Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • All We Have to Do Is Turn Entire Cities Into Ghettos

    ALL WE HAVE TO DO IS TURN ENTIRE CITIES INTO GHETTOS The Medieval and Ancient world turned city ‘Quarters’ into ghettos for hosted hostile alien underclasses. All we need to do is turn entire secessionist cities into ghettos. They can practice their own customs there, but must remain there. An immigrant city is just a plantation for the financial and bureaucratic classes.

    —“While having lunch with @RandPaul in California, we got verbally assaulted by these aggressive libs complaining about incivility. Check out the vid! #unhinged”— Anon

    —“Lol they’re literally just talking to the guy, but sure let’s call it “verbal assault” and then cry about liberals destroying the English language later. Sorry if this hurt.” — renewmeme @renewmeme

    What hurt? I agree with the OP. About a third of women are mentally ill – that’s the real reason we closed the asylums: they were full of women. Whereas the extreme male manifests in autism, the extreme female manifests is psychosis. Combine with Infantilization of males in education, the lower testosterone of lower middle and upper proletarian classes, and indoctrination into pseudoscience,sophism and denialism in the university and we see this kind of behavior from women, and pseudo-males defend them. Add a hostile excitable minority practicing systematic undermining of western civilization and you get the scenario we just saw in the video. It’s not rocket science. It’s just hatred of western civilization.

  • Christians: What Is the Difference?

    What is the cause of natural law? To the scientist it is the order of the universe. To the faithful it is god’s design. What’s the difference other than whether god created the universe (faith) or we don’t know what created the universe (skepticism), if we all obey the natural law of reciprocity and imitation of jesus and christian charity and exhaustion of forgiveness. That’s what jefferson said, and that’s what I say and we are law givers not priests. It’s not our job to do anything other than the law that prohibits bads. That which creates goods is up to those who do not violate the law. If we obey gods law because someone in the past said we must or if we do so because the scientific evidence in all walks of life says we must, what is the difference?

  • Christians: What Is the Difference?

    What is the cause of natural law? To the scientist it is the order of the universe. To the faithful it is god’s design. What’s the difference other than whether god created the universe (faith) or we don’t know what created the universe (skepticism), if we all obey the natural law of reciprocity and imitation of jesus and christian charity and exhaustion of forgiveness. That’s what jefferson said, and that’s what I say and we are law givers not priests. It’s not our job to do anything other than the law that prohibits bads. That which creates goods is up to those who do not violate the law. If we obey gods law because someone in the past said we must or if we do so because the scientific evidence in all walks of life says we must, what is the difference?

  • “Robot Judges”

    (from elsewhere) I have worked on automating legal argument since we wrote ipx drivers by hand, and was certainly one of the first people to do it for every federal court. I currently work on the strict construction of law from the test of reciprocity, and the tests of whether one is given truthful testimony. Most cases are settled before trial because they are decidable, and those that make it to trial not easily decided without subjective testing of incentives, and the vast majority of legal cases are decided by whether we subjectively test the believability of the individuals at hand – (and some by oversaturating the reason of the jury). If AI justice is at all possible we are very, very, very far from it. And even so, I don’t think we would permit it. We might permit a machine to produce information FOR a jury. But if we get to the point where we abandon the jury of our peers, it’s time to hoist the jolly roger so to speak.

  • “Robot Judges”

    (from elsewhere) I have worked on automating legal argument since we wrote ipx drivers by hand, and was certainly one of the first people to do it for every federal court. I currently work on the strict construction of law from the test of reciprocity, and the tests of whether one is given truthful testimony. Most cases are settled before trial because they are decidable, and those that make it to trial not easily decided without subjective testing of incentives, and the vast majority of legal cases are decided by whether we subjectively test the believability of the individuals at hand – (and some by oversaturating the reason of the jury). If AI justice is at all possible we are very, very, very far from it. And even so, I don’t think we would permit it. We might permit a machine to produce information FOR a jury. But if we get to the point where we abandon the jury of our peers, it’s time to hoist the jolly roger so to speak.

  • P Is a Reform on The Scale of The Roman Reforms.

    —“What about the Military under P?”–

    The P constitution preserves the federal military system for the simple reasons that (a) we need to prevent hostiles taking territory on this continent (b) military is the only organization the benefits tremendously from scale. We also push forward military reforms like the light infantry proposal, limiting constraints on rules of engagement, limiting punishments for lapses of judgement during conflict; fully separating the Marines, cultural remasculinization, competitive pay, mixing civilian contract military service personnel,and detaching compensation from rank, restoring military R&D, skipping a generation and moving out of policing and into pure defense of our citizens anywhere in the world, trade route, territorial, population and asset defense, and giving the military full license so that they are rarely used, but if they are, they are terrifying. In addition the military gets a ‘house’ in congress and all in all restores the state-military-industrial complex over the state-academy-media complex. Honestly it’s very hard for the military to disagree with our proposal. P is a reform on the scale of the roman reforms.

  • P Is a Reform on The Scale of The Roman Reforms.

    —“What about the Military under P?”–

    The P constitution preserves the federal military system for the simple reasons that (a) we need to prevent hostiles taking territory on this continent (b) military is the only organization the benefits tremendously from scale. We also push forward military reforms like the light infantry proposal, limiting constraints on rules of engagement, limiting punishments for lapses of judgement during conflict; fully separating the Marines, cultural remasculinization, competitive pay, mixing civilian contract military service personnel,and detaching compensation from rank, restoring military R&D, skipping a generation and moving out of policing and into pure defense of our citizens anywhere in the world, trade route, territorial, population and asset defense, and giving the military full license so that they are rarely used, but if they are, they are terrifying. In addition the military gets a ‘house’ in congress and all in all restores the state-military-industrial complex over the state-academy-media complex. Honestly it’s very hard for the military to disagree with our proposal. P is a reform on the scale of the roman reforms.

