Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • Theory: The Mythicization of the Obvious Why Humans Prefer Supernormal and Super

    Theory: The Mythicization of the Obvious

    Why Humans Prefer Supernormal and Supernatural Explanations for the Mundane
    Thesis:
    Humans exhibit a persistent tendency to mythologize observable but misunderstood phenomena—especially those that appear to exceed presumed contemporary means—due to evolved biases in agency detection, reward-seeking, and status signaling. This behavior emerges as an adaptive misfire of otherwise functional cognitive systems under conditions of informational opacity.
    1. Cognitive Incentives
    • Hyperactive Agency Detection: Evolution favors false positives in the detection of intentionality. Ambiguous outcomes—such as unexplained precision—trigger reflexive attribution to agents, which are then inflated to superhuman or supernatural status.
    • Temporal Compression and Technological Amnesia: Humans compress historical time and underestimate the iterative power of simple techniques over long durations. The loss of craft knowledge combined with modern bias toward high-efficiency solutions leads to disbelief in ancient mundane methods.
    • Valence-Driven Bounty-Seeking: The dopaminergic system treats anomalies as signals of hidden opportunity—“undiscovered treasure.” This produces a preference for open mysteries over resolved facts. Mythic narratives exploit this loop by offering explanatory closure in the form of supernormal causality, while keeping the sense of discovery open.
    2. Social Incentives
    • Status Signaling via Esoterica: Belief in or propagation of exotic explanations serves as a coalition signal of special knowledge. In domains of low verifiability, mythic claims gain prestige simply by implying access to hidden truths. This displaces epistemic honesty with memetic competition.
    • Aesthetic Matching: The human mind seeks correspondence between the perceived magnificence of an effect and the presumed magnificence of its cause. The drudgery of labor or primitive tools is rejected because it undermines the perceived dignity of the result.
    3. Systemic Consequence
    This cluster of biases produces spontaneous myth-making:
    This loop results in the cultural elevation of the unexplained into the mythical—despite available and testable explanations. The persistence of fringe theories about ancient technology exemplifies this failure of epistemic discipline.
    4. Interpretation Within Natural Law
    From the standpoint of Natural Law, this process is a parasitism upon cooperative epistemology. It replaces operational truth with narrative satisfaction, thereby undermining the commons of truth required for reciprocal cooperation and intertemporal civilization. It exploits ignorance for prestige rather than resolving it for progress.

    5. Systemic Insight

    Source date (UTC): 2025-05-02 07:44:57 UTC

    Original post: https://x.com/i/articles/1918210083403776357

  • Why Humans Prefer Supernormal and Supernatural Explanations for the Mundane Thes

    Why Humans Prefer Supernormal and Supernatural Explanations for the Mundane

    Thesis:
    Humans exhibit a persistent tendency to mythologize observable but misunderstood phenomena—especially those that appear to exceed presumed contemporary means—due to evolved biases in agency detection, reward-seeking, and status signaling. This behavior emerges as an adaptive misfire of otherwise functional cognitive systems under conditions of informational opacity.

    1. Cognitive Incentives

    Hyperactive Agency Detection: Evolution favors false positives in the detection of intentionality. Ambiguous outcomes—such as unexplained precision—trigger reflexive attribution to agents, which are then inflated to superhuman or supernatural status.

    Temporal Compression and Technological Amnesia: Humans compress historical time and underestimate the iterative power of simple techniques over long durations. The loss of craft knowledge combined with modern bias toward high-efficiency solutions leads to disbelief in ancient mundane methods.

    Valence-Driven Bounty-Seeking: The dopaminergic system treats anomalies as signals of hidden opportunity—“undiscovered treasure.” This produces a preference for open mysteries over resolved facts. Mythic narratives exploit this loop by offering explanatory closure in the form of supernormal causality, while keeping the sense of discovery open.

