Curt Doolittle

Form: Argument

  • Yes I Advocate Collective (group) Punishment.

    Oct 13, 2019, 11:33 AM it’s how we end the game against us. If you gain value from an identity from a membership, then you must insure the rest of us from the consequences of the organization you fund by your membership. Families insure individuals, individuals insure groups, and no one is free of insuring others.

  • Yes I Advocate Collective (group) Punishment.

    Oct 13, 2019, 11:33 AM it’s how we end the game against us. If you gain value from an identity from a membership, then you must insure the rest of us from the consequences of the organization you fund by your membership. Families insure individuals, individuals insure groups, and no one is free of insuring others.

  • Only the West Could Invent Science

    Oct 17, 2019, 9:50 AM You’re missing the point that only the west could invent science (testimony) because only the west practiced the combination of militia, truth, reciprocity, heroism, excellence, markets, and aristocracy (meritocracy). Now that we have given the world our science and technology and law and finance like we gave the world empiricism, like we gave the world logic and reason and roman law, like we gave the world horse, bronze, and wheel, and like the old world gave us writing, bronze, and agriculture. And like we gave the world eugenics. Now, we will see how the chinese do vs the europeans. If the british choose to restore the british empire rather than fall to the french conquest of europe, and the russian re-conquest of eastern europe, then china will have a competitor. But this presumes we will not have a revolution on the scale of the past, or the scale of the chinese, and reverse the primitivization of western civilization by the second abrahamic conquest and the defection of our women. Did you see what I did there? You can have the technological products of our people, but you can’t have our ‘technology’ because it’s genetic and cultural. We only have to preserve that technology to win.

  • Only the West Could Invent Science

    Oct 17, 2019, 9:50 AM You’re missing the point that only the west could invent science (testimony) because only the west practiced the combination of militia, truth, reciprocity, heroism, excellence, markets, and aristocracy (meritocracy). Now that we have given the world our science and technology and law and finance like we gave the world empiricism, like we gave the world logic and reason and roman law, like we gave the world horse, bronze, and wheel, and like the old world gave us writing, bronze, and agriculture. And like we gave the world eugenics. Now, we will see how the chinese do vs the europeans. If the british choose to restore the british empire rather than fall to the french conquest of europe, and the russian re-conquest of eastern europe, then china will have a competitor. But this presumes we will not have a revolution on the scale of the past, or the scale of the chinese, and reverse the primitivization of western civilization by the second abrahamic conquest and the defection of our women. Did you see what I did there? You can have the technological products of our people, but you can’t have our ‘technology’ because it’s genetic and cultural. We only have to preserve that technology to win.

  • “Q: How Is Your Concept of Reciprocity Different from The Common-Law Concept of Contract?”

    Oct 21, 2019, 5:21 PM

    —“… … One Law to Rule Them All … One Law to Find Them … One Law to Bring Them All … And into Reciprocity Bind Them.

    … The Natural Law of Reciprocity: Heroism, Excellence, … Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Testimonial Truth, Jury, Markets … in Everything, and the Transcendence of Man into … the Gods we Imagined…. … —“

    —Hi Curt, how is your concept of reciprocity different from the common-law concept of contract?”–Direct Democracy UK @directdemocrac7