  • Constitution: It’s about Monoculture, and Integration, or Separation.

    —“I’m in the Marines, I’m a ri–t winger. If we were to boogaloo will there be ethnic separation in propertarianism? Please answer honestly.”— Tyler Granberry

    No. Period. Honestly, Truthfully. (I will get a ton of sh-t for saying that from the WN crowd.) There is a right of voluntary DISASSOCIATION as well as ASSOCIATION meaning everyone can create new identitarian neighborhoods, villages, cities, counties, sure, because under P we can’t prohibit that VOLUNTARY association and Disassociation. Just as we can’t make bakers bake cakes they don’t agree with. Just like we can’t prohibit men from forming men’s clubs again. Just like we can’t prohibit people from forming their own group banks, own group biases. In other words we end INVOLUNTARY integration at the local level. (If you know your history, and if know the failure of force integration pretty much everywhere except the military, the 60’s destroyed the formation of the african american middle class and elites. That said, P constitution proposes a (libertarian) COMPROMISE that if unmet, escalates to POLITICIDE against the left and the use of undermining by competing ideologies, philosophies, religions and interest groups. It converts the left wing immigrant cities into city states, and removes the government from social policy, and restores it to an insurer of last resort. I suspect that we will see the formation of a small number of local polities that like the amish, the evangelicals, or the white nationalists, want to maintain cultural isolationism by a majority middle class. But the state cannot interfere eithe way. I expect that we will have major cities maintain the high and low versus the middle. I tend to look at black-white relations in the south, vs the north and the differences are rather obvious. Family is family in the south. Politics and political parties and ideology in the northeast. And hostility in southern california and new york. What we DO threaten is an escalation IF left and right cannot pursue their separate political interests in their local polities. In other words, if the left resists we promise to escalate. I think I’ve said it as political separation is a good thing, politicide is a good thing at the federal level, ethnocide if it escalates, and genocide if it escalates, so let’s do the ‘everybody wins’ scenario and devlove the ‘imperial’ federal government’s rule over other than conflict in property between the states to state, city – state, county, local level. And get out of the business of coercing each other. But you can search my ten years of posts on P and the site and all you’ll see is libertarian solutions and “I don’t do racism, I do classism, and it’s class sizes that cause the problem not race, and if we can produce commons and rules and norms suitable to our populations we will all stop having conflict over them.” Ie: it worked in the past just fine. It will work now just fine. people are the same the world over in this regard.

  • Constitution: It’s about Monoculture, and Integration, or Separation.

    —“I’m in the Marines, I’m a ri–t winger. If we were to boogaloo will there be ethnic separation in propertarianism? Please answer honestly.”— Tyler Granberry

    No. Period. Honestly, Truthfully. (I will get a ton of sh-t for saying that from the WN crowd.) There is a right of voluntary DISASSOCIATION as well as ASSOCIATION meaning everyone can create new identitarian neighborhoods, villages, cities, counties, sure, because under P we can’t prohibit that VOLUNTARY association and Disassociation. Just as we can’t make bakers bake cakes they don’t agree with. Just like we can’t prohibit men from forming men’s clubs again. Just like we can’t prohibit people from forming their own group banks, own group biases. In other words we end INVOLUNTARY integration at the local level. (If you know your history, and if know the failure of force integration pretty much everywhere except the military, the 60’s destroyed the formation of the african american middle class and elites. That said, P constitution proposes a (libertarian) COMPROMISE that if unmet, escalates to POLITICIDE against the left and the use of undermining by competing ideologies, philosophies, religions and interest groups. It converts the left wing immigrant cities into city states, and removes the government from social policy, and restores it to an insurer of last resort. I suspect that we will see the formation of a small number of local polities that like the amish, the evangelicals, or the white nationalists, want to maintain cultural isolationism by a majority middle class. But the state cannot interfere eithe way. I expect that we will have major cities maintain the high and low versus the middle. I tend to look at black-white relations in the south, vs the north and the differences are rather obvious. Family is family in the south. Politics and political parties and ideology in the northeast. And hostility in southern california and new york. What we DO threaten is an escalation IF left and right cannot pursue their separate political interests in their local polities. In other words, if the left resists we promise to escalate. I think I’ve said it as political separation is a good thing, politicide is a good thing at the federal level, ethnocide if it escalates, and genocide if it escalates, so let’s do the ‘everybody wins’ scenario and devlove the ‘imperial’ federal government’s rule over other than conflict in property between the states to state, city – state, county, local level. And get out of the business of coercing each other. But you can search my ten years of posts on P and the site and all you’ll see is libertarian solutions and “I don’t do racism, I do classism, and it’s class sizes that cause the problem not race, and if we can produce commons and rules and norms suitable to our populations we will all stop having conflict over them.” Ie: it worked in the past just fine. It will work now just fine. people are the same the world over in this regard.

  • Feeling Extremely Needy.

    “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” creates a lot of people feeling extremely needy. It inverts the natural benefits of productivity, and makes individual productivity a burden. Those who are productive require less from others…while those who are unproductive require much from others. It incentivizes non-production. It incentivizes parasitism. The more productive you are the more others then have license to take removing the personal benefit of productivity, while the more unproductive you are the more you have license to take increasing the personal benefit of parasitism. If there was ever an idea ever so inverted to life, so perfectly designed to destroy! Such an exposition of the mind and thought process of a parasite.