Curt Doolittle

Category: Natural Law and Reciprocity

  • Rights Aren’t Cheap – the Plan

    Rights Aren’t Cheap – the Plan https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/10/rights-arent-cheap-the-plan/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-10 16:44:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1259524752684785664

  • Rights Aren’t Cheap – the Plan

    —“I’m gunna be a d__k for a moment. Wouldn’t a reduction in furthering this movement due to you having to take care of your mother be considered “not bearing the cost”? its not bearing the cost of “losing mother” in order “to fight”. Not meaning to make this personal – only pointing at the bullshit of these types of “do it for the cause” virtue/purity signals. … its really just a subtle “no true scotsman” and a kick in the teeth when done in the absence of acknowledging the costs already born by those that support your vision.”—Wayne Righton

    Good and honest question. I have no problem making that hard choice, and no problem dying for the cause. The truth is it’s strategically optimum to live in country, to maintain an out of country residence, have no assets in-country, to have no ‘entanglements’ and to be able to go fully mobile on a moment’s notice from within country. Otherwise I would have brought a certain ukrainian woman here, or returned to ukraine – because i’d be a lot happier doing biz and living a normal life, than working on this revolution and house-sitting the elderly from a backwater. At present I have a pretty concrete plan. We need enough gov’t employees back at work. (they are) We want some men still out of work (they will be). We want the president fearful of losing the election (he will be). We want stress from that anxiety to spread (it will) I need a ‘dramatic’ way of issuing the ‘proposal’ of settlement, but will seize any opportunity I can (three options). And I need enough people to show up so that the first phase works, and escalates to the second phase (that’s your problem). Aside from that: What evidence do you have that I don’t think things thru? 😉 Nothing is perfect. Nothing is fail safe. But we can make sure many people know the ‘offer’ ahead of time, then we’re fine. We don’t want to go early. We want to go at the last possible minute seizing the greatest opportunity for stress prior to the election. The optimum arrangement would be that we get enough traction to get a few players in the conservative media on board with the plan so that they voluntarily or out of necessity explain our ‘just’ position. What’s the worst that will happen? First try won’t be successful but will have been the most successful publicity action since Boston’s fight with the Redcoats. What’s the best that will happen? it will work and the entire world will shake, and the chaos that results will bring everyone to the table. What’s better than that? The conservatives adopt the platform. Now flip it around: I’m paying a huge cost (and so are my investors by the way.) If you’re dumb enough to both be in a vulnerable position AND use your real name so that you can pay some external loss then that’s your choice. Plenty of people don’t. If you think I’m writing another ideology, then you’re wasting your time and mine. If you want emotional, moral, and intellectual sedation by some narrative that makes you feel justified then you’re wasting your time and mine. I switched from intellectual to revolutionary when I was divorced raped, then procedurally nearly put out of business by manipulation of the court, then when the state sold my company’s bank but guaranteed the loans, so that the bank was incentivized to put us out of business, then Obama made it clear he was out to unify the left against my people, and then my own government tried to criminalize having made and honest living, by shutting down overseas banking, and then when for a simple error on a tax form where the state owed me hundreds of thousands, they nearly killed my business. I’m tired of lack of juridical defense. I’m tired of a genocide against my people. I’m tired of the second destruction of western civilization by the same means. And I’m tired of an enemy among us reveling in our naivety and tolerance. So man the F-k up. Shut the f-k up. Show the F-k up. And if you’re not here for the revolution, don’t waste the time of the men who are. Restoration of our rights as ‘Englishmen’. The rights made and rights we have fought to maintain for centuries. And if you don’t man up, shut up, and show up, then you don’t deserve those rights.

  • Rights Aren’t Cheap – the Plan

    —“I’m gunna be a d__k for a moment. Wouldn’t a reduction in furthering this movement due to you having to take care of your mother be considered “not bearing the cost”? its not bearing the cost of “losing mother” in order “to fight”. Not meaning to make this personal – only pointing at the bullshit of these types of “do it for the cause” virtue/purity signals. … its really just a subtle “no true scotsman” and a kick in the teeth when done in the absence of acknowledging the costs already born by those that support your vision.”—Wayne Righton