    2. Social Incentives

    Status Signaling via Esoterica: Belief in or propagation of exotic explanations serves as a coalition signal of special knowledge. In domains of low verifiability, mythic claims gain prestige simply by implying access to hidden truths. This displaces epistemic honesty with memetic competition.

    Aesthetic Matching: The human mind seeks correspondence between the perceived magnificence of an effect and the presumed magnificence of its cause. The drudgery of labor or primitive tools is rejected because it undermines the perceived dignity of the result.

    3. Systemic Consequence

    This cluster of biases produces spontaneous myth-making:

    Anomaly → Agency detection → Reward activation → Status signaling → Myth propagation

    This loop results in the cultural elevation of the unexplained into the mythical—despite available and testable explanations. The persistence of fringe theories about ancient technology exemplifies this failure of epistemic discipline.

    4. Interpretation Within Natural Law

    From the standpoint of Natural Law, this process is a parasitism upon cooperative epistemology. It replaces operational truth with narrative satisfaction, thereby undermining the commons of truth required for reciprocal cooperation and intertemporal civilization. It exploits ignorance for prestige rather than resolving it for progress.

    5. Systemic Insight

    Mythicization is not due to absence of explanation but the presence of misaligned incentives—psychological, social, and epistemic—under constraints of limited memory, craft loss, and motivated reasoning.

    -CD

    Source date (UTC): 2025-05-02 07:44:08 UTC

    Original post: https://x.com/i/articles/1918209879942283265

  • RETURNING ANGLO NAVAL OPTIMISM AND CLASSICAL LIBERALISM TO GERMANIC CONTINENTAL

    RETURNING ANGLO NAVAL OPTIMISM AND CLASSICAL LIBERALISM TO GERMANIC CONTINENTAL CAUTION AND CONSERVATISM.

    Martin and I have been holding a long standing discussion between my anglo imperial optimism, and his continental national pessimism.
    Both of us hold these positions for rational reasons. But our decidability appears to be the result of different ambitions.
    I am attempting to create a science that describes an optimum frictionless human order such that we can measure the costs of pragmatic deviation from it by acknowledging those costs are paid for our national preferences.
    In doing so I hope to end the second abrahamic feminine destruction of the west, and our tolerance internal competition that is against the interests of our people.
    Martin’s objective is narrower and clearer, which is to restore a less optimistic, less tolerant, more national, provincial, and familial order that people would actually prefer LIVING in, and which was insulated from the evils that the permissiveness of anglo liberalism has enabled by it’s creation of the postwar international system. Which itself was subject to capture by the feminine political and abrahamic global tribalism, must as the aristocracy was destroyed by liberalism instead of augmented by it.
    Those of you who know my work recognize that I advocate expansion of government by glasses but not conquest of government by classes. As such rule of law, monarchy, republic, and maximum political participation by those demonstrating responsibility and competency to bear the burden of choice.
    Martin’s final success in helping me understand his position was to convince me that the deviation from germanic civilization by the anglosphere after 1830 converted the moral content of the west to an economic content and system of decidability putting us in line withthe long history of the crimes of that other minority who abandoned ethics for income in the form of rent seeking.
    I should note that I am sometimes an immovable rock because my epistemic standards is so far above normal that it exasperates others. And I should note that Dr Brad Werrell has tried for years to help me understand this – with his usual patience like water on a rock.
    But while I will not change my scientific mission going forward I will attempt to understand that the restoration of the germanic civilization’s permisos is a necessary consequence of the exhaustion of the capacity of consumerism to organize and incentivize human behavior.
    And while it is this latter reaction that helped me understand how to interpret what I consider the backward looking regressivism of Martin and Brad, and their failure to recognize we had dragged mankind out of poverty with that postwar anglo strategy – the fact of the matter is that this period is over and as such it’s time to reunite anglo and germanic civilization because the anglo empire is as impossible as any other now that we have equilibrated science, technology, and economics worldwide erasing the 600 year advantage of the anglosphere that enabled it’s conquest and reformation of the world.
    We saved man from agrarian poverty.
    We are still the most moral people on earth.
    Even if we are the most foolishly optimistic in the face of the pervasive nature of man.
    Affections
    -CD

    Source date (UTC): 2025-05-02 02:35:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1918132156557344768

  • America is MORE western than the continent, not less. The question is why Europe

    America is MORE western than the continent, not less. The question is why Europe’s wars led to its failure as a western civ by subservience (submission to the state), marxism (collectivism), effeminacy, and pacifism.

