Curt Doolittle

Category: Law, Constitution, and Jurisprudence

  • (FYI, you know, this is going to hit the supreme court. Not because of GAB. But

    (FYI, you know, this is going to hit the supreme court. Not because of GAB. But because the president will issue an executive order, and the court will be forced to rule on it. And the ‘Right’ will win. Guaranteed.)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-30 19:05:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1057347859509661697

    Reply addressees: @opinionhacker @PayPal @stripe

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1056505006034083842

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1056505006034083842

  • Curt, What Do You Mean by Common Law and Tort Law

    October 30th, 2018 12:19 PM —“CURT, WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY COMMON LAW AND TORT LAW AND HOW ARE THEY RELATED.”— [O]K. Um I’m talking about the common law in the old sense as ‘the traditional law’ which consists of sovereignty and tort. In both UK and USA ‘common law’ often includes legislation that violates sovereignty and tort. In my work I make a clear distinction between the one law (reciprocity) common law (findings of the court), legislative law (improving or undermining the common law and the one law) and regulation (enforcement of legislative law whether it improves or undermines the common law and the one law) I refer to tort when I want to remind people that legislation and regulation do not necessarily (and often do not) preserve our natural, customary, traditional, rule of law by findings of law. The legislature’s original purpose was to choose whether the monarchy’s demand for the population to bear costs was acceptable to the regions,the warriors, the militia, and sometimes out of pragmatism) to the people. The ‘enlightenment’ took the power of commons choice out of the hands of the monarchy and put it into the republic (elected representatives, and the peerage (local governors)). The marxist and social democratic movement reversed our civilization by expanding the commons such that they violated our underlying natural law of reciprocity, in favor of the rest of humanity’s underclass demand for proportionality, and upon receiving proportionality, the political and underclass demand for equality of outcome. So, great question.

  • Curt, What Do You Mean by Common Law and Tort Law

    October 30th, 2018 12:19 PM —“CURT, WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY COMMON LAW AND TORT LAW AND HOW ARE THEY RELATED.”— [O]K. Um I’m talking about the common law in the old sense as ‘the traditional law’ which consists of sovereignty and tort. In both UK and USA ‘common law’ often includes legislation that violates sovereignty and tort. In my work I make a clear distinction between the one law (reciprocity) common law (findings of the court), legislative law (improving or undermining the common law and the one law) and regulation (enforcement of legislative law whether it improves or undermines the common law and the one law) I refer to tort when I want to remind people that legislation and regulation do not necessarily (and often do not) preserve our natural, customary, traditional, rule of law by findings of law. The legislature’s original purpose was to choose whether the monarchy’s demand for the population to bear costs was acceptable to the regions,the warriors, the militia, and sometimes out of pragmatism) to the people. The ‘enlightenment’ took the power of commons choice out of the hands of the monarchy and put it into the republic (elected representatives, and the peerage (local governors)). The marxist and social democratic movement reversed our civilization by expanding the commons such that they violated our underlying natural law of reciprocity, in favor of the rest of humanity’s underclass demand for proportionality, and upon receiving proportionality, the political and underclass demand for equality of outcome. So, great question.

  • THIS IS ALL NORMIES NEED TO UNDERSTAND: PROPERTARIANISM WILL MAKE THEIR LIVES BE

    THIS IS ALL NORMIES NEED TO UNDERSTAND: PROPERTARIANISM WILL MAKE THEIR LIVES BETTER AND FAST – NOT BECAUSE THEY UNDERSTAND IT. BUT BECAUSE OF THE LAW IT MAKES POSSIBLE.

    Normal people are not students of, or interested in, nor necessarily capable of conceiving the world via the tools of calculus, economics, programming, law, or formal logic. They are merely the BENEFICIARIES of it when used by those of us who can.

    If you merely explain that it is possible to use the law to prohibit the financial sector, the media, politicians and the academy from taking advantage of them by lying to them, and that Propertarianism provides a method of writing the law in order to make that possible, they will understand.

    Because the work consists largely of:

    (a) a single value-independent language of logic, science, ethics, politics, economics, and law.

    (b) a set of criteria for testing whether or not statements made in that language (which is very close to law already) is false (such that it may still be true but it is not false or dependent upon pretense of knowledge).

    (c) that we can add this to the constitution and the courts fairly easily. And in doing so allow us to continue market support of what we favor, and court suppression of falsehoods that we don’t.

    (d) and if we do this most of the ‘redistributive demands’ can be made possible by disempowering of the financial, academy, media, and state sector, so that those proceeds can instead by consumed by the people (citizens),

    (e) so that once again it is possible to bear and rase a family on one income, pay for one’s house, and then save for retirement for the vast majority of the laboring, working, middle, and upper middle classes.

    That’s it.

    That’s what they have to understand.

    The rest of it is just the technical means of constructing, debating, writing, administering, and judging the law such that all of that is possible.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-30 14:52:00 UTC

  • “CURT, WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY COMMON LAW AND TORT LAW AND HOW ARE THEY RELATED.”—

    —“CURT, WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY COMMON LAW AND TORT LAW AND HOW ARE THEY RELATED.”—

    OK. Um I’m talking about the common law in the old sense as ‘the traditional law’ which consists of sovereignty and tort. In both UK and USA ‘common law’ often includes legislation that violates sovereignty and tort. In my work I make a clear distinction between the one law (reciprocity) common law (findings of the court), legislative law (improving or undermining the common law and the one law) and regulation (enforcement of legislative law whether it improves or undermines the common law and the one law)

    I refer to tort when I want to remind people that legislation and regulation do not necessarily (and often do not) preserve our natural, customary, traditional, rule of law by findings of law.

