Curt Doolittle

Category: Law, Constitution, and Jurisprudence

  • Then Pay for it rather than cause a war, break the postwar consensus, break peac

    Then Pay for it rather than cause a war, break the postwar consensus, break peace of westphalia.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-26 20:59:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/802617690800136194

    Reply addressees: @GorskyDmitry @nntaleb @FamesBlond @RT_com

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/802533839243542528

    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/802533839243542528

  • Thankfully we don’t judge people criminals on their sincerity of their intention

    Thankfully we don’t judge people criminals on their sincerity of their intentions but the result of actions.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-26 01:20:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/802321108410236928

    Reply addressees: @digitalErmit @VonMacht @Salon

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/802312726286475264

    IN REPLY TO:

    @digitalErmit

    @curtdoolittle @VonMacht @Salon I’m not educated enough on them to tell. Now, I believe some of them were sincere and thoughtful.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/802312726286475264

  • Holding Status Issuers Liable

    HOLD THE NOBEL PRIZE COMMITTEE LIABLE FOR THEIR RATING SERVICE? Do you suppose we could make the Nobel Prize committee liable for the certification of pseudoscience? I think we could. Why not? I mean, for all intents and purposes, how is the Nobel Committee any different from the Mortgage Rating Services? Privatizing commons while socializing losses into the commons?  

  • Holding Status Issuers Liable

    HOLD THE NOBEL PRIZE COMMITTEE LIABLE FOR THEIR RATING SERVICE? Do you suppose we could make the Nobel Prize committee liable for the certification of pseudoscience? I think we could. Why not? I mean, for all intents and purposes, how is the Nobel Committee any different from the Mortgage Rating Services? Privatizing commons while socializing losses into the commons?  

  • How To Prosecute Rather Than Convince

    HOW TO PROSECUTE RATHER THAN CONVINCE We have moral cause (genocide). We have moral authority (a century of lies). We have sufficient violence. We have opportunity (loss of any credibility in the honesty of our opponents.)

    So, we have means, motive and opportunity. PROSECUTION 1) Prosecute people to demonstrate that they are liars and thieves. 2) Ask why they will not trade with you instead of lie, cheat and steal. 3) Tell them that if we disagree and they force no costs upon us, our kin, and our civilization, then that is merely an agreement to disagree. If they wish to trade what we wish for what they wish then that is merely an agreement to cooperate on means, even though we seek different ends. But if they will not respect what is ours and leave us in peace, will not compromise by trade, and instead seek to impose costs upon us, our kin, and our civilizations, by proxy via the force of government, or by deceit, or by conversion, or by invasion, or by violence, then it is only rational that we will resort ourselves to violence, displacement, deportation, enslavement, and truthfulness. We are left with no choice but to prosecute enemies by punishment, expulsion, enslavement, or death. This is what I mean by prosecution. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.

  • How To Prosecute Rather Than Convince

    HOW TO PROSECUTE RATHER THAN CONVINCE We have moral cause (genocide). We have moral authority (a century of lies). We have sufficient violence. We have opportunity (loss of any credibility in the honesty of our opponents.)

    So, we have means, motive and opportunity. PROSECUTION 1) Prosecute people to demonstrate that they are liars and thieves. 2) Ask why they will not trade with you instead of lie, cheat and steal. 3) Tell them that if we disagree and they force no costs upon us, our kin, and our civilization, then that is merely an agreement to disagree. If they wish to trade what we wish for what they wish then that is merely an agreement to cooperate on means, even though we seek different ends. But if they will not respect what is ours and leave us in peace, will not compromise by trade, and instead seek to impose costs upon us, our kin, and our civilizations, by proxy via the force of government, or by deceit, or by conversion, or by invasion, or by violence, then it is only rational that we will resort ourselves to violence, displacement, deportation, enslavement, and truthfulness. We are left with no choice but to prosecute enemies by punishment, expulsion, enslavement, or death. This is what I mean by prosecution. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.

  • “What about regulation? Can you offer an explanation in Propertarian terms?”—

    —“What about regulation? Can you offer an explanation in Propertarian terms?”— Jeremie Makell

    EXCELLENT QUESTION

    Law is discovered, contracts are constructed with terms. Regulations cannot exist unless provided by an insurer of the contract. So as far as I know only Discovered Law, Strictly constructed productive contract, and strictly constructed insurance contract, can exist.

    The reason the state ‘got into the regulatory business’ is that the primary function of the state has been as the insurer of last resort.

    My position is that the state implicitly insures by the court of law, all insurers within the domain.

    And that as the insurer of last resort, rescuing an insurer in the common interest, is accomplished by just another contract.

    A contract cannot be made without the ability to ensure restitution and reparation in case of failure.

    Under this model there is no agent that can issue regulations except the insurer. And as an insurer these are not ‘regulations’ but simply contract terms.

    So regulations cease to exist under propertarianism since only a monopoly can create regulations – and there exist no monopolies other than the monopoly of the one law of natural law of cooperation.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-23 19:29:00 UTC

  • The De-Professionalization of Information Distribution

    THE DE-PROFESSIONALIZATION OF INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION Little did they know what they were doing. But by removing the duel, libel, slander, and falsehood from the common law, the state eliminated warranty (skin in the game). And by the elimination of warranty under the law, converted a moral imperative captured in common law, to a moral imperative discarded in exchange for market profits. It was the elimination of duel, libel, slander, and falsehood under the assumption of a naturally moral man, and the catastrophe of free speech that made possible the war against the west: judaic cosmopolitanism, puritan postmodernism, french pseudoscientific moralism, and german pseudo-rationalism.

    THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF BUREAUCRACY: DE-PROFESSIONALIZATION AND LOSS OF WARRANTY (SKIN IN THE GAME)

  • The De-Professionalization of Information Distribution

    THE DE-PROFESSIONALIZATION OF INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION Little did they know what they were doing. But by removing the duel, libel, slander, and falsehood from the common law, the state eliminated warranty (skin in the game). And by the elimination of warranty under the law, converted a moral imperative captured in common law, to a moral imperative discarded in exchange for market profits. It was the elimination of duel, libel, slander, and falsehood under the assumption of a naturally moral man, and the catastrophe of free speech that made possible the war against the west: judaic cosmopolitanism, puritan postmodernism, french pseudoscientific moralism, and german pseudo-rationalism.

    THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF BUREAUCRACY: DE-PROFESSIONALIZATION AND LOSS OF WARRANTY (SKIN IN THE GAME)

  • THE DE-PROFESSIONALIZATION OF INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION Little did they know what

    THE DE-PROFESSIONALIZATION OF INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION

    Little did they know what they were doing. But by removing the duel, libel, slander, and falsehood from the common law, the state eliminated warranty (skin in the game). And by the elimination of warranty under the law, converted a moral imperative captured in common law, to a moral imperative discarded in exchange for market profits.

    It was the elimination of duel, libel, slander, and falsehood under the assumption of a naturally moral man, and the catastrophe of free speech that made possible the war against the west: judaic cosmopolitanism, puritan postmodernism, french pseudoscientific moralism, and german pseudo-rationalism.

    THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF BUREAUCRACY: DE-PROFESSIONALIZATION AND LOSS OF WARRANTY (SKIN IN THE GAME)

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-22 17:18:00 UTC