Category: Uncategorized

FIVE POSTS FOR THE STEW PETERS SHOW
On the Supreme Court and Trump
Stew Peters (@RealStewPeters) on Twitter
https://stewpeters.com/

1. What’s the Supreme Court Going to Decide Regarding Trump on The Ballot?
https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1738261136829497454

2. How the Supreme Court Will Decide “Trump on…

FIVE POSTS FOR THE STEW PETERS SHOW
On the Supreme Court and Trump
Stew Peters (@RealStewPeters) on Twitter
https://t.co/nAYmaiRMCf

1. What’s the Supreme Court Going to Decide Regarding Trump on The Ballot?
https://t.co/0VHIVcA7kj

2. How the Supreme Court Will Decide “Trump on The Ballot”.
https://t.co/F8c7RUcNwJ

3. What Does Settled Law Mean in The Context of Trump Et Al?
https://t.co/WTyoSCtWWW

4. Present Issues: Trump Candidacy and The Chevron Defense
https://t.co/WTyoSCtWWW

5. How Our Lower Courts Create False Positives That Confuse the Public
https://t.co/mDdYgiu5Yf

Find me here on twitter at @curtdoolittle
or at the Natural Law Institute on the web:
https://t.co/sczfFL1Pns

Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
The Science of Cooperation

(^Careful. That will get you banned. Don’t threaten, doxx, or pursue doxxing. No matter how much the person deserves it. 😉 )

In the sense that it’s masculine in the sense that it’s capitalizing and responsible yes. But I do catch your meaning.

and the only reason it’s possible is white women.

SCOTT
Yes. You got there. As elegantly as you do with regularity.

For the broader audience: once you realize that the entirety of the conflict of the 20th is the introduction of women into economy and polity and the subsequent introduction of the pill, and the resulting reproductive, social, economic, and political ability for the feminine instinct, intuition, and mind to pursue it’s irresponsible, hyperconsumption (of everything from attention to capital), socialization of losses, privatizing of commons, and use of the feminine means of antisocial behavior as warfare (undermining, canceling, sedition, baiting into hazard, victim claiming, oppression claiming), and that the mating problem is merely the end result of the natural sequence of unregulated antisocial feminine expression, you subsequently realize that the problem isn’t our civilization it’s not just our mating, it’s our women, and that women have the precisely opposite long term instincts, intuitions that men do – despite the differences between male social and economic classes. It’s only the third time in history it’s been possible. In late Sparta. In late ancient Rome. And in the late modern West. With the same outcome every time.

There are no surviving feminine polities for a reason. Even matrilineal polities are still politically paternal for inescapable evolutionary reasons of sex differences in perception, disambiguation, valuation, prediction, and preference.

Why? The brains of the sexes evolved to divide the labor of time, population, and space with women the short, small, and near, and men the long, large and far. We label this under the technical term ’empathizing vs systematizing’ or colloquial ‘feels vs reals’ but the causality of that difference is the division of labor in time, population and space.

Correction of our condition is rather easy really. But I won’t get into correcting incentives in this post. It’s long enough already.

You probably won’t read this but I’ll have said it anyway. 😉

If you want me to go into the ‘science’ behind this I’m happy to at excruciating detail. I’m sure we would have an interesting discussion. No one of consequence ever converses with me without being affected by having done so. 😉

Cheers

Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
The Science of Cooperation

Reply addressees: @ScottAdamsSays

Scott got there. I doubt he’s reading me. Or that anyone that influences him might be. So he came to the correct conclusion on his own. Which only validates my conclusion. https://twitter.com/TarzanWannaBe/status/1750931463426449559

Scott got there. I doubt he’s reading me. Or that anyone that influences him might be. So he came to the correct conclusion on his own. Which only validates my conclusion.

TEXAS DOESN’T NEED THE USA – HERE’S WHY:
There is no central bank other than the central banking system that is a collection of regional central banks. Texas has one of the central banks, a treasury and can print money. It has its own ports, its own fuel, it’s own electrical grid, and is responsible for 15% of total US trade and is the top US trading partner. As a separate country, with an economy of $2.4 trillion, Texas would be the eight largest economy in the world, just behind India, the UK and France, and ahead of Canada, Russia and Italy. Texas has a population approaching that of Canada, and at 120,000 it has more armed forces than any state other than California, and the Virginia-Georgia-North-Carolina military ‘core’. And its armed civilian conservative population is six times the size of the military’s fighting capacity. And the military has lost every war against domestics it’s ever fought. There are only three US cities capable of fielding police forces of any number in an uprising – and many of those men would choose sides. You have no knowledge of just now little power developed countries have against their own population. Advanced countries keep order by the utility of their economies not because they can apply force against the population,. Compare with Russia where the majority of the government does the exact opposite. If texas were to seceded, reduce private and corporate taxes, and produce a currency of its own backed by say, oil, it would cause capital flight to texas on a scale comparable only to the UK flight to the USA during and after the world wars. Subsequently the central agrarian territories of the USA and central and western canada would secede and join Texas. The south would follow. And the coasts, the rust belt would be successful but strategically weak isolates. This would destroy the dollar a sthe world reserve currency, and destroy the capacity of the USA to field a military and diplomatic corps capable of

Now, while most of my time is spent on constitutional, legal economic, and policy reform, this kind of thing – geostrategic competition – is my job. But do you think there aren’t dozens of men like me in the state department, intelligence, military intelligence, and general staff, and military wings of the government that don’t understand this just as well as I do? The demarcation between those of us who do and those who don’t, is whether we understand total war, including economic and demographic war and the interdependence between them.

The difference between those folks and the few of us in the private sector, is that if you’re dependent on US funds for research, like Rand or other think tanks, you can’t say it. If you’re paid by the federal government you can’t say it. If you’re paid by investors you can’t say it. But I’m paid by myself and private donors. So I can say what they can’t.

That doesn’t mean they wouldn’t say it if they could.

It is not at all clear, that given the disdain for the USA is due to what the world perceives as “coastal immoral degenerate hedonism” riding on american military and economic power, that the world wouldn’t be far better off without the end of coastal influence on not only the rest of the country but on world affairs in general.

People around the world have no problem with rule of law and the proceeds. They are not so sure about democracy. And the yare not at all sure about capitalism. But they are very sure about the marxist-to-woke religion of degeneracy that they see as destroying their culture and harmony between classes and sexes, at the cost of the family and love and security it provides.

In fact, secession, isolating the coasts, causing responsible people to flee the cities to the responsible territories, forming new moral cities, and leaving decadent cities with an elite core, an impoverished circle around it, might in fact be just what the world needs.

And I’m not entirely confident that I’m only using hyperbole as an example that might cause introspection but there is more than an element of my subconscious that thinks that in fact this might be ta better thing for the world.

Cheers
-CurtD

Reply addressees: @MomentoAnima @rey45528 @kevstyluss @toneyjetson @dp9qkbmztp @JenniferBrett15 @ryan_ut21 @HTTP_Lovecraft

HOW THE SUPREME COURT WILL DECIDE “TRUMP ON THE BALLOT”.

DRAFT
This draft started with myy Interview Prep for Stew Peters Interview Dec 22nd on The CO Ruling re Trump on the ballot.

The Supreme Court’s Concern

What was the State of mind of Trump – What was he attempting to do…