Curt Doolittle

Category: Natural Law and Reciprocity

  • LOWER ORDER / HIGHER ORDER In my work I use the incremental, evolutionary, suppr

    LOWER ORDER / HIGHER ORDER

    In my work I use the incremental, evolutionary, suppression of parasitism in all its forms via natural judge discovered common law, as a means of causing the gradual increase in trust, and the gradual increase in the production of goods, at gradually increasing rates. (you can see this in Fukuyama’s work as well, although as an asian he prefers the monopoly bureaucracy instead of the western model of a market of sovereigns under the common law of sovereigns.)

    So I refer to higher orders as those with higher trust (lower corruption) and the corresponding institutions.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-27 08:22:00 UTC

  • WE ALL GO THE SAME ROUTE … Classical liberal > libertarian > anarcho capitalis

    WE ALL GO THE SAME ROUTE …

    Classical liberal > libertarian > anarcho capitalism > neo reactionary > Sovereignty (Natural Law Nomocracy) – ie: “Propertarianism”.

    Sovereignty: the oath of the initiatic brotherhood of warriors.

    (A simple sequence: the evolution of in one’s belief in the nature of man: from 1-enlightenment hopeful, 2-mid 20th century frustrated, to 3-late 2000’s resigned, to 4-current committed-to-action)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-25 17:16:00 UTC

  • (excerpt) ***And from there we will realize that preferences do not coincide, an

    (excerpt)

    ***And from there we will realize that preferences do not coincide, and so regardless of TRUTH or PREFERENCE the only actions we can take that are True, moral, and preferable are those that constitute productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchanges, limited to productive externalities.

    And it is that last sentence that is the basis of western civilization, and the single principle from which it all evolved.

    The jeffersonian, anglo-saxon, germanic, aryan, indo-european oath of reciprocity under sovereignty: the oath of the intiatic brotherhood of warriors. …. Not soldiers, warriors.***

    We unfortunately, imprecisely, call this oath and brotherhood “aristocratic egalitarianism”. Which obscures its causality.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-25 14:31:00 UTC

  • WHAT’S “FAIR”? Q&A: What is ‘fair’ or ‘unfair’? — Jason Cockrell Fair (moral):

    WHAT’S “FAIR”?

    Q&A: What is ‘fair’ or ‘unfair’? — Jason Cockrell

    Fair (moral): reciprocity. meaning actions limited to (a) productive, (b) fully informed, (c) warrantied, (d) voluntary transfers, (e) limited to productive externalities.

    This prohibits profiting from another’s loss, and the construction of hazards: parasitism.

    It’s an easier comparison when we think of adult vs child (asymmetry of knowledge and understanding). We tend to be more ‘ok’ with fucking over other adults. We are not ‘ok’ with fucking over children.

    But this is because we falsely consider other adults ‘equal’ or ‘peers’ under christianity and the enlightenment. When in fact, the adult-child disparity in knowledge and understanding increases rapidly in a division of knowledge, and labor.

    I was taught ‘noblesse oblige’ which is that we don’t take advantage of the lower classes, but we hold those above us to the same standard we hold ourselves to in relation to those below us.

    Judgement flows downhill, and so does forgiveness. The ignorant cannot judge and since they cannot judge they cannot forgive.

    Hence the value of christianity in creating divisions of knowledge and labor.

    Christianity + Aristocracy is a good combination. Forgive because you cannot judge, and take responsibility, because you can judge.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-23 09:56:00 UTC

  • ARE MORAL CODES MORAL? Q&A: —“Are moral codes moral?”—Fredrick George Welfar

    ARE MORAL CODES MORAL?

    Q&A: —“Are moral codes moral?”—Fredrick George Welfare

    A difference between normative, descriptive, and necessary ethics.

    NEGATIVA: Necessary ethics are moral (true),

    EXISTENTIAL: Descriptive (how they are practiced) exist.

    POSITIVA: Normative ethics (how we imagine they should be practiced).(theoretical)

    This terminology is confusing because existential ethics are in evidence as ‘norms’, and normative ethics are not those that are practiced as norms, but the study of what should perhaps be practiced as norms. I prefer “Necessary, Descriptive, and Theoretical.”

