Curt Doolittle

Category: Politics, Power, and Governance

  • READ HOPPE TO UNDERSTAND “WHY MONARCHY?” by Scott De Warren ‘Democracy: The God

    READ HOPPE TO UNDERSTAND “WHY MONARCHY?”

    by Scott De Warren

    ‘Democracy: The God that Failed’ by Hoppe is available online and to help expand people’s thinking on monarchies.

    Also, it will help to know that the founding fathers originally intended to stay under the monarchy and that George Washington’s officers regularly toasted the health of the King.

    Their fight was with the King’s ministers in their mind . Even after the decision to break was made many of the officers and leaders were open to monarchy in the United States.

    Our enemies have greatly exaggerated the extent to which radical anti-monarchical elements played in the founding of our Republic. The military leaders wanted to make Washington king, but he declined in the face of the radical fringe democratic elements.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-12 11:02:00 UTC

  • “IT”S HARD TO GET ON BOARD WITH MONARCHY” I wasn’t on board with it either. It’s

    “IT”S HARD TO GET ON BOARD WITH MONARCHY”

    I wasn’t on board with it either. It’s just eventually I couldn’t deny it any longer.

    Constitutional monarchy with power of veto, termination of ministers, dissolution of parliament. That’s all.

    Monarchy = Kinship government, and Intergenerational Incentives, and capitalization rather than tragedy of the commons, and compensates for fashion, political, and procedural failure.

    The enemy wanted to end our monarchy to replace it with an organized crime family.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-12 09:53:00 UTC

  • VOTING —“Universal suffrage was a mistake…and practically everyone knew it w

    VOTING

    —“Universal suffrage was a mistake…and practically everyone knew it would have a great cost, but did it anyway because it’s “right”…the cost was exactly what they predicted it would be: the quality of civilization itself.”—Mike Harvey

    From Alexander Hamilton:

    —“It is also, undeniably, certain, that no Englishman, who can be deemed a free agent in a political view, can be bound by laws, to which he has not consented, either in person, or by his representative. Or, in other words, every Englishman (exclusive of the mercantile and trading part of the nation) who possesses a freehold, to the value of forty shillings per annum, has a right to a share in the legislature, which he exercises, by giving his vote in the election of some person, he approves of, as his representative.

    “The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own. If these persons had votes, they would be tempted to dispose of them, under some undue influence, or other. This would give a great, an artful, or a wealthy man, a larger share in elections, than is consistent with general liberty. If it were probable, that every man would give his vote, freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of Liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote, in electing those delegates, to whose charge is committed the disposal of his property, his liberty and life. But since that can hardly be expected, in persons of indigent fortunes, or such as are under the immediate dominion of others, all popular states have been obliged to establish certain qualifications, whereby, some who are suspected to have no will of their own, are excluded from voting; in order, to set other individuals, whose wills may be supposed independent, more thoroughly upon a level with each other.”

    Hence it appears, that such “of the people as have no vote in the choice of representatives, and therefore, are govern’d, by laws, to which they have not consented, either by themselves or by their representatives, are only those persons, who are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.” Every free agent, every free man, possessing a freehold of forty shillings per annum, is, by the British constitution, intitled to a vote, in the election of those who are invested with the disposal of his life, his liberty and property.”—

    Source:

    Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted, or A more impartial and comprehensive View of the Dispute between Great-Britain and the Colonies. . . . (New York, 1775), in Harold C. Syrett, ed., The Papers of Alexander Hamilton (New York: Columbia University Press, 1961-1979), 1:81-165.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-12 09:50:00 UTC

  • She had name recognition, but she went too far on policy, is too shrill, and whe

    She had name recognition, but she went too far on policy, is too shrill, and when people got to know her they didnt like her, and they don’t think she can win Foolish really. She knows the issues thoroughly. She can campaign. but not for president.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-12 08:35:31 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1227511538317217792

    Reply addressees: @BadgrGrl21

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1227413261110403072

    IN REPLY TO:

    @BadgrGrl21

    I love Elizabeth Warren, and I just don’t get what is going on with her support right now in these early states. I mean, Klobuchar over her??? I mean, WHAT?? #NHprimary2020 #NewHamshire https://t.co/2oHxgODDFx

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1227413261110403072

  • Feb 11, 2020, 10:03 PM

    https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/entrepreneur-andrew-yang-ends-bid-presidency/story?id=67499153https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/entrepreneur-andrew-yang-ends-bid-presidency/story?id=67499153Updated Feb 11, 2020, 10:03 PM

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-11 22:03:00 UTC

  • THE RIGHT TO SELF DETERMINATION We either have the right to self determination –

    THE RIGHT TO SELF DETERMINATION

    We either have the right to self determination – or we have the right to extermination. So choose. (I’m happy either way.)