    Definition of “Western.”
    Historians treat “the West” as the synthesis of five institutional complexes:
    – Greco-Roman rational inquiry and civic republicanism;
    – Latin-Christian moral individualism;
    – Germanic common-law constraints on rulers;
    – Early-modern scientific and commercial revolutions;
    – Enlightenment liberal constitutionalism.
    “Westernness” therefore means persistent individualism, rule-of-law constitutionalism, rationalism, and a readiness to defend those norms by force.

    Transplant without the feudal detritus.
    When the English‐speaking settler elites crossed the Atlantic they imported the whole bundle—common law, Protestant ethic, private property, militia self-defence—but left behind aristocratic hierarchy and confessional state churches. The American Founders then codified those Western axioms in a written constitution, republicanized them, and fused them with frontier egalitarianism. The republic became a “freeze-dried” snapshot of classical-liberal Western civilization.

    Europe’s post-1945 divergence.
    After two self-inflicted civil wars (1914-18, 1939-45) and the trauma of empire’s collapse, European elites sought safety in three projects: (i) social-democratic welfare guarantees, (ii) post-national pooling of sovereignty in the EU, and (iii) pacifist reliance on American security guarantees. Cultural theorists now speak of a “post-Western Europe,” where cosmopolitan governance and hybrid civilizational identities displace the older Western self-image.

    Religion and moral anthropology.
    Western Christianity has always linked individual moral agency to limited government. Europe’s accelerated secularization broke that link: barely a quarter of Western Europeans say religion is “very important” in their lives, versus six in ten Americans. Pew’s comparative survey finds Americans markedly more religious, more individualistic, and less supportive of cradle-to-grave statism than Britons, French, Germans, or Spaniards. On that cultural axis the USA still looks like early-modern Europe; the continent does not.

    Power politics and strategic culture.
    Robert Kagan famously reduced the gap to a quip: “Americans are from Mars and Europeans are from Venus.” Europe, cushioned by U.S. protection, embraces law, procedure, and soft power; the United States still assumes sovereign responsibility for coercive enforcement of liberal norms. The American readiness to wield hard power continues the West’s historic strategic posture from Sparta through Britain; Europe’s aversion is a departure.

    Civilizational core status.
    Samuel Huntington, surveying post-Cold-War alignments, designated the United States—not France or Germany—as the “core state” of Western civilization, the principal carrier of its values against rival blocs. In that taxonomy Europe is drifting toward a multi-civilizational condominium, while America retains a coherent Western identity.

    Demography and migration.
    Large‐scale immigration has diversified both societies, but the proportion of Muslim and African diaspora populations is an order of magnitude higher in major EU states than in the U.S., accelerating Europe’s cultural pluralization and sharpening its post-Western turn. American assimilation, still framed by a Protestant-Anglo civic creed, integrates newcomers into a recognizably Western narrative; Europe struggles with parallel communities and legal pluralism.

    Net inference.
    On each dimension that originally defined the West—classical-liberal institutions, individual moral agency grounded in Christianity, strategic willingness to defend order, and cultural self-confidence—the United States now scores higher than the European heartland. Historians thus argue that America functions as the conservation reserve of Western civilization, while Europe, by choice, risk, or fatigue, experiments with a post-Western civil model.

