Curt Doolittle

Form: Argument

  • The Cost and Profit of Different Orders

    Apr 27, 2017 9:56am THE PROFITABILITY OF DIFFERENT ORDERS, AND THE COST OF EACH (important) —“Curt: What is your opinion on feudalism?”—

    • Sovereigns are more profitable than citizens,
    • citizens more profitable than freemen,
    • freemen more profitable than serfs,
    • serfs more profitable than slaves, s
    • laves more profitable than enemies.

    One must educate and develop recipes (techniques), manners, ethics, morals, common law, natural law, institutions of cooperation (truth, contract, money, banking, interest, and sheriff, judge, militia, and army, and freedom of association, marriage, markets, markets for commons, and cities) in order to evolve from command(slavery) to feudalism(serfdom), to republic(freemen), to monarchy(citizens), to aristocracy (sovereigns). That requires a great deal of time, and effort. But civilizing man is a profitable enterprise. It is the most profitable enterprise we have yet discovered.

  • Answering Practical Questions on Law

    —“The world’s first murderer stands before a common law court. No applicable statute or precedent. How is law made?”— By Natural Law: reciprocity. The violation of reciprocity by aggression against life, body, mate, kin, property, interest. In history, common law developed to prevent reciprocity (retaliation), because of retaliation cycles. (Feuds) States imposed uniform laws once people came into conflict between groups. And if one ‘group’s punishments were too different from the others retaliation cycles would ensue (Feuds). —“Can you define reciprocity?”— Reciprocity is just the promise of doing unto others only as one would have done unto you; and not doing unto others that which you would not have done unto you. But once this is broken how do we restore a condition of reciprocity? We do so by restitution. –“Does restitution necessitate capital punishment?”– Technically it is impossible to perform restitution for murder except with capital punishment. However, in most cases it is possible to pay a high price for murder. And people generally have been forced to pay a high price depending upon the status of the killer and killed. But, in the end, the real reason we use capital punishment is because if someone will break the last rule, the one-rule, of not murdering, then they must be eliminated from the group. —“Standardization means that a superior authority is set?”— Not sure what you mean. Not authority, but decidability. Natural law is decidable. It’s perfectly decidable in all cases, everywhere, at all times, between all people. We can define restitution regardless of opinion or preference of members – in order to maintain ‘the peace’ (the rewards of cooperation). Natural law means people can’t prey upon each other. That is different from a standard. As far as I know that’s a truth. It’s just science. We don’t get to choose. Two people or parties can settle their differences however they want as long as the settlement of differences does not export harm or risk to others. but if we are asked or forced to resolve a conflict, we can do so by natural law regardless of our individual opinions. ––“If natural law means we can’t prey on each other, is it not a priori? Or is it empirically discovered as a function of the rewards of not preying?”— Well you know asking that question is fallacious. The apriori is simply a trivial case of the empirical, and the empirical merely a trivial case of the scientific. It’s observable, it’s logical, it’s possible, it’s demonstrable, and it’s thoroughly demonstrated – and moreover it’s actually impossible to contradict rationally. (You can’t even try to contradict it without confirming it.) I mean, we are part of the physical universe, despite our ability to outwit it on a regular basis through the use of sense, perception, memory, prediction, reason. If an organism tolerates parasitism and predation why does it do so? If an organism can cooperate, and cooperation produces extraordinary returns, and parasitism disincentivizes cooperation, and deprives an organism of returns, then what adaptation must an organism evolve in order to preserve cooperation? Just what we see: altruistic punishment (costly retaliation). Because even though retaliation is costly, the cumulative parasitism is much more costly, and possibly deadly. Any organism that can cooperate and becomes dependent upon cooperation cannot survive significant non-cooperation. However, some minimum of non-cooperation is necessary in order to preserve the incentive to preserve the instinct to punish parasites. And some minimum non-cooperation is necessary to provide evolutionary routes to superiority that may be integrated into the whole.