    Good and honest question. I have no problem making that hard choice, and no problem dying for the cause. The truth is it’s strategically optimum to live in country, to maintain an out of country residence, have no assets in-country, to have no ‘entanglements’ and to be able to go fully mobile on a moment’s notice from within country. Otherwise I would have brought a certain ukrainian woman here, or returned to ukraine – because i’d be a lot happier doing biz and living a normal life, than working on this revolution and house-sitting the elderly from a backwater. At present I have a pretty concrete plan. We need enough gov’t employees back at work. (they are) We want some men still out of work (they will be). We want the president fearful of losing the election (he will be). We want stress from that anxiety to spread (it will) I need a ‘dramatic’ way of issuing the ‘proposal’ of settlement, but will seize any opportunity I can (three options). And I need enough people to show up so that the first phase works, and escalates to the second phase (that’s your problem). Aside from that: What evidence do you have that I don’t think things thru? 😉 Nothing is perfect. Nothing is fail safe. But we can make sure many people know the ‘offer’ ahead of time, then we’re fine. We don’t want to go early. We want to go at the last possible minute seizing the greatest opportunity for stress prior to the election. The optimum arrangement would be that we get enough traction to get a few players in the conservative media on board with the plan so that they voluntarily or out of necessity explain our ‘just’ position. What’s the worst that will happen? First try won’t be successful but will have been the most successful publicity action since Boston’s fight with the Redcoats. What’s the best that will happen? it will work and the entire world will shake, and the chaos that results will bring everyone to the table. What’s better than that? The conservatives adopt the platform. Now flip it around: I’m paying a huge cost (and so are my investors by the way.) If you’re dumb enough to both be in a vulnerable position AND use your real name so that you can pay some external loss then that’s your choice. Plenty of people don’t. If you think I’m writing another ideology, then you’re wasting your time and mine. If you want emotional, moral, and intellectual sedation by some narrative that makes you feel justified then you’re wasting your time and mine. I switched from intellectual to revolutionary when I was divorced raped, then procedurally nearly put out of business by manipulation of the court, then when the state sold my company’s bank but guaranteed the loans, so that the bank was incentivized to put us out of business, then Obama made it clear he was out to unify the left against my people, and then my own government tried to criminalize having made and honest living, by shutting down overseas banking, and then when for a simple error on a tax form where the state owed me hundreds of thousands, they nearly killed my business. I’m tired of lack of juridical defense. I’m tired of a genocide against my people. I’m tired of the second destruction of western civilization by the same means. And I’m tired of an enemy among us reveling in our naivety and tolerance. So man the F-k up. Shut the f-k up. Show the F-k up. And if you’re not here for the revolution, don’t waste the time of the men who are. Restoration of our rights as ‘Englishmen’. The rights made and rights we have fought to maintain for centuries. And if you don’t man up, shut up, and show up, then you don’t deserve those rights.

  • Reciprocity in every thing. 😉

    Reciprocity in every thing. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-09 21:50:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1259239240443080704

    Reply addressees: @PaulssonRussell

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1259238417184874496

  • Is It True You Need a High Iq for P? (no)

    Apr 27, 2020, 9:37 AM

    —“If I remember correctly, you once stated that an IQ of 120 is required as a bare minimum for having the most basic understanding of Propertarianism. Is this correct? Be honest”—Korey Savoie

    I almost wouldn’t answer this because of ‘be honest’. WTF do you think I do all day? At great personal cost. lol 😉 THE INFLUENCE OF IQ 1 – IQ determines time and effort in learning something. 2 – Cost benefit prediction determines willingness to invest time and effort in learning the subject. 3 – Cost benefit prediction determines willingness to invest in the time and effort of assisting others in their learning of the subject. So when I say “You need x IQ to understand P” it’s in the context of learning the METHOD along with the group. The 140/150+ crowd can do it quickly. Others not. It is very hard to explain and apply the method. That seems to be a 130/140 requirement. But pretty much anyone can understand everything up to applying it, and I’m not sure other than theoretical mathematicians will understand the underlying logic. UNDERSTAND WHAT PART OF THE PROJECT? EVERYONE The psychology (acquisition) sociology (compatibilism), the Ethics (basic reciprocity, telling the truth), and politics (optimum government)? MOST EVERYONE The foundations of western civ in natural law? The group strategies of different civilizations? The history? The JQ/20th C attack on our civ? SOME The method? Reciprocity? Testimony, the grammars? The legal method? Strict construction of law? The constitution? FEW Applying and arguing with the method VERY FEW The operational description of brain and consciousness? The logical foundations? The geometry of thought?