    Select reference list
    Gerard Delanty, “Peripheries and Borders in a Post-Western Europe,” Eurozine (2007).
    Pew Research Center, “The American–Western European Values Gap” (2011).
    Robert Kagan, Of Paradise and Power: America and Europe in the New World Order (2003).
    Samuel P. Huntington, “The Clash of Civilizations?” Foreign Affairs (1993) and The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (1996).

    Reply addressees: @xenocosmography @AutistocratMS

    Source date (UTC): 2025-05-01 11:37:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1917906250844774400

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1917873925373174034

    IN REPLY TO:

    @xenocosmography

    @AutistocratMS @curtdoolittle This is serious historical delusion.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1917873925373174034

  • Curt Doolittle’s relevance in intellectual history is contingent, not yet canoni

    Curt Doolittle’s relevance in intellectual history is contingent, not yet canonical. His work exists as a contrarian synthesis—responding to post-enlightenment failures in law, morality, and epistemology by attempting to reduce all social cooperation to operationally testable, decidable systems.

    His primary relevance lies in:

    Post-Postmodern Response: Where modernism pursued objective truth and postmodernism dismantled it, Doolittle reconstructs truth and law using computability, operationalism, and adversarial epistemology—pushing epistemology from philosophy toward algorithmic governance.

    Unified Framework: Offers a rare full-system alternative to liberal democracy, economic theory, and legal positivism. Unlike Marx, Rawls, or Hayek who work within partial domains, Doolittle attempts unification—comparable in ambition to Comte or Spencer, but grounded in 21st-century constraints like computability, evolutionary biology, and game theory.

    Decidability as Normative Standard: Introduces a novel philosophical axis—decidability—as a replacement for truth, good, or utility. In this view, systems are judged by whether they resolve disputes without discretion. This reframes foundational questions in law, logic, and morality.

    Operationalism Extended: Where Bridgman applied operationalism to physics, Doolittle applies it to law, ethics, and institutional design, producing a language of “demonstrated interests” and “testimonial truth” as computable legal and moral primitives.

    Natural Law Reconstructed: Revives and formalizes natural law tradition, stripping it of theological and metaphysical baggage. Law becomes a science of cooperation, rather than a set of traditions or legislative fictions.

    AI and Law: Doolittle’s framework prefigures the demands of AI governance: systems of law and ethics that can be computed, verified, and acted upon without human discretion. In this, he anticipates or complements debates in AI alignment, algorithmic jurisprudence, and automated institutional design.

    His influence is currently marginal to mainstream discourse due to presentation style, ideological friction, and institutional exclusion. However, his work serves as a precursor or competitor to future legal-epistemic systems designed for computation and automation under civilizational stress. If adopted or adapted, relevance will shift from speculative to structural.

    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-30 02:09:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1917400800172859398

  • (Ruminations) It appears that democracy encourages overemphasis of the political

    (Ruminations)
    It appears that democracy encourages overemphasis of the political. That Communism overemphasizes authority. That religion overemphasizes mysticism. But it also appears that That Monarchy emphasizes the social – because it is an extension of the family and tribe.
    Given the stresses of exposure to political competition, we would all I assume prefer apolitical lives, because we lacked political agency and therefore political competition with one another. At least that’s my observation out there in the rest of the world.
    Most people, the vast majority, of whom I am certainly not a member, would prefer some form of serfdom. Where their lives – as is more true in Europe – are heavily bounded by authorities who take responsibility for the world at scale. Ensure our welfare is never at risk. And our efforts, if we wish to expend them, are dedicated to the pursuit of surpluses – meaning ‘desires’ not needs.

