Curt Doolittle

Category: Politics, Power, and Governance

  • NEW MOVEMENT: “SPRING CLEANING” Starting this spring, 2016, we declare Islamism

    NEW MOVEMENT: “SPRING CLEANING”

    Starting this spring, 2016, we declare Islamism a political movement masquerading as a religion, with an immoral incompatible competing law, and clean the west of islamism, just as we cleaned Spain of Islam and cleaned the west of Communism. Truthful Speech replaces Free Speech. Religious freedom is limited to that which is entirely compatible with western natural law. And all monuments other than christian must be torn down and removed. We either reform the church or take its property and possessions to the last stone and blade of grass. And we convert each into a credit union with zero taxation on interest and earnings on that which is under its control. We hang, guillotine, impale, or burn anyone who even raises a weak objection. And we end this century of lying propaganda postmodernism marxism and destruction. The cost? Young and old will go to work in those minor jobs rather than sit at home and stare at the idiot box.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-13 17:39:00 UTC

  • Had we given women legal equality, but their own separate house of commons, we w

    Had we given women legal equality, but their own separate house of commons, we would not have had the collapse of western civilization.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-13 17:37:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/665222002945466368

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/665219842367209473

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    The first question of ethics is why don’t I kill you and take your land, women, and things – not assuming cooperation as the starting point.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/665219842367209473

    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    The first question of ethics is why don’t I kill you and take your land, women, and things – not assuming cooperation as the starting point.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/665219842367209473

  • We created a great number lies in granting women political enfranchisement. They

    We created a great number lies in granting women political enfranchisement. They used it to destroy the west. Policy=Family. Law=Individual.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-13 14:20:00 UTC

  • THE JUDICIOUS USE OF FEAR AND VIOLENCE How do we prevent the rise of the corpora

    THE JUDICIOUS USE OF FEAR AND VIOLENCE

    How do we prevent the rise of the corporate state over the interest of kin, tribe and nation? Fear. The purpose of kings is to deny people an alternative. It is not that kings are good. It is that no government is good. The only goods are the market for goods and services in which competition provides incentives to produce and consume; the market for commons in which prevention of privatization provides incentives to invest in long term returns; and the ostracization from both markets if one fails to consume, product and invest. The most moral use of violence is in the prevention of parasitism leaving man only productivity as a means of survival. An armed militia provides power-seekers fear. The sheriff and judiciary provide abusers with fear. The king is merely evidence that the militia, sheriff, and judiciary succeed in the use of fear. For it is the judicious use of fear that eliminates the need for judicious use of violence.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-13 13:30:00 UTC

  • Had we given women legal equality, but their own separate house of commons, we w

    Had we given women legal equality, but their own separate house of commons, we would not have had the collapse of western civilization.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-13 12:37:00 UTC

  • “A bureaucracy ultimately always ends up costing the people more than an upper c

    —-“A bureaucracy ultimately always ends up costing the people more than an upper class.”—-

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-12 21:53:00 UTC

  • It’s an interesting statement in itself that the conservative fringe consists of

    It’s an interesting statement in itself that the conservative fringe consists of inarticulate idiots , while the libertarian fringe consist of articulate lunatics, and the progressive fringe consists of the verbose and ridiculous. They’re all tragic, but at least fringe libertarians are entertaining.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-12 21:34:00 UTC

  • #libertarian #conservative #nrx #propertarianism

    #libertarian #conservative #nrx #propertarianism https://t.co/FwZ9Ox7Foh

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-12 17:54:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/664863933354872832

  • Q&A: No, I am an Aristocratic Libertarian, not a Bourgeoise Libertarian

    [I] do not possess the values of a bourgeoise libertarian, but an aristocratic, martial, advocate of personal liberty. I have been accused of being an aristocratic and intellectual snob for my entire life. It was only by gradually learning to ‘fit in’ after university, and as a necessity of conducting business with common people, and our relocation to rather parochial Seattle, that incrementally forced me to tone it down out of pure utility. So I don’t hold to the fallacy that consumption is a penultimate good in its own. And while I advocate wealth, cooperation and decidability, it’s because I view cooperation as a means of constructing the voluntary organization of experiment, innovation, production, distribution and trade that produces wealth and technology with which a minority of warriors and generals can hold the hordes – often wealthy hordes – at bay. This is the ancient info European (Yamnaya) social economic and military evolutionary strategy. To use advanced technology and professional warriors to defeat superior numbers: to pacify and transform the world. So I see all competitively advantageous products of man as weaponry to be used against competitors. My cognitive process like my heritage is martial. Until I learned economics – the language of equilibria, I used martial terminology – the language of competition. We need kings, generals, captains, lieutenants, sergeants, and warriors. But, I do not need the same intuitions as an individual warrior or captain. I need the intuitions of a general and King. Wars are won by logistics. That is why.

  • Q&A: No, I am an Aristocratic Libertarian, not a Bourgeoise Libertarian

    [I] do not possess the values of a bourgeoise libertarian, but an aristocratic, martial, advocate of personal liberty. I have been accused of being an aristocratic and intellectual snob for my entire life. It was only by gradually learning to ‘fit in’ after university, and as a necessity of conducting business with common people, and our relocation to rather parochial Seattle, that incrementally forced me to tone it down out of pure utility. So I don’t hold to the fallacy that consumption is a penultimate good in its own. And while I advocate wealth, cooperation and decidability, it’s because I view cooperation as a means of constructing the voluntary organization of experiment, innovation, production, distribution and trade that produces wealth and technology with which a minority of warriors and generals can hold the hordes – often wealthy hordes – at bay. This is the ancient info European (Yamnaya) social economic and military evolutionary strategy. To use advanced technology and professional warriors to defeat superior numbers: to pacify and transform the world. So I see all competitively advantageous products of man as weaponry to be used against competitors. My cognitive process like my heritage is martial. Until I learned economics – the language of equilibria, I used martial terminology – the language of competition. We need kings, generals, captains, lieutenants, sergeants, and warriors. But, I do not need the same intuitions as an individual warrior or captain. I need the intuitions of a general and King. Wars are won by logistics. That is why.