    —“Excellent. For some reason I thought you or Bill or Brandon posted a few months ago that an IQ of 120 was required just to scratch the surface. I haven’t been tested, but I assumed mine to be somewhere in the 100-109.”— Korey Savoie

    It’s because if someone ARGUES with us, that requires we resort to using the METHOD and if they can’t use the method we can’t conduct an argument. So we can understand what it tells us, vs understand how to use it. You don’t need to undrestand calculus to understand most statistical diagrams. You do if you want to argue against those diagrams. You don’t need to understand operationalism to undrestand the findings of operational analysis using P-law. You do if you want to argue against those findings. Understanding WHAT vs understanding HOW.

  • Apr 27, 2020, 10:07 PM —“Can you describe the difference between P and Bakunin

    Apr 27, 2020, 10:07 PM

    —“Can you describe the difference between P and Bakunin anarchy. Just reading something and the description seemed very similar to P but seems to simply lack the formalism around reciprocity.—-

    P is a method. I use the P-method to explain all group strategies, religions, political systems, and moral intuitions. I use P to recommend the optimum political system that has ever been formed – rule of law by natural law. I dunno why you would pick Bakunin. This is Bakunin’s fantasy:

    –“The liberty of man consists solely in this, that he obeys the laws of nature because he has himself recognized them as such, and not because they have been imposed upon him externally by any foreign will whatsoever, human or divine, collective or individual.”–Bakunin

    What is true instead?

    1. Man desires consumption, consumption is increased by opportunity, and opportunity is increased by liberty, but so is irresponsibility. And so is free riding, parasitism, fraud, crime, immigration, conversion, conquest, and genocide.
    2. The state evolved to incrementally suppress local parasitism decreasing local transaction costs, in exchange for paying taxes to pay the cost of decreasing local transaction costs. This made markets possible where only primitive trade previously existed.
    3. Man is amoral by nature, and pragmatic. By the institution of parenting, acculturation, indoctrination, training, laws, restitution, punishment, and prevention we invest in his domestication.
    4. Man develops theology, philosophy, ideologies, rationalizations, myths, fantasies, and various other forms of frauds, to attempt to obscure and justify his free riding, parasitism, fraud, crime, and organized crime.
    5. In order to produce the suppression of free riding, parasitism, fraud, crime, and organized crime, requires a power law of institutions of prevention, investigation, dispute resolution, prosecution, restitution, punishment and prevention.
    6. In order to produce a market requires a pareto distribution of assets, so that the organization of networks in an market can produce a complex division of labor and its returns without which the terms freedom and liberty have no meaning.
    7. In order to produce a society that tolerates market competition and the suppression of free riding, parasitism, fraud, crime, and organized crime, requires the resulting distribution of rewards satisfy a marginal nash equilibrium.
    8. Given three possible means of coercion: force-defense (Military-police, government), trade-boycott(commerce-law), and advocacy+insurance-undermining+ostracization(social,education,religion), elites will combine to use and misuse these skills in a competition.
    9. Given that Man varies greatly from barely human to superhuman in physical, social, and intellectual ability, and sexual, social, economic, political, and military value, and given the power, pareto, and nash necessities of distributions, man will sort by value to others by his value in those markets – producing networks of competing and overlapping hierarchies that we call sexual, social, economic, and political class.
    10. As such, rule of law and the independent judiciary provide a market for the suppression of not only individuals and groups of individuals, but elites in all three dimensions of elites, such that sovereignty, liberty and freedom are maintained DESPITE the presence of necessary hierarchies.

    So I consider bakunin like all other idiots as immature, adolescent, vain and ignorant consequences of the industrial revolution and the disregard for the hierarchies in elites of all resulted, and the that these vain, ignorant, immature, adolescent minds gave fertile soil for the false promise of pseudosciences and sophisms of the anti european sense making, and anti-european marxism, neo-marxism, neo-conservatism, libertarianism, postmodernism, feminism, and hbd-denial of the foundations of western civlization: that we used markets in everything to defeat regression to the mean by suppressing the reproduction of those that lacked ability to compete in the markets in the service of others. In other words, I view these well meaning fools as useful idiots in the destruction of western civlization. Which is how I pretty much view everyone.