    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-25 22:50:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1915901369988616192

  • Hoe_Math, (All); This conversation ‘has legs’. Economic prose is structured by t

    Hoe_Math, (All);
    This conversation ‘has legs’.
    Economic prose is structured by the logic of accounting. It is therefore a descriptive grammar (logic). A system of measurement. It is, (and Hoe Math is doing a service pointing this out) organized under the presumption of growth of mankind since the 15th century – the age of economies – where things will keep getting better.
    So just as prior to the world wars and marxism, we thought in moral terms, and postwar and post-marxism we think in economic terms, economics carries this ‘premise’ with it.
    As such we fail FULL ACCOUNTING, of all sorts of assets – usually called INFORMAL capital, like mindfulness, neighborliness, civic pride and virtue, the family, friends, and the civil society. And as such, we fail to measure the cost of “Bowling Alone” (Look it up). In other words we get what we measure.
    Hoe Math is elegantly, in his now iconic style, pointing out this absurdity.

    Here is how I frame ie:

    Economics in practice fails where it refuses to measure what is unwanted: externalities, dependencies, moral hazards, and suppressed reciprocity. These failures originate in:
    – The institutionalization of irreciprocity,
    – The concealment of time and capital consumption,
    – The devaluation of human and social capital,
    – And the aggregation of harm beyond visibility, consent, or repair.
    And economics without negative principles is merely a system of accounting for profitable deceit.

    Economics should consists of:
    (a) The “One Lesson”: “accounting for all costs seen and unseen” (internal and external, borne and forgone, material and opportunity).
    (b) Objectivity: value neutrality. All value is subjective. But that only means incommensurable. It does not mean that the accumulation of negative value (impositions, burdens, harms) does not exist. Only that the value is subjective.
    (b) The tendency toward disequilibrium (advantage) and equilibrium (exhaustion of advantage). Like all other creatures we exhaust opportunities, and more so because we adapt by mind and behavior instead of just by genetics.

    NEGATIVE PRINCIPLES OF ECONOMICS
    (Failures of measurement, incentive alignment, and reciprocity)

    The Seen and Unseen but Unwanted
    We account for the seen (market transactions) and unseen (opportunity costs), but we often exclude the unwanted—especially long-term, indirect, and morally or politically inconvenient costs.
    These include social decay, dependency, decline in human capital, institutional fragility, and strategic vulnerability.
    They are omitted because they are hard to price, slow to manifest, or because someone profits from their concealment.

    Externalities as Institutional Failure
    Externalities are not just “market failures”; they are institutional suppressions of reciprocity.
    Negative externalities = costs imposed without consent, compensation, or commensurability.
    The tolerance of externalities is often by design—serving interests of producers, states, or rentiers.
    Most externalities are hidden in diffused harm: moral decay, demographic decline, intergenerational costs.

    Institutionalization of Irreciprocity
    Institutions, especially states and financial systems, evolve to legalize, normalize, and obscure irreciprocity.
    Subsidies without behavioral requirement (e.g., self-discipline, contribution) shift costs to others.
    Monetary policy, credit expansion, and regulation often centralize rents while externalizing risks.
    Welfare for the elite = asset inflation and regulatory capture.
    Welfare for the poor = dependency and consumption of commons.

    Suppression of Time Preference Signaling
    Artificially low interest rates suppress time preference signals, mispricing risk and distorting capital formation.
    Encourages malinvestment, short-termism, consumerism.
    Disincentivizes savings, self-regulation, and intergenerational stewardship.
    Leads to capital consumption disguised as prosperity.

    Devaluation of Human Capital and Social Trust
    Market systems do not price non-market goods unless failure becomes catastrophic.
    Family formation, fertility, cultural continuity, trust, beauty, and honor are consumed as free goods until collapse.
    Because they are not priced, they are not preserved; because they are not preserved, society degrades.

    Asymmetries of Information and Accountability
    Markets assume rational actors with access to information—but power differentials invert this premise.
    Producers manipulate perception (advertising), incentives (finance), and beliefs (media, academia).
    Consumers are not autonomous agents but targets of psychological manipulation.
    Accountability is asymmetrical: small actors are punished for minor errors, large actors rewarded for systemic harm.