    To make mattes worse, existing ethical systems (norms) consist of portfolio of various ‘contracts’, any provision of which my be immoral but in concert, when practiced produce moral ends (or not). The same goes for the combination of moral provisions, can produce immoral ends (although this is harder.)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-21 05:39:00 UTC

  • LIBERTY, FREEDOM AND SUBSIDY VIA NEGATIVA: NON INTERFERENCE WITH SOVEREIGNTY Sov

    LIBERTY, FREEDOM AND SUBSIDY VIA NEGATIVA: NON INTERFERENCE WITH SOVEREIGNTY

    Sovereignty requires no liberty. Liberty requires permission of the sovereigns. Freedom permission of both. And subsidy so desirable by women and the underclasses is only available by the success of all three.

    Ergo, liberty and ‘libertarianism’ are sandwich-board signs worn by beggars.

    If you want an condition of liberty, the only way to obtain it is through sovereignty, and the only way to obtain sovereignty is with violence. And the only way to obtain sufficient violence to construct a condition of sovereignty, is ally with others who equally desire sovereignty.

    If you want subsidy, freedom, or liberty, then the only solution is to at least not interfere with the production of sovereignty.

    Why? Because rule is a profitable, honorable, moral, heroic occupation the consequences of which determine the outcome of not just nations, but civilizations – and all of mankind.

    I do not begrudge payment to my betters in exchange for liberty or freedom or subsidy. I begrudge only those payments which deny me the privileges of sovereignty I pay for: liberty, freedom, and subsidy

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-18 15:10:00 UTC

  • CLEARING THE MARKET FOR CONFLICT WITH VIOLENCE One of Eli Harman’s most importan

    CLEARING THE MARKET FOR CONFLICT WITH VIOLENCE

    One of Eli Harman’s most important contributions to Propertarianism is the insight that violence functions as a market clearing mechanism for disputes, just as cooperation forms a market clearing mechanism for agreements.

    –“Violence is the means of expressing the subjective evaluations not captured by price signals, which are as vast and varied as those which are.”—Eli Harman

    Define “Market Clearing?”

    The application of a concept from economics to cooperation proper:

    “That which restores disequilibrium to equilibrium.”

    In economics we state a market has been cleared when supply=demand: meaning no ‘problem’ exists for the market to calculate.

    You can solve political problems by agreement or physical conflict. They are all solvable. You can clear the market for cooperation or the market for conflict. Both markets are clearable.

    Via Negativa in Everything.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-17 18:35:00 UTC

  • Law of Nature, Natural Law, Moral Literature, Mythology, Spirituality, & Dreams

    Law of Nature, Natural Law, Moral Literature, Mythology, Spirituality, & Dreams.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-17 10:38:00 UTC

  • No one can fight in the sheriffs, militia, military, for you. Fighting is a non-

    No one can fight in the sheriffs, militia, military, for you. Fighting is a non-substitutable good. If for no other reason than you cannot perform restitution for losses incurred. Compensation perhaps. But never restitution. If you cannot perform restitution then the good is not substitutable.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-15 17:46:00 UTC

  • THAT WHICH IS NOT BAD, BUT IS A DEMONSTRATED PREFERENCE, IS GOOD. Bill Joslin: –

    THAT WHICH IS NOT BAD, BUT IS A DEMONSTRATED PREFERENCE, IS GOOD.

    Bill Joslin: —“defining by POSITIVA does not distinguish the necessary and essential. But by NEGATIVA – the removal of properties/operations – we identify the essentials because if the essential is removed the term is no longer possible…this is why you say operational consistency shows what is possible.. not there yet. I’ll sit with it.”—

    Bingo. Ying/Yang, Communication/Criticism, Free-Association-Hypothesis/Theory-Law, Art-Literature-Religion/Natural-Law, Cooperation/ConflictAvoidance, Negativa/Positiva. Opportunities/Morality.

    Convey the idea, and then subtract the falsehoods.

    Truth cannot be conveyed or testified to without both.

    Balance is bad. That’s asian. It’s one of the reasons for their failure.

    We practice innovation. That which is not bad, and is chosen as an action, must be good for at least the person who chose it.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-15 13:50:00 UTC