Curt Doolittle

Category: Politics, Power, and Governance

  • Q: Define Power Distance

    Q: DEFINE POWER DISTANCE (definitions)

    —“Would someone please robustly define power distance?”— Micky Callahan

    Power distance refers to the relationship between those in power and the subordinates in a society where lower ranking individuals depending on the high or low power distance culture react to that authority. Simple checklist (Doolittle): 1 – How many layers are between you and political decision makers. 2 – How many people are competing for their attention? 3 – How contradictory are the competitors demands to yours? 4 – How how likely are political decision makers to reflect anyone’s interest other than their own? Links via Paul Bard 1. Power Distance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_distance 2. Power distance Index

    Power Distance Index
    3. Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hofstede’s_cultural_dimensions_theory?

  • Q: Define Power Distance

    Q: DEFINE POWER DISTANCE (definitions)

    —“Would someone please robustly define power distance?”— Micky Callahan

    Power distance refers to the relationship between those in power and the subordinates in a society where lower ranking individuals depending on the high or low power distance culture react to that authority. Simple checklist (Doolittle): 1 – How many layers are between you and political decision makers. 2 – How many people are competing for their attention? 3 – How contradictory are the competitors demands to yours? 4 – How how likely are political decision makers to reflect anyone’s interest other than their own? Links via Paul Bard 1. Power Distance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_distance 2. Power distance Index

    Power Distance Index
    3. Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hofstede’s_cultural_dimensions_theory?

  • Our Purpose, Our Control

    Our Purpose, Our Control https://propertarianism.com/2020/04/23/our-purpose-our-control/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-23 19:56:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253412538424807426

  • Our Purpose, Our Control

    OUR PURPOSE, OUR CONTROL He who can defend a thing, owns a thing. He who can destroy a thing controls a thing. The men who can defend or destroy, always own and control things. The question is only whether they act to control things they own. This is why a universal militia is required to produce rule of law – the power to deny power. And this is why only western man has rule of law – individual sovereignty. And with the introduction of metal, the spear, then the sword, then the bow, then the rifle, the militia increasingly obtained power, to deny power. The purpose of the militia is to create the power to deny power, so that no one else has the power to control things or destroy things – leaving only sovereignty and reciprocity under the natural law as means of survival. Therefore the host of men must exercise control of things in order to prevent control of things, leaving only the natural law, and and the markets for reciprocity within them.

  • Our Purpose, Our Control

    OUR PURPOSE, OUR CONTROL He who can defend a thing, owns a thing. He who can destroy a thing controls a thing. The men who can defend or destroy, always own and control things. The question is only whether they act to control things they own. This is why a universal militia is required to produce rule of law – the power to deny power. And this is why only western man has rule of law – individual sovereignty. And with the introduction of metal, the spear, then the sword, then the bow, then the rifle, the militia increasingly obtained power, to deny power. The purpose of the militia is to create the power to deny power, so that no one else has the power to control things or destroy things – leaving only sovereignty and reciprocity under the natural law as means of survival. Therefore the host of men must exercise control of things in order to prevent control of things, leaving only the natural law, and and the markets for reciprocity within them.

  • Define how You Use the Term Socialism.

      Define how you use the term socialism. I’m assuming you mean european socialism (french-german) not jewish socialism (jewish russian). Socialism means state control of the means of production. Mixed economy means using the borrowing power of the state to strategically finance what the private sector cannot or will not. My opinion is the same as most major economists – that the state does not capture the proceeds of those investments and return them to the common people. My opinion is that we should finance repatriation of all non-trivial industry AND automate the heck out of it, and that the state should take non-voting interest in these companies and demand dividends as income for the people. My opinion is that the financial sector is predatory and that consumer credit should be purely statistical and direct from the treasury eliminating all rent seeking from the financial sector. My opinion is that liquidity necessary to generate demand should not be distributed to the financial sector for credit multipliers, but as cash distribution directly to citizens that business and finance compete for. My opinion is that education is largely wasted income other than the high end stem fields, and that all other schooling takes one year to two years non-resident at most. My opinion is that teaching and research staffs should be separate corporations with separate controls, and that phd and research programs should be well funded and largely state funded. My opinion is that the military used to fund basic research, and that presently, basic research must be faked under medical or non-military, when in general the state should treat investment in research as a venture capitalists, seeking returns for the polity in longer time horizons than other peoples. My opinion is that the best education in the world should be offered to all citizens from the best educators in the world, and that this should be a continuous process, and it should cost almost nothing (200 per course or something) My opinion is that if universities admit students that if the student doesn’t compete two years or transfer the university eats the money. And that the university carries the loan entirely, even if the loan is borrow by the university from the government. My opinion is that if we did this we’d be back to one income households just fine.