    Genomes, genetic distributions, institutions, culture, traditions, norms, manners, ethics, morals, laws, history, myth, legend, monuments, territory, are all assets. Some assets are valuable. Some are not. Some are harmful. If we choose to preserve an asset, we do so.

    1) We know that moral intuition is genetic, sex biased, and that only trauma can change it – even then only slightly. We know that all traits are somewhere between 70-80% heritable and the rest is idiosyncratic accumulation rather than patterns of environment.

    2) We know that class is genetic, with lower classes accumulating more loads (defects), upper middle the fewest, and aside from noble families, the upper classes random lottery results from the middle – but otherwise there is little to no class rotation.

    3) We know that moral biases reflect female (herd, infant-equality, devotion, consumption) strategy and the male (pack, mature-hierarchy, loyalty, capitalization) instinct and that females use social superpredation by undermining, and males political superpredation by violence.

    4) We know that each of us is born with a bias in female (lateral breadth) vs male(longitudinal velocity) brain structures, and that the stereotype of male analytic and female empathic is physical construction, and that given freedom to do so we pursue interests fitting our bias.

    5) We know that at present we are wealthy enough to want to diverge by the female, empathic, equalitarian, consumptive, infantilized, and underdeveloped strategy and some by the male, analytic, hierarchical, capitalizing, and mature strategy. And so we must separate or civil war.

    6) Because while you are of the opinion that you reason, you have very little agency. And if you did, and you had knowledge, you would know that the female strategy is dysgenic, the left’s strategy is dysgenic, and standard of living is dependent on the center of the distribution.

    7) So if you want to feel harmony in suicide and bring about another dark age of ignorance, this time with social construction of the myth of possible equality, the only result of which will be dysgenia and decline – we are fine with it.

    But you can’t take the rest of us with you.

    8) Some of us are more than semi domesticated animals sensing, perceiving, feeling, experiencing intuiting, and responding to incentives to hyper consume.

    And some of us are willing to let you turn your cities into dysgenic favelas.

    Which is what we plan to let you do.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-11 17:34:00 UTC

  • Trump does not have congress to help with domestic organization. He has power to

    Trump does not have congress to help with domestic organization. He has power to alter trade, military, and diplomatic strategy. And with that alone he is about a third of the way to rebuilding america.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-11 16:15:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1227264954308399106

    Reply addressees: @AMCarbonaro @realDonaldTrump @SecPompeo

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1227233583695302656

    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/1227233583695302656

  • “WHY SHOULD YOU HAVE A VOTE?” If you have juridical defense in matters private a

    “WHY SHOULD YOU HAVE A VOTE?”

    If you have juridical defense in matters private and public, but haven’t served, aren’t financially independent and responsible for yourself, haven’t had a family that you are responsible for, don’t run a company whose employees and capital you are responsible for, or haven’t run an enterprise whose employees, capital, and patterns of trade you are responsible for, or run a state whose entire economy you are responsible for, then why do you have a vote in any of those matters without having demonstrated sufficient ability to successfully hold that responsibility?

    If you haven’t served then why do you have free speech, ownership of property?

    If you haven’t had replacement number of children, then why do you also have a vote in matters of commons?

    If you haven’t employed dozens, then why do you also have a vote in matters of the economy?

    If you haven’t employed tens of thousands, why do you have a vote in matters international?

    If you haven’t governed a state, then why do you have a vote in matters of the state?

    About 1/5-1/4 of the population is informed enough to make choices. The rest are either biased to a political party, or dependent upon filtering propaganda and opinions of friends and family. We are all capable of different levels of intellectual resolution whether by level of ability, level of interests, level of knowledge, or constitution of character.

    We do not have standing in matters public today – only private. The state deprived us of the user of courts in matters public – we had to invent class action to circumvent that deprivation.

    But If you have juridical defense, in matters BOTH private AND public – called ‘universal standing’ – then you have defense against harmed by others private and political.

    But aside from defense why should you have any opinion on anything over which you cannot demonstrate comprehension, success, and responsibility?

    All government action is limited to coercion, either by informing/lying, bribery/deprivation, or force/defense. It is only the rule of law of reciprocity, the judiciary, the monarchy, and the military as last resort, that protects us from abuse of those levers of coercion.

