Author: Curt Doolittle

  • PROPERTARIAN AGGRESSION VERSUS LIBERTINE AGGRESSION (worth repeating) –“In poli

    PROPERTARIAN AGGRESSION VERSUS LIBERTINE AGGRESSION

    (worth repeating)

    –“In political philosophy we separate the use of proactive force (aggression) from reactive force (defense). So force can be put to positive (defensive) or negative (aggressive) uses. But then this approach requires that we define what we can aggress against, in order to know what we can defend against. In libertinism they refer to intersubjectively-verifiable property (physical things) whereas in propertarianism I refer to property-en-toto, meaning all things that humans seek to defend that they have obtained by voluntary exchange or homesteading (transforming). ergo: I cannot force your you to give me your attention – that is theft, which allows violence. Conversely I can use violence to defend against your attempt to get my attention. However, if I hear that you advocate theft, then I can defend against your advocacy of theft – and visa versa.”–


    Source date (UTC): 2014-12-14 05:30:00 UTC

  • NEW PROPERTARIANISM.COM – (SORT OF) I’m really in love with the design still, so

    NEW PROPERTARIANISM.COM – (SORT OF)

    I’m really in love with the design still, so it largely looks the same. But I spent some time this week hand-coding propertarianism.com – reducing the memory footprint by two thirds, and creating a new document type that will allow me to publish propertarianism online more easily.

    In truth the new document type was an experiment since Oversing’s later versions will contain a kind of document authoring that is I think, more in line with the direction of writing tools and online writing in particular, than the wiki model – and far easier to work with. I can’t do everything in wordpress that I want to but at least I think the idea is sound.

    Anyway, I really didn’t want to spend time on this but the server crash at Bluehost last weekend convinced me that the effort to reconstruct the website would be better put to hand coding it.

    STATE OF THE CONTENT

    Oversing takes priority at the moment, but I will incrementally both move work to the web site, and revise the definitions. I have a lot of work to do still, but most of it is just labor now.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-12-14 03:42:00 UTC

  • (worth repeating) –“I would say, that I cannot force anyone to hear anything, o

    (worth repeating)

    –“I would say, that I cannot force anyone to hear anything, or to listen, or even to pay attention. What I can do is to punish them for lie and error in words just as we punish them for lie and error in deeds, when those words, like those deeds cause loss of property-en-toto.”–


    Source date (UTC): 2014-12-14 03:28:00 UTC

  • Propertarianism vs Neo-Reaction

    (draft)
    [I] tend to see Propertarianism as Post-Neo-Reactionary. Although, it may be more accurate to position NRx as a rationalist program in the continental and moral traditional, and Propertarianism as an analytic program in the anglo scientific tradition – but both making the same criticism: the evolution of the cathedral, the failure of the enlightenment program, and the necessity to return to modernity (science) and away from postmodernism (pseudoscience, cosmopolitanism and neo-puritanism).

    The most important difference is that Propertarianism is not so much reactionary as it is revolutionary. In that literally I am working on a program to cause and justify a revolution. However, I don’t recommend a return to the past at all, but an evolution of the classical liberal model of government that serves the wants and needs of post-industrial individuals, families (or lack of), societies, economies.

    Propertarianism—-NeoReaction
    Scientific————-Rational
    Analytic————–Allegorical
    Solution————-Criticism
    Legal—————–Moral
    Progressive———-Reactionary
    Prescriptive——–Prescriptive
    Institutional———Technical

    Screen-Shot-2014-12-08-at-6.01.22-AM

  • Propertarianism vs Neo-Reaction

    (draft)
    [I] tend to see Propertarianism as Post-Neo-Reactionary. Although, it may be more accurate to position NRx as a rationalist program in the continental and moral traditional, and Propertarianism as an analytic program in the anglo scientific tradition – but both making the same criticism: the evolution of the cathedral, the failure of the enlightenment program, and the necessity to return to modernity (science) and away from postmodernism (pseudoscience, cosmopolitanism and neo-puritanism).

    The most important difference is that Propertarianism is not so much reactionary as it is revolutionary. In that literally I am working on a program to cause and justify a revolution. However, I don’t recommend a return to the past at all, but an evolution of the classical liberal model of government that serves the wants and needs of post-industrial individuals, families (or lack of), societies, economies.

    Propertarianism—-NeoReaction
    Scientific————-Rational
    Analytic————–Allegorical
    Solution————-Criticism
    Legal—————–Moral
    Progressive———-Reactionary
    Prescriptive——–Prescriptive
    Institutional———Technical

    Screen-Shot-2014-12-08-at-6.01.22-AM

  • Libertine “Self Ownership” is Suitable for Children’s Stories

    [U]nfortunately you ‘aren’t’ anything other than a bag of mostly water, and rights only exist when they have been created by an act of promise or contract.

    As such you may DEMAND, or WANT to be treated as the owner of your body, and therefore are seeking CUSTOMERS for your offer, and those customers will offer you the same deal in exchange – albeit with differing degrees of warranty. But until that point you ‘have’ no ‘right’. You cannot. It cannot be made to exist without the action of exchange.