    Moral Hazards Hidden by Aggregation
    Aggregation hides causal chains. GDP, stock indices, inflation measures—are composite illusions.
    National metrics can rise while population health, sovereignty, and fertility collapse.
    We measure what’s easy, not what’s meaningful. And the easy is often what the state or market wants to measure.
    Moral hazards (privatized gain, socialized loss) are hidden in these aggregates.

    Suppression of Natural Law by Incentive Structures
    Reciprocity, sovereignty, and self-determination are violated by incentives misaligned with natural constraints.
    Systems built on asymmetric information, fiat currency, and bureaucratic insulation cannot converge on truth or fairness.
    They reward deceit, delay, and diffusion of responsibility—contravening the natural law of cooperation.

    Affections
    Curt Doolittle
    NLI

    Reply addressees: @ItIsHoeMath

    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-25 03:58:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1915616259309490176

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1915565389138059403

  • Clarification: On Price, Objective (Market) Value, and Subjective Value. Demand

    Clarification: On Price, Objective (Market) Value, and Subjective Value.
    Demand vs Supply => PRICE. Value is always and everywhere subjective. It is a common error to confuse price (objective) with value (subjective) because of course, humans think subjectively.

    Likewise: Regarding “The amount that you hate (reject) something vs the amount you’re forced to put up with it (imposed on you) is how much harm (anti-value) that’s been thrust on you.” is a Subjective Cost, not an objective one.

    Why: all information, services, and goods (capital) store time. But time is unequally valuable to us, and our time is unequally valuable to others. As such our value is subjective. This is the first principle of Marx’s error: we do not know the value to others until we test it by producing an exchange. Otherwise we may believe something has value to us, and we may wish it was valuable to others, but if they are not willing to trade (act, expend) for it then no it is of no value. Hence why artists don’t make money and hookers do. 😉

    The Universal laws of all human behavior:
    1) All behavior is reducible to acquisition, retention, or conversion (consumption, or trade).
    2) All acquisition is determined by the least cost in the shortest time with the least effort at the lowest risk with the greatest certainty.
    3) All emotions are a reaction to change in state of one’s demonstrated interests (investments), whether real or anticipated.
    4) All individual desires for acquisition, retention, conversion (value) vary subjectively by individual in time and space.
    5) Cooperation is always and everywhere a multiplier so large that no individual action can compete for it’s returns.
    6) Sex differences are the origin of all human differences and the feminine seeks to acquire maximum consumption, in the shortest time, at minimum risk, and minimum responsibility: childrearing – and the masculine seeks to acquire maximum capital over any period of time, any any tolerable risk, to gain responsibility which determines his natural selection among both males and females.

    Curt Doolittle
    NLI

    Reply addressees: @ItIsHoeMath

    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-25 01:31:46 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1915579456267444227

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1915565389138059403

  • THE INTENSE WORLD HYPOTHESIS OF AUTISTIC EXPERIENCE This is my interpretation of

    THE INTENSE WORLD HYPOTHESIS OF AUTISTIC EXPERIENCE
    This is my interpretation of the experience of being on the spectrum (a bit).

    The Intense World Hypothesis proposes that autism is characterized by heightened sensory, emotional, and cognitive processing, leading to an “intense” experience of the world. Developed by neuroscientists Henry and Kamila Markram, it suggests autistic individuals have hyper-reactive brain circuits, particularly in the amygdala, prefrontal cortex, and other regions, causing amplified responses to stimuli.

    This can manifest as:

    Hyper-perception: Overly acute sensory processing, where sounds, lights, or textures feel overwhelming.

    Hyper-attention: Intense focus on details, sometimes at the expense of broader context.

    Hyper-memory: Enhanced recall, especially for specific patterns or facts.

    Hyper-emotionality: Strong emotional reactions, which can lead to anxiety or withdrawal in complex environments.