  • Answering Practical Questions on Law

    —“The world’s first murderer stands before a common law court. No applicable statute or precedent. How is law made?”— By Natural Law: reciprocity. The violation of reciprocity by aggression against life, body, mate, kin, property, interest. In history, common law developed to prevent reciprocity (retaliation), because of retaliation cycles. (Feuds) States imposed uniform laws once people came into conflict between groups. And if one ‘group’s punishments were too different from the others retaliation cycles would ensue (Feuds). —“Can you define reciprocity?”— Reciprocity is just the promise of doing unto others only as one would have done unto you; and not doing unto others that which you would not have done unto you. But once this is broken how do we restore a condition of reciprocity? We do so by restitution. –“Does restitution necessitate capital punishment?”– Technically it is impossible to perform restitution for murder except with capital punishment. However, in most cases it is possible to pay a high price for murder. And people generally have been forced to pay a high price depending upon the status of the killer and killed. But, in the end, the real reason we use capital punishment is because if someone will break the last rule, the one-rule, of not murdering, then they must be eliminated from the group. —“Standardization means that a superior authority is set?”— Not sure what you mean. Not authority, but decidability. Natural law is decidable. It’s perfectly decidable in all cases, everywhere, at all times, between all people. We can define restitution regardless of opinion or preference of members – in order to maintain ‘the peace’ (the rewards of cooperation). Natural law means people can’t prey upon each other. That is different from a standard. As far as I know that’s a truth. It’s just science. We don’t get to choose. Two people or parties can settle their differences however they want as long as the settlement of differences does not export harm or risk to others. but if we are asked or forced to resolve a conflict, we can do so by natural law regardless of our individual opinions. ––“If natural law means we can’t prey on each other, is it not a priori? Or is it empirically discovered as a function of the rewards of not preying?”— Well you know asking that question is fallacious. The apriori is simply a trivial case of the empirical, and the empirical merely a trivial case of the scientific. It’s observable, it’s logical, it’s possible, it’s demonstrable, and it’s thoroughly demonstrated – and moreover it’s actually impossible to contradict rationally. (You can’t even try to contradict it without confirming it.) I mean, we are part of the physical universe, despite our ability to outwit it on a regular basis through the use of sense, perception, memory, prediction, reason. If an organism tolerates parasitism and predation why does it do so? If an organism can cooperate, and cooperation produces extraordinary returns, and parasitism disincentivizes cooperation, and deprives an organism of returns, then what adaptation must an organism evolve in order to preserve cooperation? Just what we see: altruistic punishment (costly retaliation). Because even though retaliation is costly, the cumulative parasitism is much more costly, and possibly deadly. Any organism that can cooperate and becomes dependent upon cooperation cannot survive significant non-cooperation. However, some minimum of non-cooperation is necessary in order to preserve the incentive to preserve the instinct to punish parasites. And some minimum non-cooperation is necessary to provide evolutionary routes to superiority that may be integrated into the whole.

  • Use the Argument to Reciprocity More Often.

    USE THE ARGUMENT TO RECIPROCITY MORE? —“We (the real right) should use the word/concept of reciprocity a lot more in public discourse, because normies intuitively “get” the concept in its most basic form (not the full propertarian use, but the simple idea – e.g. the fact that it is one of Cialdini’s 6 laws of influence, people feel obligated to return good deeds & feel others have an obligation to return good deeds). It is a great way to diffuse the “we are obligated to hand over everything to the brown hordes” assertion. I like to say things like, “I care about 3rd-world immigrants and their children exactly as much as they care about me and my children: not at all.” Or “These people from very different cultures than Western Civ can come colonize our nations as soon as they agree to let us come do the same to their nations.”

    This “bring up the reciprocity principle” exposes the hordes’ strategy for what it really is: nothing but a gimme-dat power-play. I know we’re done talking to the left. But tactics like these can demonstrate and reinforce our moral high ground to (not fully red-pilled) righties and normies.”— John Lille

  • Use the Argument to Reciprocity More Often.

    USE THE ARGUMENT TO RECIPROCITY MORE? —“We (the real right) should use the word/concept of reciprocity a lot more in public discourse, because normies intuitively “get” the concept in its most basic form (not the full propertarian use, but the simple idea – e.g. the fact that it is one of Cialdini’s 6 laws of influence, people feel obligated to return good deeds & feel others have an obligation to return good deeds). It is a great way to diffuse the “we are obligated to hand over everything to the brown hordes” assertion. I like to say things like, “I care about 3rd-world immigrants and their children exactly as much as they care about me and my children: not at all.” Or “These people from very different cultures than Western Civ can come colonize our nations as soon as they agree to let us come do the same to their nations.”

    This “bring up the reciprocity principle” exposes the hordes’ strategy for what it really is: nothing but a gimme-dat power-play. I know we’re done talking to the left. But tactics like these can demonstrate and reinforce our moral high ground to (not fully red-pilled) righties and normies.”— John Lille