    Long version I don’t want to get into right now. Short version: 1) CL-Contract within a polity within the common law tradition of findings, regulation, legislation command. P-contract, constitution, govt, and polity within the law of reciprocity, and all acts are contracts only. 2) P-contract requires strict construction from P-Reciprocity, including all findings, contracts, regulation, legislation and command. 3) P-Law: No disintermediation of the people from matters of the commons, no insulation of judges, govt, state from suit. (Think Class Action). 4) P-Law: property defined by demonstrated interest (bearing a cost or opportunity cost in order to obtain an interest) regardless of its constitution – so institutions, traditions etc are commons defensible in court. ie: no state consumption of cultural commons. 5) P-Law: most important is the formal articulation of Truthful (Testimonial speech) across the entire spectrum of human knowledge, and the extension of involuntary warranty from good and service to speech in matters of the commons to the public. 6) Part 5 above eradicates pseudoscience-innumeracy, sophism-idealism, and supernaturalism-occult, and in particular the Abrahamic technique of Undermining civilization used in Marxism(class), Feminism(gender), Postmodernism(identity), and denialism(truth) in public speech… 7) … including education, academy, media, state, financial, commercial, advertising, sectors, and prohibits any religion violating natural law and christian ethics (both of which are scientifically stated). Meaning that anyone attempting to undermine western civ is liable. 8) The net result is preserving free truthful and reciprocal speech while prohibiting false and irreciprocal speech, and restoring the via-negativa market of the law, to mirror the via positiva market for goods, services, information, whether private or common. 9) You might think passing tests of truthful speech in court regardless of the context is difficult but once you understand the P-method and particularly the grammars it isn’t hard at all. It’s a checklist. And every item in the checklist is testable before a jury. 10) Anyway, those are the primary differences, and they end creative legislation, creative regulation, creative adjudication, sloppy authoring of all of the above, and they end the entire marxist, postmodern, feminist, effort to repeat the destruction of the ancient world, here. Notes: Imagine if every reporter, entertainer, politician, public intellectual, academic, teacher, is liable for the truth and reciprocity of every syllable. As usual the courts will go thru twenty years of building a body of findings as court, findings, and people adapt. Notes continued: But imagine how much less discord, false promise, virtue signaling, defamation, propagandizing, de-financialization, de-politicization, academic ‘cleansing’ will occur when speech must be true and reciprocal. Notes continued: Along with the economic changes I’ve proposed, the middle class will be restored, the immigrant cities isolated, and people will self sort to preference, instead of competing by falsehood deceit and false promise for political power to oppress others. Edit

  • “Q: How Is Your Concept of Reciprocity Different from The Common-Law Concept of Contract?”

    Oct 21, 2019, 5:21 PM

    —“… … One Law to Rule Them All … One Law to Find Them … One Law to Bring Them All … And into Reciprocity Bind Them.

    … The Natural Law of Reciprocity: Heroism, Excellence, … Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Testimonial Truth, Jury, Markets … in Everything, and the Transcendence of Man into … the Gods we Imagined…. … —“

    —Hi Curt, how is your concept of reciprocity different from the common-law concept of contract?”–Direct Democracy UK @directdemocrac7

    Long version I don’t want to get into right now. Short version: 1) CL-Contract within a polity within the common law tradition of findings, regulation, legislation command. P-contract, constitution, govt, and polity within the law of reciprocity, and all acts are contracts only. 2) P-contract requires strict construction from P-Reciprocity, including all findings, contracts, regulation, legislation and command. 3) P-Law: No disintermediation of the people from matters of the commons, no insulation of judges, govt, state from suit. (Think Class Action). 4) P-Law: property defined by demonstrated interest (bearing a cost or opportunity cost in order to obtain an interest) regardless of its constitution – so institutions, traditions etc are commons defensible in court. ie: no state consumption of cultural commons. 5) P-Law: most important is the formal articulation of Truthful (Testimonial speech) across the entire spectrum of human knowledge, and the extension of involuntary warranty from good and service to speech in matters of the commons to the public. 6) Part 5 above eradicates pseudoscience-innumeracy, sophism-idealism, and supernaturalism-occult, and in particular the Abrahamic technique of Undermining civilization used in Marxism(class), Feminism(gender), Postmodernism(identity), and denialism(truth) in public speech… 7) … including education, academy, media, state, financial, commercial, advertising, sectors, and prohibits any religion violating natural law and christian ethics (both of which are scientifically stated). Meaning that anyone attempting to undermine western civ is liable. 8) The net result is preserving free truthful and reciprocal speech while prohibiting false and irreciprocal speech, and restoring the via-negativa market of the law, to mirror the via positiva market for goods, services, information, whether private or common. 9) You might think passing tests of truthful speech in court regardless of the context is difficult but once you understand the P-method and particularly the grammars it isn’t hard at all. It’s a checklist. And every item in the checklist is testable before a jury. 10) Anyway, those are the primary differences, and they end creative legislation, creative regulation, creative adjudication, sloppy authoring of all of the above, and they end the entire marxist, postmodern, feminist, effort to repeat the destruction of the ancient world, here. Notes: Imagine if every reporter, entertainer, politician, public intellectual, academic, teacher, is liable for the truth and reciprocity of every syllable. As usual the courts will go thru twenty years of building a body of findings as court, findings, and people adapt. Notes continued: But imagine how much less discord, false promise, virtue signaling, defamation, propagandizing, de-financialization, de-politicization, academic ‘cleansing’ will occur when speech must be true and reciprocal. Notes continued: Along with the economic changes I’ve proposed, the middle class will be restored, the immigrant cities isolated, and people will self sort to preference, instead of competing by falsehood deceit and false promise for political power to oppress others. Edit