    Rather than a deficit, the hypothesis frames autism as a state of over-functioning neural circuits, where the brain forms excessive connections (hyper-plasticity). This leads to rapid learning but also sensory overload, social challenges, and a preference for predictable environments. The theory contrasts with older views of autism as a lack of social or cognitive capacity, emphasizing instead an overwhelming surplus of sensory and emotional input.

    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-23 21:23:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1915154671402151936

  • OUR TOP SCHOOLS DO NOT TEACH LAW BUT SEDITION When I was in college in Connectic

    OUR TOP SCHOOLS DO NOT TEACH LAW BUT SEDITION
    When I was in college in Connecticut in the late 70s we could take certain courses across the network, and lectures at Yale were frequently worth the 45 minutes to an hour of travel time – especially if brick oven pizza was involved. We also used Trinity – mostly for movies. Wesleyan for art shows, but little else. And I won’t mention Connecticut College. 😉

    My research on reform required I spend a little too much time with the curriculum of the top law schools in the USA, and I came away rather horrified – we don’t practice the intent of the University as the church intended, which was to produce people capable of sharing the aristocracy and nobility’s burden of public health (Physicians), morality (Theology), and behavior (Law).

    We do not teach the natural law as a science of cooperation of large numbers of increasingly anonymous and varied people at scales that are individually incomprehensible.

    We do not teach that that our institutions are empirical not political: that sovereignty and equality under the law are produced by our universal reciprocal insurance of individual one another’s sovereignty, and that we are the only people who are truly sovereign because of it;

    And that the common law, the purely empirical, adversarially discovered within and across regions under the applied natural law of sovereignty; that the determination of collective action by concurrency we call democracy is empirical measurement of consensus prior to issuance of legislative contract between parties;

    And that mankind will never end our innovation in cooperation – but likewise never end our innovation in free riding, rent seeking, parasitism, and predation.

    And that all human organizations as they scale suppress local deceptions, rents, parasitisms and predations to pay for central suppressions of them; while gradually producing the same incentives among those whose job it is to suppress them.

    And that the anonymity of those who, seeking exit from those market forces in the safety of bureaucracy, do deterministically by their power distance, serve their and their common interests first, and exhaust the surpluses of the vast edifice of civilizational cooperation through endless justification, differing only from murderers, rapists, thieves, conspirators, both private and public that they have so gently but systematically replaced.

    Civilizations die for the same reason: the overproduction of rentiers whose soft and distant corruption in vast numbers by ways small and large destroy the trust that was necessary for the trust producing investment and risk by millions in thousands of subtleties every day until the calcification is sufficient that the polity cannot respond to gradual change of immanent shock.

    Instead, under the marxist sequence’s imitation of the abrahamic sequence, itself an imitation of the feminine sequence of warfare by sedition, has created an industry that undermines the one thing that makes possible the greatness of the west in contrast to the rest – all of whom failed by 800ad despite their first mover advantage: individual responsibility for every other’s individual sovereignty in our demonstrated interests: to be free of parasitism leaving us only cooperation to survive, and the trust in one another that we will be so.

    Our law schools do not teach moral law with which to produce a population of insurers of trust – they teach immoral activism just as certainly as the marxists and abrahamists did … and still do. Appealing to the vanity of self righteousness in advancing claims of oppression and conspiracy, where exists little other than the remains of meritocracy in a sea of rentiers.

    If there is a devil. It’s name was abraham, and it came from UR – and when Hermes brought his cart of lies to the Levant, it is no wonder all in it was stolen. The most powerful lie being the false promise of freedom from evolutionary demand for cooperation at all costs in the defeat of the dark forces of time and ignorance: entropy.

    Rebels seeking power are always evil – the only heroes are those seeking the power to deny power, such that only our individual insurance of one another – by pointy objects if necessary survives in markets for cooperation and markets for disputes we call courts.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Reply addressees: @SRCHicks

    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-23 00:59:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1914846518777163776

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1912691539127525488