Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • Why Learn the Grammars?

    [I]f you study math, programming, the physical sciences, economics, or law, you will notice the similarity, in that there are n-number of software design patterns at every level of complexity; n-number of physical laws at every level of complexity; there are n-number of economic ideas at every level of complexity; and n-number of properties of law at contract, jurisprudence, and state authority; and you learn the economic ideas by the association with the author, and the legal ideas by association with a case; the programming ideas by label, example or function, and the mathematic ideas at every increase in dimensions (shapes) by the most absurd archaic nonsense language humanly possible. These different disciplines only ‘seem’ dissimilar or complicated, but they are all reducible to a common paradigm (ontology) and terminology, which once understood is … profoundly enlightening. This is what The Grammars in Propertarianism explain. That there is a regular, obvious pattern to the available operations at every level of complexity, where a level is defined as the set of operations possible before a subsequent operation is possible. In other words, you can’t make a molecule without an element, or an element without an elementary particle, or an elementary particle without the elementary forces. This particular pattern will explain language to you in a way that will explain all languages to you whether that language is one we speak, or one consisting of operations possible in the physical, sentient, and social world.

  • Why Learn the Grammars?

    [I]f you study math, programming, the physical sciences, economics, or law, you will notice the similarity, in that there are n-number of software design patterns at every level of complexity; n-number of physical laws at every level of complexity; there are n-number of economic ideas at every level of complexity; and n-number of properties of law at contract, jurisprudence, and state authority; and you learn the economic ideas by the association with the author, and the legal ideas by association with a case; the programming ideas by label, example or function, and the mathematic ideas at every increase in dimensions (shapes) by the most absurd archaic nonsense language humanly possible. These different disciplines only ‘seem’ dissimilar or complicated, but they are all reducible to a common paradigm (ontology) and terminology, which once understood is … profoundly enlightening. This is what The Grammars in Propertarianism explain. That there is a regular, obvious pattern to the available operations at every level of complexity, where a level is defined as the set of operations possible before a subsequent operation is possible. In other words, you can’t make a molecule without an element, or an element without an elementary particle, or an elementary particle without the elementary forces. This particular pattern will explain language to you in a way that will explain all languages to you whether that language is one we speak, or one consisting of operations possible in the physical, sentient, and social world.

  • Reducing the Cannon of The West to A Bible

    [T]he west never had a bible, but a canon, and that canon was written in multiple frames although primarily scientific, legal, philosophical, normative, literary, and theological. While we traditionally had rule of law beyond which no leader may tread, we allowed liberalism (even classical liberalism) to violate that traditional law. Philosophy, theology, tradition, are just narratives that explain a group strategy in a grammar of wishes. Law is the evidence of what actually occurs, not what is wished for. Our Founding Fathers, through generations of the English civil wars, sought to reduce that canon to constitution. But they lacked the skill we developed in the 20th because of programming, the sciences, and the collapse of the philosophical program (yes). They were successful despite those weaknesses as long as the heroic narrative of the revolution persisted, or what the founders said was dependent upon the moral teachings of the church. The failure of the church to reform in the face of Darwin and the sciences, the replacement of the church with the academy, the capture of the academy by the immoral left, combined with Anti-whiteness, under guise of privilege, colonialism, and slavery (not unique to whites at all) provided the means of undermining that narrative, and So we must complete the Greco-roman-germanic-anglo-American research program and produce that bible in the form of a constitution such that no narrative can undermine it, without causing our retaliation. We need to create the white law – a rational, scientific, western competitor to Jewish law and Muslim sharia. A strict construction from our founding differences: sovereignty and reciprocity, truth and duty, judge and jury, heroism and excellence, family and commons, and the market for voluntary cooperation in all walks of life – that together produce the social political and economic order most rapidly open to adaptation and innovation. We need a constitution and a law closed to interpretation open to innovation, but beyond which no man, private, public, or foreign may tread. Heroism and excellence, Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, and Duty, Judge and Jury, and markets in all aspects of life: association, cooperation, production, reproduction, commons, polities, and war. That is the secret to western civilization. Sovereignty.