    Combine rule of law of reciprocity, with demonstrated investment and capacity for participation, with demand for truthful reciprocal speech, with houses of the classes, with a monarchy as a judge of last resort – and democracy can work.

    But universal unearned franchise, political parties, single house majoritarianism, and devolution from rule of law to rule by legislation (or even rule by discretion) has proven too vulnerable to baiting the ignorant and unaccountable into hazard with false promise of circumvention of nature’s necessity for markets in everything.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-11 13:52:00 UTC

  • “WHAT IS YOUR IDEOLOGY?” —“So, what is your political ideology? I mean I know

    “WHAT IS YOUR IDEOLOGY?”

    —“So, what is your political ideology? I mean I know you’re right wing. But, what are you? A Nationalist-Socialist or Libertarian Civic Nationalist?”— Amit Patel

    I am none of those things – all of which i consider excuses for obtaining power under democracy to circumvent markets. I am ‘right wing’ only in the sense that I am intolerant of violations of the laws of nature and the natural law of reciprocity.

    I am an Aryan(european branch of indo-europeans): transcendence of man into gods through competitive heroism, demonstrated excellence, speaking truth, and creating beauty.

    I am a European Sovereigntarian: Markets in everything: Let A Thousand Nations Bloom.

    I am an Aristotelian: Realism, Naturalism, Operationalism,

    I am a Jeffersonian libertarian: a written constitution of natural law, with transactional procedural modifications.

    I am a Constitutional Monarchist favoring multi-house governments as markets for the classes.

    I am a Manorialist: natural eugenics – home before children, family as the central unit of society, bring capital to people not people to capital.

    I am a Conservative: Bear your own costs, externalize no cost, purely empirical government, change by evidence not by hypothesis.

    I am a National(kinship) Socialist: direct the maximum proceeds to the production of capitalizing (not consumptive) commons.

    I am a Kinship Christian: humility in ones never ending pursuit of virtue, exhaust all opportunities for forgiveness before abandoning it, and demonstrate personal acts of charity at personal cost.

    I am a Kinship Pagan: we owe a debt to nature, our ancestors known and named, and known as heroes, and known only as archetypes (gods), and are responsible to them for preserving their investments in making us, just as those that follow us are responsible for preserving our investments in them.

    I am a universalist: any people that wishes european civilization’s benefits can adopt them if they try – or not if they choose not to.

    The Laws of Nature

    The Natural Law

    Self Determination

    Our Transcendence into gods

    Sovereignty to do so

    A Universal Militia

    The Oath of Reciprocal Insurance

    A constitution of the natural law

    Markets in association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, polities.

    A Judicial Priesthood

    A monarchy as a judge of last resort

    A Cabinet

    Houses for the classes (three or four)

    … Territory

    … Industry

    … Family

    … (Dependents)

    Local Priority in Legislation, regulation, norm.

    Professionalized (Privatized) Education

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-11 08:35:00 UTC

  • “WHAT’S YOUR VISION FOR POST MAJORITARIAN AMERICA, EUROPE, WESTERN CIVILIZATION?

    “WHAT’S YOUR VISION FOR POST MAJORITARIAN AMERICA, EUROPE, WESTERN CIVILIZATION?”

    —“Do you wish to implement a caste system in America? And, if so what would it be regarding: racial based or social status based?”—Amit Patel

    Are parties castes? No. Are tribes castes? no. Are classes castes? Close but no – a class is alterable by demonstrated behavior, but a caste isn’t.

    The reason for european success in the ancient and modern world is sovereignty, and sovereignty requires markets in every aspect of life, and markets produce continuous adaptation and evolution without political consensus and intervention.

    I want to create markets in everything, where we may not seek to circumvent those markets in display word or deed without severe consequences.

    In politics i want to recreate the market between the classes for the production of commons – using houses of the classes in the traditional British european model.

    And a market for polities that produce those commons suitable to the needs of different people, in the traditional european model – particularly the hundreds of princedom’s in the german holy roman empire.

    For some of us we will prefer the English, Prussian, Germanic, orderly, clean, aesthetic, homogenous, redistributive, civil society where most of our investments are in the commons.

    For others they will prefer the ‘latin, catholic, leisurely, communal life of the family with state (feudal) responsibility for the commons.

    For others the individual they prefer the cosmopolitan (jewish) urban, high stimulation, high consumption, high opportunity, low responsibility, low investment in the commons.

    For others they will prefer the close membership and mutual insurance of the semitic hyper familial tribe, at the high cost of the many externalities, including demand for authoritarian religion and state.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-11 08:06:00 UTC