    So if you are willing to fight hard enough that you raise the cost of your subjugation to the point at which those who prefer to subjugate you prefer to engage in the reciprocal exchange of rights to self, life, mind, and body, then you may per-chance, obtain that property right in exchange for your offer of that property right.

    But until you raise the cost of your subjugation such that it is more profitable to give you a right to your self, life, mind and body, it is absolutely demonstrable – empirically, logically demonstrable – that you do NOT in fact, possess such a right.
    Nonsense appeals to ‘rights’ like nonsense appeals to pseudoscience are the modern equivalent religious comforts and promises of life after death. They are just nonsense appeals to make you feel comfortable as a slave with some hope of savior by technology, democracy, Arthur, Jesus, or God.

    Nonsense is for children who fear monsters under the bed, those who need comfort on their death beds, slaves who much suffer without relief, and the lazy and cowardly who fear to act. Use of nonsense words means one is a child, lost to life, lazy or coward.
    The only right you possess is the one you obtain in exchange. And that which you receive in exchange, like that which you obtain by homesteading, is only yours because you act to defend it with your life.

    Wishes are free. Words are cheap. Actions are dear.

    Freedom is purchased by strong arms and pointed weapons.

    Everything else is nonsense-words.

    Leave the false prophecy of the Libertines behind. Come to Aristocracy. We know better: Violence and time are the only wealth you were born with. Spend them wisely.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

  • Libertine “Self Ownership” is Suitable for Children’s Stories

    [U]nfortunately you ‘aren’t’ anything other than a bag of mostly water, and rights only exist when they have been created by an act of promise or contract.

    As such you may DEMAND, or WANT to be treated as the owner of your body, and therefore are seeking CUSTOMERS for your offer, and those customers will offer you the same deal in exchange – albeit with differing degrees of warranty. But until that point you ‘have’ no ‘right’. You cannot. It cannot be made to exist without the action of exchange.

    So if you are willing to fight hard enough that you raise the cost of your subjugation to the point at which those who prefer to subjugate you prefer to engage in the reciprocal exchange of rights to self, life, mind, and body, then you may per-chance, obtain that property right in exchange for your offer of that property right.

    But until you raise the cost of your subjugation such that it is more profitable to give you a right to your self, life, mind and body, it is absolutely demonstrable – empirically, logically demonstrable – that you do NOT in fact, possess such a right.
    Nonsense appeals to ‘rights’ like nonsense appeals to pseudoscience are the modern equivalent religious comforts and promises of life after death. They are just nonsense appeals to make you feel comfortable as a slave with some hope of savior by technology, democracy, Arthur, Jesus, or God.

    Nonsense is for children who fear monsters under the bed, those who need comfort on their death beds, slaves who much suffer without relief, and the lazy and cowardly who fear to act. Use of nonsense words means one is a child, lost to life, lazy or coward.
    The only right you possess is the one you obtain in exchange. And that which you receive in exchange, like that which you obtain by homesteading, is only yours because you act to defend it with your life.

    Wishes are free. Words are cheap. Actions are dear.

    Freedom is purchased by strong arms and pointed weapons.

    Everything else is nonsense-words.

    Leave the false prophecy of the Libertines behind. Come to Aristocracy. We know better: Violence and time are the only wealth you were born with. Spend them wisely.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

  • Legal Prohibitions on Free Riding Must Expand With Minimum Friction

    [E]ntrepreneurs innovate. Property is necessary for calculation and incentives. Trust is necessary for economic velocity (rates). As complexity expands so does the means of free riding and theft, so legal prohibitions must expand in criminal, ethical, moral, conspiratorial coverage at a marginally indifferent rate from the complexity of associations in order to maintain trust and economic velocity.


    This state of affairs is only possible in homogenous polities.

  • Legal Prohibitions on Free Riding Must Expand With Minimum Friction

    [E]ntrepreneurs innovate. Property is necessary for calculation and incentives. Trust is necessary for economic velocity (rates). As complexity expands so does the means of free riding and theft, so legal prohibitions must expand in criminal, ethical, moral, conspiratorial coverage at a marginally indifferent rate from the complexity of associations in order to maintain trust and economic velocity.


    This state of affairs is only possible in homogenous polities.

  • A Quarterly Reminder – Fair Warning.

    [F]or new friends and followers, please understand what I do here and on FB. It is my sketch pad. I work in public like a village blacksmith where you can peer into the forge and see the experimental work being done – good and bad.

    Propertarianism is a very special thing and you can learn a lot about the world by following me. But it does require that you keep in mind that I am constantly using the community as an experimental pool to test ideas and seek criticism.

    I am slaying a few hundred years of sacred western ideas, and doing so mercilously. This often requires that I experiment in everything from very rigorous philosophy, to the most general of aphorisms and narratives. Some of which are guaranteed to offend you. (And me sometimes, too.)

    But my goal is to capture what made the west competitively successful in our history in formal logical and scientific terms – for the first time, to capture it as an analytic political philosophy, recommend formal institutions, espouse it as an ideology, and provide moral authority for revolution, the strategic and tactical means of conducting that revolution.

    I am not so much a populist as an engineer. Its not my job to be popular. It’s my job to discover the truth.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev Ukraine