition, GoldenRule/SilverRule, that is the western innovative alternative to eastern static ying-and-yang. Where they match sides, we only overlap in a venn diagram. Where they have a balance of equality and necessary cooperation, we have a division of labor and voluntary cooperation. OBVERSE: Positive Government uses Justification and ascent (republic) – the objective is to do good. Concentrate all resources behind single ideas: monopoly provision of commons: the government society. But we cannot know good, or agree on good. Napoleonic law of prior restraint. Scope of Property is limited. Standing is limited. Rule is by Coercive Government (ascent). Judgements are ideological and hypothetical. And this creates opportunity for rent seeking(parasitism). At best, this strategy is useful for transitioning a failed people. REVERSE: Negative Government uses Criticism and prosecution (aristocracy) – the objective is to do no harm. Distribute all resources according to preferences of the contributors: market provision of commons: the civic society. And we can know harm. Common law of dispute resolution. Scope is Property-en-toto, Standing is universal. Rule is by prohibitionary judgement (veto). Decisions are empirical and operational. And this strategy creates no opportunity for rent seeking (parasitism). At worst, this strategy is useful for maintaining a successful people. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine (London, July 16, 2015)

  • Universalism: The Love of Man

    [S]orry all, but while I argue to advance my tribe, I also seek to advance all tribes through aristocratic egalitarianism (meritocracy), testimonial truth, and propertarianism. My political solution is very simple: non-parasitism, voluntary exchange, rule of law, common law, jury and truth telling. Truth is enough to restore our civilization to greatness by a radical innovation in the construction of commons. And to do the same for any other civilization if they are able to learn truth telling.

    I’ve been very consistent in my position: the only material differences between the races of man are caused by (a) differences in distributions of reproductive desirability and (b) differences in distributions of intelligence, aggressiveness, and impulsivity. And that these differences are caused by different rates of reproduction of the different classes. There are exceptional people in all races and tribes. There are more exceptional people in the white tribe because we invented truth, because we suppressed the reproduction of the lower classes, and because we are less aggressive and impulsive – we have a lower time preference. A population’s abilities determine the quality of it’s informal and formal institutions, and that those institutions are tragically imprisoning when combined with a population whose median is below 106. So the problem facing EVERY tribe is how to get its population above a median of 106. And in the future, that number might be even higher. ANTI-PARASITISM, PREFERENCE FOR KIN-SELECTION, and SEPARATISM are not the same thing as NON-COOPERATION. Our meritocratic aristocracies are marginally indifferent, and easily can cooperate, because they are not reliant on kin for information, signals, production, reproduction, and cooperation. It is not our similarities that cause conflict. It is the dissimilarities between our lower classes that cause us conflict. I will sacrifice for my kin. I refuse parasitism by non-kin. I refuse to shift reproductive velocity from the upper to the lower classes no matter how profitable it is. I refuse to take the one truth telling civilization on earth and reduce it to yet another group of parasitic liars. I refuse to limit humanity’s future by surrendering our people to dysgenia. But I also refuse to blame others for our failures. I refuse to abandon cooperation with other tribes. And I refuse to abandon the rest of humanity to the predation of parasitic elites. Aristocracy cannot include everyone but it can serve everyone. Aristocracy for everyone, if not of everyone. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Universalism: The Love of Man

    [S]orry all, but while I argue to advance my tribe, I also seek to advance all tribes through aristocratic egalitarianism (meritocracy), testimonial truth, and propertarianism. My political solution is very simple: non-parasitism, voluntary exchange, rule of law, common law, jury and truth telling. Truth is enough to restore our civilization to greatness by a radical innovation in the construction of commons. And to do the same for any other civilization if they are able to learn truth telling.

    I’ve been very consistent in my position: the only material differences between the races of man are caused by (a) differences in distributions of reproductive desirability and (b) differences in distributions of intelligence, aggressiveness, and impulsivity. And that these differences are caused by different rates of reproduction of the different classes. There are exceptional people in all races and tribes. There are more exceptional people in the white tribe because we invented truth, because we suppressed the reproduction of the lower classes, and because we are less aggressive and impulsive – we have a lower time preference. A population’s abilities determine the quality of it’s informal and formal institutions, and that those institutions are tragically imprisoning when combined with a population whose median is below 106. So the problem facing EVERY tribe is how to get its population above a median of 106. And in the future, that number might be even higher. ANTI-PARASITISM, PREFERENCE FOR KIN-SELECTION, and SEPARATISM are not the same thing as NON-COOPERATION. Our meritocratic aristocracies are marginally indifferent, and easily can cooperate, because they are not reliant on kin for information, signals, production, reproduction, and cooperation. It is not our similarities that cause conflict. It is the dissimilarities between our lower classes that cause us conflict. I will sacrifice for my kin. I refuse parasitism by non-kin. I refuse to shift reproductive velocity from the upper to the lower classes no matter how profitable it is. I refuse to take the one truth telling civilization on earth and reduce it to yet another group of parasitic liars. I refuse to limit humanity’s future by surrendering our people to dysgenia. But I also refuse to blame others for our failures. I refuse to abandon cooperation with other tribes. And I refuse to abandon the rest of humanity to the predation of parasitic elites. Aristocracy cannot include everyone but it can serve everyone. Aristocracy for everyone, if not of everyone. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • How To Repair The Western Press?

    [R]oman got me thinking last week, about the central difficulty with western press’ reliance on telling both sides of the STATED story, instead of whether they tell the truth given the INCENTIVES of both sides, regardless of what they state. Telling both sides merely gives the liars equal air play as the truth tellers.

    And it’s much easier for a ‘journalist’ to report on someone’s feelings, and speech than it is to report on facts and incentives. It’s much easier to create moral outrage or high ground with verbalism that obscures incentives, rather than the incentives themselves. To report ‘scientifically’ is possible with propertarian incentives and testimonial truth. We can systematically criticize what people say, and report on their incentives rather than their propaganda. But that means retraining a lot of ‘journalists’ and eliminating the perverse incentives that we have produced with the popular press. And the press, who free rides on destruction of the informational commons, may not like carrying the burden. On the other hand, we would have a lot fewer ‘journalists’ and they would be highly respected – and highly paid. And I think that’s something all of us would like.

  • How To Repair The Western Press?

    [R]oman got me thinking last week, about the central difficulty with western press’ reliance on telling both sides of the STATED story, instead of whether they tell the truth given the INCENTIVES of both sides, regardless of what they state. Telling both sides merely gives the liars equal air play as the truth tellers.

    And it’s much easier for a ‘journalist’ to report on someone’s feelings, and speech than it is to report on facts and incentives. It’s much easier to create moral outrage or high ground with verbalism that obscures incentives, rather than the incentives themselves. To report ‘scientifically’ is possible with propertarian incentives and testimonial truth. We can systematically criticize what people say, and report on their incentives rather than their propaganda. But that means retraining a lot of ‘journalists’ and eliminating the perverse incentives that we have produced with the popular press. And the press, who free rides on destruction of the informational commons, may not like carrying the burden. On the other hand, we would have a lot fewer ‘journalists’ and they would be highly respected – and highly paid. And I think that’s something all of us would like.

  • Choice: Truth vs Lies

    [W]E HAVE A CHOICE: Truth and Trade (propertarianism) -versus- Lies and Takings (progressivism) Source: (2) Curt Doolittle

  • Choice: Truth vs Lies

    [W]E HAVE A CHOICE: Truth and Trade (propertarianism) -versus- Lies and Takings (progressivism) Source: (2) Curt Doolittle