  • Apr 27, 2020, 10:07 PM —“Can you describe the difference between P and Bakunin

    Apr 27, 2020, 10:07 PM

    —“Can you describe the difference between P and Bakunin anarchy. Just reading something and the description seemed very similar to P but seems to simply lack the formalism around reciprocity.—-

    P is a method. I use the P-method to explain all group strategies, religions, political systems, and moral intuitions. I use P to recommend the optimum political system that has ever been formed – rule of law by natural law. I dunno why you would pick Bakunin. This is Bakunin’s fantasy:

    –“The liberty of man consists solely in this, that he obeys the laws of nature because he has himself recognized them as such, and not because they have been imposed upon him externally by any foreign will whatsoever, human or divine, collective or individual.”–Bakunin

    What is true instead?

    1. Man desires consumption, consumption is increased by opportunity, and opportunity is increased by liberty, but so is irresponsibility. And so is free riding, parasitism, fraud, crime, immigration, conversion, conquest, and genocide.
    2. The state evolved to incrementally suppress local parasitism decreasing local transaction costs, in exchange for paying taxes to pay the cost of decreasing local transaction costs. This made markets possible where only primitive trade previously existed.
    3. Man is amoral by nature, and pragmatic. By the institution of parenting, acculturation, indoctrination, training, laws, restitution, punishment, and prevention we invest in his domestication.
    4. Man develops theology, philosophy, ideologies, rationalizations, myths, fantasies, and various other forms of frauds, to attempt to obscure and justify his free riding, parasitism, fraud, crime, and organized crime.
    5. In order to produce the suppression of free riding, parasitism, fraud, crime, and organized crime, requires a power law of institutions of prevention, investigation, dispute resolution, prosecution, restitution, punishment and prevention.
    6. In order to produce a market requires a pareto distribution of assets, so that the organization of networks in an market can produce a complex division of labor and its returns without which the terms freedom and liberty have no meaning.
    7. In order to produce a society that tolerates market competition and the suppression of free riding, parasitism, fraud, crime, and organized crime, requires the resulting distribution of rewards satisfy a marginal nash equilibrium.
    8. Given three possible means of coercion: force-defense (Military-police, government), trade-boycott(commerce-law), and advocacy+insurance-undermining+ostracization(social,education,religion), elites will combine to use and misuse these skills in a competition.
    9. Given that Man varies greatly from barely human to superhuman in physical, social, and intellectual ability, and sexual, social, economic, political, and military value, and given the power, pareto, and nash necessities of distributions, man will sort by value to others by his value in those markets – producing networks of competing and overlapping hierarchies that we call sexual, social, economic, and political class.
    10. As such, rule of law and the independent judiciary provide a market for the suppression of not only individuals and groups of individuals, but elites in all three dimensions of elites, such that sovereignty, liberty and freedom are maintained DESPITE the presence of necessary hierarchies.

    So I consider bakunin like all other idiots as immature, adolescent, vain and ignorant consequences of the industrial revolution and the disregard for the hierarchies in elites of all resulted, and the that these vain, ignorant, immature, adolescent minds gave fertile soil for the false promise of pseudosciences and sophisms of the anti european sense making, and anti-european marxism, neo-marxism, neo-conservatism, libertarianism, postmodernism, feminism, and hbd-denial of the foundations of western civlization: that we used markets in everything to defeat regression to the mean by suppressing the reproduction of those that lacked ability to compete in the markets in the service of others. In other words, I view these well meaning fools as useful idiots in the destruction of western civlization. Which is how I pretty much view everyone.

  • I’m not against anyone.

    May 2, 2020, 2:14 PM

    I”m not against anyone. But you’re either integrating into the militia, the natural law, duty reciprocity and truth, markets in everything, trifunctionalism, optimum government, and evolutionary necessity or you’re not only undermining western civlization, but mankind, and you’re not only depriving those of us who inherited all those institutions from self determination but leaving us no choice but war.

  • I’m not against anyone.

    May 2, 2020, 2:14 PM

    I”m not against anyone. But you’re either integrating into the militia, the natural law, duty reciprocity and truth, markets in everything, trifunctionalism, optimum government, and evolutionary necessity or you’re not only undermining western civlization, but mankind, and you’re not only depriving those of us who inherited all those institutions from self determination but leaving us no choice but war.

  • YOu don’t understand the word law. He gave dictates. Westerners have law Rule of

    YOu don’t understand the word law.
    He gave dictates.
    Westerners have law
    Rule of law: Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Jury, And the single natural law of tort we call ‘property’. Where else is there such law today? Anywhere? The primitives are still catching up.
    Why? Endemic lying

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-09 01:51:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1258937683239370764

    Reply addressees: @niceprinter12 @healingbyhenry @sunkiisss

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1258936982371209217