  • Reducing the Cannon of The West to A Bible

    [T]he west never had a bible, but a canon, and that canon was written in multiple frames although primarily scientific, legal, philosophical, normative, literary, and theological. While we traditionally had rule of law beyond which no leader may tread, we allowed liberalism (even classical liberalism) to violate that traditional law. Philosophy, theology, tradition, are just narratives that explain a group strategy in a grammar of wishes. Law is the evidence of what actually occurs, not what is wished for. Our Founding Fathers, through generations of the English civil wars, sought to reduce that canon to constitution. But they lacked the skill we developed in the 20th because of programming, the sciences, and the collapse of the philosophical program (yes). They were successful despite those weaknesses as long as the heroic narrative of the revolution persisted, or what the founders said was dependent upon the moral teachings of the church. The failure of the church to reform in the face of Darwin and the sciences, the replacement of the church with the academy, the capture of the academy by the immoral left, combined with Anti-whiteness, under guise of privilege, colonialism, and slavery (not unique to whites at all) provided the means of undermining that narrative, and So we must complete the Greco-roman-germanic-anglo-American research program and produce that bible in the form of a constitution such that no narrative can undermine it, without causing our retaliation. We need to create the white law – a rational, scientific, western competitor to Jewish law and Muslim sharia. A strict construction from our founding differences: sovereignty and reciprocity, truth and duty, judge and jury, heroism and excellence, family and commons, and the market for voluntary cooperation in all walks of life – that together produce the social political and economic order most rapidly open to adaptation and innovation. We need a constitution and a law closed to interpretation open to innovation, but beyond which no man, private, public, or foreign may tread. Heroism and excellence, Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, and Duty, Judge and Jury, and markets in all aspects of life: association, cooperation, production, reproduction, commons, polities, and war. That is the secret to western civilization. Sovereignty.

  • Legit Ad Hom’s Against Doolittle

    [J]ust ’cause it’s come up again.  I prefer to stand out in front of criticism rather than let people presume I’m making a moral claim about myself. I’m not. List of legitimate Ad Hom’s.

    • Multiple marriages. Put business before family.
    • Multiple relationships. Put business and philosophy before relationship.
    • High risk biz ventures most of which succeeded – not all – producing expected downsides when not.
    • Ruthless biz practices, some of which made others rich, that resulted in various suits, as well as various tremendous windfalls.
    • Continuous civil warfare during and after divorce that will continue for the next four to six years easily.
    • Mid life crisis after near death experiences resulted in a bit of a wild ride for a bit.
    • Obsessively – zero tolerance for ‘slights’.
    • Will fight to the end on ‘principle’ – even if it makes no material sense to do so.
    • More than slightly clueless about normie life and experience, and insensitivity to normie world views.
    • Considers other people subjects in social science experiments.
    • Considers each business an experiment in social science.
    • Wealth is merely a means of financing experiments in social science.
    • Considers people vehicles for achieving success in business or social science.
    • “One cares for domesticated animals and pets, one cannot engage in reciprocity with them.” or more fashionably: “A lion doesn’t concern himself with the opinion of sheep. “
    • Definitely part of the Yuppie-Wall Street Generation.

    These are legit ad homs. They are true. Everyone knows them. They also have nothing to do with the work on Natural Law and the Logic and Science of the Social Sciences. I am not a good person. I succeed because I am an infovore, competitive, with ruthless, predatory, and driven. That is all. I am however, somewhere between a good and great philosopher of jurisprudence, testimony, and the natural law of cooperation. I am also not a normie living a working class lifestyle with little exposure to the power structures and systems of cooperation and conflict in civilizations across the world and across time. I am not a good person, and don’t claim to be. Truth doesn’t require I be a good person. It requires only that my work is not false. -CD

  • Legit Ad Hom’s Against Doolittle

    [J]ust ’cause it’s come up again.  I prefer to stand out in front of criticism rather than let people presume I’m making a moral claim about myself. I’m not. List of legitimate Ad Hom’s.