  • Define how You Use the Term Socialism.

      Define how you use the term socialism. I’m assuming you mean european socialism (french-german) not jewish socialism (jewish russian). Socialism means state control of the means of production. Mixed economy means using the borrowing power of the state to strategically finance what the private sector cannot or will not. My opinion is the same as most major economists – that the state does not capture the proceeds of those investments and return them to the common people. My opinion is that we should finance repatriation of all non-trivial industry AND automate the heck out of it, and that the state should take non-voting interest in these companies and demand dividends as income for the people. My opinion is that the financial sector is predatory and that consumer credit should be purely statistical and direct from the treasury eliminating all rent seeking from the financial sector. My opinion is that liquidity necessary to generate demand should not be distributed to the financial sector for credit multipliers, but as cash distribution directly to citizens that business and finance compete for. My opinion is that education is largely wasted income other than the high end stem fields, and that all other schooling takes one year to two years non-resident at most. My opinion is that teaching and research staffs should be separate corporations with separate controls, and that phd and research programs should be well funded and largely state funded. My opinion is that the military used to fund basic research, and that presently, basic research must be faked under medical or non-military, when in general the state should treat investment in research as a venture capitalists, seeking returns for the polity in longer time horizons than other peoples. My opinion is that the best education in the world should be offered to all citizens from the best educators in the world, and that this should be a continuous process, and it should cost almost nothing (200 per course or something) My opinion is that if universities admit students that if the student doesn’t compete two years or transfer the university eats the money. And that the university carries the loan entirely, even if the loan is borrow by the university from the government. My opinion is that if we did this we’d be back to one income households just fine.

  • We Are All Turning to The Masculine Defense of Our Peoples and Cultures

    We Are All Turning to The Masculine Defense of Our Peoples and Cultures https://propertarianism.com/2020/04/23/we-are-all-turning-to-the-masculine-defense-of-our-peoples-and-cultures/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-23 19:50:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253410912792244225

  • THE STATE AS A MONOPOLY ON VIOLENCE IS EVIDENTLY FALSE The westphalian peace res

    THE STATE AS A MONOPOLY ON VIOLENCE IS EVIDENTLY FALSE

    The westphalian peace resulted in the demand between states that the state maintain a monopoly on violence. The muslims do the opposite and ended the westphalian peace.

    The state cannot in fact and never has had, a monopoly on violence. It still doesn’t. It just tries. What defines a state is not it’s monopoly on violence but it’s capacity to produce the incentives that produce order with violence among those incentives.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-23 13:58:00 UTC

  • DISAMBIGUATION OF GOVERNMENT (BANKRUPTCY) 1. Military > State > Government > Com

    DISAMBIGUATION OF GOVERNMENT (BANKRUPTCY)

    1. Military > State > Government > Commons > institutions-organization

    2. Rule of Law > Law > Courts > Contracts > Biz-trade

    3. Strategy+Tradition > Religion+Education+Academy+Media > Families/Consumers > People-consumption

    State (corporation holding assets)

    1. Federal State -> Federal Government

    2. … Regional State -> Regional Government

    3. … … Territorial: County Corporation -> County Government

    4. … … Market: Local Corporation -> Local Government

    If a state declares bankruptcy the creditors get screwed all or partly. The state has demonstrated incompetence in the management of state affairs, and then the creditors will seek higher interest rates in the future, and after a cycle or two governments ‘learn’ partly because they have evidence of the consequences after bankruptcy and no evidence prior to bankruptcy – just as we now have evidence of immigration, diversity, monetary policy, and democracy – evidence of failure seems to be necessary to prevent repetition of human hubris.

    The state as a monopoly on violence is evidently false because it was a construct of the westphalian peace. At present it’s falsified, just as it was prior to the westphalian peace. In other words it was always false.

    The state is a corporation. The institutions organize the use of assets. The owners of that corporation consist of a small number of people willing to use sufficient violence to prevent alternative organizations of institutions and assets. The people who govern may or may not constitute sufficient violence to do so.

    Usually they don’t. In china they do. In russia they do. Because the fear of chaos in those countries is the opposite of the love of opportunity in NE European civilizations. – something the rest of the world cannot comprehend – because they never developed trust or commons … as we did.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-23 12:07:00 UTC