    The legislature’s original purpose was to choose whether the monarchy’s demand for the population to bear costs was acceptable to the regions,the warriors, the militia, and sometimes out of pragmatism) to the people.

    The ‘enlightenment’ took the power of commons choice out of the hands of the monarchy and put it into the republic (elected representatives, and the peerage (local governors)).

    The marxist and social democratic movement reversed our civilization by expanding the commons such that they violated our underlying natural law of reciprocity, in favor of the rest of humanity’s underclass demand for proportionality, and upon receiving proportionality, the political and underclass demand for equality of outcome.

    So, great question.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-30 12:19:00 UTC

  • CLOSE 10) This is indifferent from the debate over ‘creativity in legal interpre

    CLOSE 10) This is indifferent from the debate over ‘creativity in legal interpretation’ in the supreme court, versus the law says only what it obviously says in the context it was written for the purpose it was written: One Shall Not (in the jewish tradition) attempt To FIT Data.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-25 21:26:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055571308493324290

    Reply addressees: @PhilosophyCuck @MrKennan1948 @WorMartiN

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055556675585875968

    IN REPLY TO:

    @Jonas_Ceika

    @MrKennan1948 @curtdoolittle @WorMartiN The language is very familiar to me. What confuses me is the fact that it’s completely detached from any of my criticisms on the topic.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055556675585875968

  • Continuing: –“..respect [for] western classics…”–. Does not include the prop

    Continuing: –“..respect [for] western classics…”–. Does not include the proposition (that Hicks or I would state) that this technique (Pilpul) is what separates anglo law, philosophy, and science, from platonism and continental ‘literary philosophy’ which rebelled against it.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-25 21:04:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055565826785468416

    Reply addressees: @PhilosophyCuck @MrKennan1948 @WorMartiN

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055556675585875968

    IN REPLY TO:

    @Jonas_Ceika

    @MrKennan1948 @curtdoolittle @WorMartiN The language is very familiar to me. What confuses me is the fact that it’s completely detached from any of my criticisms on the topic.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055556675585875968

  • Well, the purpose of Propertarian Constitution is to not only to eliminate false

    Well, the purpose of Propertarian Constitution is to not only to eliminate falsehood and immorality in public speech, but to de-financialize the economy, and de-politicize the population, so that we return to the production of eugenic norms rather than dysgenic institutional enforcement in opposition to those norms. The opposition does not want that of course. They want Power of Dysgenia.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-25 12:33:00 UTC

  • THE VIA NEGATIVA OF LAW (AND THE METHOD IN GENERAL) —“Curt: By stating it’s la

    THE VIA NEGATIVA OF LAW (AND THE METHOD IN GENERAL)

    —“Curt: By stating it’s law that made western virtues, are you not only offering half of the story here? “—

    —“…If I see someone being raped,

    but do nothing to help….”—

    Then by law, “You failed to remove the bad”.

    Incremental Suppression: the discovery and canonization of ‘bads’ (violations of reciprocity) by use of the one law of reciprocity (tort), the jury, and an independent professional judiciary, provides the most rapid means possible of continuous incremental suppressions of free riding, parasitism, and predation

    The Natural Law of Reciprocity: the demand for Productive, Fully Informed, Warrantied, Voluntary Transfer of Demonstrated Interests (property), Free of Imposition of Costs upon the Demonstrated Interests (property) of others by externality.

    —“..confusion..”—

    Remove the bad: Every man a warrior, sheriff, juror, legislator of the one natural law of reciprocity.

    —“You’re conflating “good””—

    Anything that is not bad is good. Bads can be known. The preferential, the good (reciprocal preferential), are preferences. Whether they are preference or good is an opinion. Whether they are ‘bad’ and a violation of reciprocity is not an opinion. It is a fact (by Logical Necessity).

    —“Sacrifices”–

    No animal, including humans, demonstrates altruism, only kin selection, option buying, status acquisition (opportunity gain and discount), and reciprocity (debt) payment against status loss (and therefore opportunity loss). We cast this self interest as virtuous in order to acquire more of such behavior by grant of status to heroic display.

    —“…being good…”—

    Man is, by all evidence, amoral – preying upon or cooperating with as suits his self interest. Given a long time frame, it is in one’s self interest to cooperate because of the outsized returns on cooperation versus predation and boycott. One is ‘virtuous’ because all ‘virtues’ decrease the opportunity costs of cooperation and provide discounts on those higher returns. The fact that we attribute status (pay for with opportunity discounts [trust, recommendation, referrals], is merely compensation (investment) in the production of reciprocity by those with most evidence of it.

    |WESTERN CIVILIZATION| Transcendence (Evolutionary Velocity) via Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth and Duty, The judiciary of the natural law, and the consequential markets in everything. Where there the militia constitutions a private partnership and there is no state to perform the function of insurer of last resort, every man demonstrate reciprocity by performing the function of insurer of last resort.

    QUOD ERAT DEMONSTRANDUM

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-25 10:10:00 UTC

  • THE CHALLENGE OF ACTING AS PROSECUTOR

    October 23rd, 2018 3:56 PM THE CHALLENGE OF ACTING AS PROSECUTOR

    —I may seem like kind of an asshole but my REAL problem is generally not going hard enough. I give people too much benefit of the doubt. I give them too many chances. As a result. They hurt others.”— Ely Harman

    —“People confuse you being right with you being an asshole.”— Alba Rising

    [W]e don’t need prosecutors to be nice. We need them to produce justice: Restitution, Correction, and Prevention.