  • “Let Me Help You”: About Bitcoin

    LET ME HELP YOU: BITCOIN —“Is the bitcoin a sustainable form of currency, in accord to propertarianism?”– It is not a form of currency. Demand for a currency is warrantied by a state treasury through the combination of law and taxes. A bitcoin (or equivalent) is a fractional share in the bitcoin (or equivalent) network, liquid within that network, and only within that network. The difference between these money substitutes, as between all money substitutes, is the degree of INSURANCE, or what is called ‘backing’ that limits one’s losses of the time (value) accumulated in money proper: commodity money. Think of tickets you buy at a carnival. A bitcoin is a ticket. Tickets can only be spent at the carnival. No one else will trade with you for them. You can buy a ticket and spend it on a ride, or sell it to someone else to do the same. The difference is that the carnival can issue as many tickets as it wants, and fractional shares are issued by the profitable carnival rider operators. However, as we have seen, (a) bitcoin operators are generally even more incompetent than banks, and (b) often more dishonest than bankers. And those investments are uninsured. Commodity money (hard money) is insured by demand for the commodity. The fact that we break it into countable units and trademark them guaranteeing their weight and measure, serves to increase the value of that commodity. So commodity money is insured by demand for the commodity independent of any institution or technology, and independent of time and space. Everything else we use as money is a money substitute, and as a money substitute, requires insurance by weaker and weaker means. Fiat money (“currency”) is insured by a government treasury. As we have seen governments can lose the ability to insure a currency. Banks and other asset holders issue “notes” (promises) that are redeemable for money at a face value. Some banks and treasuries issue “fractional reserve notes”, meaning that under normal circumstances, these notes are redeemable for money – but as we have seen, when ‘runs’ occur, very little of a bank’s assets are liquid and very little of its assets can be made liquid. Companies issue stocks. Stocks can be traded but only within a network or through the company. Bitcoins different from stock companies in that they only issue stocks in payment for validation of transactions, and because shares in the bitcoin network can be divided at will by their owner, these each bitcoin is a ‘fractional’ share of the network, backed only by demand for these fractional shares, hosted on a fragile voluntary network lacking all insurance. Bitcoins are technically, fractional shares of token money substitutes, in a token money substitute network, and the least insurable and insured form of money substitute that man has yet invented. The material benefits are that they (should be) reasonably hard to steal, (should have) near zero carrying and transaction costs, and if achieve sufficient scale (trillions) might provide some limited market demand – until there is a power failure. BTW: the primary means of war has evolved from military to economic. The primary future means of war will be deprivation of electricity and communication lines. We are currently more dependent upon electricity than water. So, what propertarianism would say is that unless an individual consumer of bitcoins has been informed of these facts, he has been the victim of deception. But if he is informed of these facts then it constitutes a productive, fully informed, warrantied exchange, limited to positive externalities. Further Thoughts:

    • BTC is exceptionally useful for:
      • title registries,
      • the fractional sale of debt instruments in particular,
      • escrows (if implemented)
      • the elimination of transaction costs, and
      • for serving those outside the banking system.
    • Until a bitcoin transaction is as fast, easy, and insured, as a visa transaction it’s pretty much techie porn toy.
    • Conversely, I don’t know why we need stock markets any longer….
    • I dont’ know why we need title firms any longer…..
    • I don’t know why we need check cashing firms any longer.
    • I don’t know why we need consumer interest any longer….

  • “Let Me Help You”: About Bitcoin

    LET ME HELP YOU: BITCOIN —“Is the bitcoin a sustainable form of currency, in accord to propertarianism?”– It is not a form of currency. Demand for a currency is warrantied by a state treasury through the combination of law and taxes. A bitcoin (or equivalent) is a fractional share in the bitcoin (or equivalent) network, liquid within that network, and only within that network. The difference between these money substitutes, as between all money substitutes, is the degree of INSURANCE, or what is called ‘backing’ that limits one’s losses of the time (value) accumulated in money proper: commodity money. Think of tickets you buy at a carnival. A bitcoin is a ticket. Tickets can only be spent at the carnival. No one else will trade with you for them. You can buy a ticket and spend it on a ride, or sell it to someone else to do the same. The difference is that the carnival can issue as many tickets as it wants, and fractional shares are issued by the profitable carnival rider operators. However, as we have seen, (a) bitcoin operators are generally even more incompetent than banks, and (b) often more dishonest than bankers. And those investments are uninsured. Commodity money (hard money) is insured by demand for the commodity. The fact that we break it into countable units and trademark them guaranteeing their weight and measure, serves to increase the value of that commodity. So commodity money is insured by demand for the commodity independent of any institution or technology, and independent of time and space. Everything else we use as money is a money substitute, and as a money substitute, requires insurance by weaker and weaker means. Fiat money (“currency”) is insured by a government treasury. As we have seen governments can lose the ability to insure a currency. Banks and other asset holders issue “notes” (promises) that are redeemable for money at a face value. Some banks and treasuries issue “fractional reserve notes”, meaning that under normal circumstances, these notes are redeemable for money – but as we have seen, when ‘runs’ occur, very little of a bank’s assets are liquid and very little of its assets can be made liquid. Companies issue stocks. Stocks can be traded but only within a network or through the company. Bitcoins different from stock companies in that they only issue stocks in payment for validation of transactions, and because shares in the bitcoin network can be divided at will by their owner, these each bitcoin is a ‘fractional’ share of the network, backed only by demand for these fractional shares, hosted on a fragile voluntary network lacking all insurance. Bitcoins are technically, fractional shares of token money substitutes, in a token money substitute network, and the least insurable and insured form of money substitute that man has yet invented. The material benefits are that they (should be) reasonably hard to steal, (should have) near zero carrying and transaction costs, and if achieve sufficient scale (trillions) might provide some limited market demand – until there is a power failure. BTW: the primary means of war has evolved from military to economic. The primary future means of war will be deprivation of electricity and communication lines. We are currently more dependent upon electricity than water. So, what propertarianism would say is that unless an individual consumer of bitcoins has been informed of these facts, he has been the victim of deception. But if he is informed of these facts then it constitutes a productive, fully informed, warrantied exchange, limited to positive externalities. Further Thoughts:

    • BTC is exceptionally useful for:
      • title registries,
      • the fractional sale of debt instruments in particular,
      • escrows (if implemented)
      • the elimination of transaction costs, and
      • for serving those outside the banking system.
    • Until a bitcoin transaction is as fast, easy, and insured, as a visa transaction it’s pretty much techie porn toy.
    • Conversely, I don’t know why we need stock markets any longer….
    • I dont’ know why we need title firms any longer…..
    • I don’t know why we need check cashing firms any longer.
    • I don’t know why we need consumer interest any longer….

  • THE PROBLEM OF MONOGAMY AND PROSPERITY Unless women can reproduce with the best

    THE PROBLEM OF MONOGAMY AND PROSPERITY

    Unless women can reproduce with the best genes and obtain support from the rest of the genes in exchange for sex, then they will always be a dysgenic influence on mankind. Why? Their offspring are costly and they are capable of any self delusion possible in order to carry on the pretense that their poor choice of father has not resulted in an individual that is a dead parasitic weight on civilization. Monogamy keeps men from violence but forces dysgenia. Do you get it?

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-01 10:03:00 UTC

  • YEAH. GROW UP. THERE IS ONLY ONE TRUTHFUL LANGUAGE. Yeah, I understand that reli

    YEAH. GROW UP. THERE IS ONLY ONE TRUTHFUL LANGUAGE.

    Yeah, I understand that religion and occult, and psychologism, and this kind of literary version of ‘numerology’ is helpful to some people but it’s all nonsense.

    All words are excuses. People act according to costs, assets, opportunities, and incentives. Whatever words they make up to make excuses for choosing among them is just more Egyptian/babylonian/semitic/hindu drivel.

    If you can’t say it from the chinese philosophers, you can’t say it reasonably. If you can’t say it from the western philosophers and lawyers you can’t say it rationally, and If you can’t say it from the western scientists you can’t say it truthfully.

    The ‘middle earth’ f-ckers have been a cancer on humanity forever. They still are. The cancer survives. It survives in fictionalism in its occult, religious, psychological, pseudo-rational, and pseudo-scientific forms.

    All conflation may provide meaning at the cost of deception and the manufacture of further ignorance. Deflation is more costly but provides truth and it is with truth we defeat the dark forces of time, ignorance, distance, and sarcity.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-29 14:16:00 UTC

  • DO YOU UNDERSTAND YET? ARYANISM: MARKETS IN EVERYTHING? Abrahamism imposes artif

    DO YOU UNDERSTAND YET? ARYANISM: MARKETS IN EVERYTHING?

    Abrahamism imposes artificial equality where we are only equal if we are slaves. Western religion was originally pagan, meaning a hierarchical family, infinitely extensible, where individuals could find both virtues to imitate, sins to avoid, and advocates for their roles in society at every single level.

    Abrahamism is not a market strategy for a division of knowledge, labor and advocacy among many small extended clans organized into nation states, but an authoritarian and monopolistic one for the production and maintenance of a despotic empire.

    Aryanism *IS* a market strategy, and our original religion provided us with a both a unifying narrative of an extended family with virtues, sins, roles, and interests, custom tailored gods, demi gods, heroes, and great men to appeal to.

    Our god was not demanding, or commanding, or even engaged, but provided wisdom, justice, and decisions in exchange for offerings – *a trade*.

    Do you understand the difference between Aryanism and Semitism yet? Markets and families, vs Monopoly and Empire.

    No excuses. No more lies.

    End the pollution of the west. Imitate the only other superior people on this earth, the east asians, and insulate ourselves from the ‘people of the center’ who failed to transcend from beast to man.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-29 12:45:00 UTC