  • Because P Is Compatible with Christianity, and Will Preserve Christianity

    Oct 29, 2019, 8:14 PM P-Law is not ‘superior’ to Christian Faith – we have no say over such things. P-Law is compatible with Christian ethics and morality, and superior in the material – science, economics, law, politics and war, and likewise christianity is compatible with P-law, and is outside of the material – science, economics, law, politics, and war. YOU HAVE IT BACKWARDS A Christian does not profess P. A christian professes Christianity, and assists the implementation of a P-constitution, Because p is compatible with christianity, and will preserve Christianity in theological, philosophical, traditional, rational, and scientific terms. If christians want a theological monopoly they can wait until the islamists eradicate the rest of them – and carry the blame for letting it happen.

  • Because P Is Compatible with Christianity, and Will Preserve Christianity

    Oct 29, 2019, 8:14 PM P-Law is not ‘superior’ to Christian Faith – we have no say over such things. P-Law is compatible with Christian ethics and morality, and superior in the material – science, economics, law, politics and war, and likewise christianity is compatible with P-law, and is outside of the material – science, economics, law, politics, and war. YOU HAVE IT BACKWARDS A Christian does not profess P. A christian professes Christianity, and assists the implementation of a P-constitution, Because p is compatible with christianity, and will preserve Christianity in theological, philosophical, traditional, rational, and scientific terms. If christians want a theological monopoly they can wait until the islamists eradicate the rest of them – and carry the blame for letting it happen.

  • No. You’re Wrong

    Oct 30, 2019, 10:56 AM There is only one most parsimonious grammar of physical reality, and that’s the physics. There is only one most parsimonious grammar of life, and that’s conservation of energy; There is only one most parsimonious grammar of sentient life: and thats economics. There is only one most parsimonious grammar of ‘the grammars themselves’. There is only one most parsimonious grammar of history of human life: that’s the use of the grammars for the production of economics. There is no interpretation of history any more than there is interpretation of entropy, the conservation of energy, productivity, reciprocity, or testimony. in other words, all human history can be expressed as success or failure to defeat the red queen by using the grammars to organize production and cooperation we call economy. There is one science, one biochemistry, one set of grammars, and one economics, and one history written in them. There is history proper or lying. Period.

  • No. You’re Wrong

    Oct 30, 2019, 10:56 AM There is only one most parsimonious grammar of physical reality, and that’s the physics. There is only one most parsimonious grammar of life, and that’s conservation of energy; There is only one most parsimonious grammar of sentient life: and thats economics. There is only one most parsimonious grammar of ‘the grammars themselves’. There is only one most parsimonious grammar of history of human life: that’s the use of the grammars for the production of economics. There is no interpretation of history any more than there is interpretation of entropy, the conservation of energy, productivity, reciprocity, or testimony. in other words, all human history can be expressed as success or failure to defeat the red queen by using the grammars to organize production and cooperation we call economy. There is one science, one biochemistry, one set of grammars, and one economics, and one history written in them. There is history proper or lying. Period.