    • Multiple marriages. Put business before family.
    • Multiple relationships. Put business and philosophy before relationship.
    • High risk biz ventures most of which succeeded – not all – producing expected downsides when not.
    • Ruthless biz practices, some of which made others rich, that resulted in various suits, as well as various tremendous windfalls.
    • Continuous civil warfare during and after divorce that will continue for the next four to six years easily.
    • Mid life crisis after near death experiences resulted in a bit of a wild ride for a bit.
    • Obsessively – zero tolerance for ‘slights’.
    • Will fight to the end on ‘principle’ – even if it makes no material sense to do so.
    • More than slightly clueless about normie life and experience, and insensitivity to normie world views.
    • Considers other people subjects in social science experiments.
    • Considers each business an experiment in social science.
    • Wealth is merely a means of financing experiments in social science.
    • Considers people vehicles for achieving success in business or social science.
    • “One cares for domesticated animals and pets, one cannot engage in reciprocity with them.” or more fashionably: “A lion doesn’t concern himself with the opinion of sheep. “
    • Definitely part of the Yuppie-Wall Street Generation.

    These are legit ad homs. They are true. Everyone knows them. They also have nothing to do with the work on Natural Law and the Logic and Science of the Social Sciences. I am not a good person. I succeed because I am an infovore, competitive, with ruthless, predatory, and driven. That is all. I am however, somewhere between a good and great philosopher of jurisprudence, testimony, and the natural law of cooperation. I am also not a normie living a working class lifestyle with little exposure to the power structures and systems of cooperation and conflict in civilizations across the world and across time. I am not a good person, and don’t claim to be. Truth doesn’t require I be a good person. It requires only that my work is not false. -CD

  • Yes We Need Order Rather than Chaos

    (from Gab)

    —“Jefferson? We don’t need freedom, we need order”– @alternative_right

    [Y]es, but what order?

    1. Order of Truth, Science, Law and productive cooperation? (Rule of Law – Competition between men under the law of reciprocity.)

    2. Or order of Lies, Supernaturalism, Scripture and Parasitism – Rule by men? (Rule by Church Men – Priests)

    3. Or order of Fraud, Pseudoscience, Sophism and Parasitism – rule by men? (Rule by Dishonest Men – “You Know Who”)

    4. Or order of Force, Command, Whim, and Parasitism – rule by man? (Rule by Forceful Men – Military )

    Let me explain Jefferson’s context. 1. The Aristocratic order (taxation force), 2. The Priestly Order(lies, obedience and Tithes) and 3. The Commercial order (truth, tort, and trade). His understanding was natural law Natural law by rule of law. Rule of law producing a commercial order. A commercial order is a voluntary order. An order of meritocracy. Meritocracy meaning Natural Aristocracy. We haven’t replaced it with socializing. We’ve replaced it with DISORDER. We can have our order but we cannot have it by the simple means you intuit. Rules must exist, and rules free of human ‘discretion’ because in the end all human discretion ‘swims left’. Jefferson was (correctly) trying to create a THIRD WAY, free of the parasitism of the state and church – who were both tremendous parasites that kept our people in ignorance and poverty. The Enemy can bed defeated by law and prosecution without planting the seeds of another enemy. The natural law is the best civic religion ever invented by man. The natural law, the stoic method, and the Epicurean goals are the optimum personal religion. The Five Rules of Christianity, if limited to Kin, are the optimum method of producing harmony. The only cost one bears under the natural law is christian forgiveness. And Aryan Intolerance. Every Man a Sheriff.

  • Yes We Need Order Rather than Chaos

    (from Gab)

    —“Jefferson? We don’t need freedom, we need order”– @alternative_right

    [Y]es, but what order?

    1. Order of Truth, Science, Law and productive cooperation? (Rule of Law – Competition between men under the law of reciprocity.)

    2. Or order of Lies, Supernaturalism, Scripture and Parasitism – Rule by men? (Rule by Church Men – Priests)

    3. Or order of Fraud, Pseudoscience, Sophism and Parasitism – rule by men? (Rule by Dishonest Men – “You Know Who”)

    4. Or order of Force, Command, Whim, and Parasitism – rule by man? (Rule by Forceful Men – Military )

    Let me explain Jefferson’s context. 1. The Aristocratic order (taxation force), 2. The Priestly Order(lies, obedience and Tithes) and 3. The Commercial order (truth, tort, and trade). His understanding was natural law Natural law by rule of law. Rule of law producing a commercial order. A commercial order is a voluntary order. An order of meritocracy. Meritocracy meaning Natural Aristocracy. We haven’t replaced it with socializing. We’ve replaced it with DISORDER. We can have our order but we cannot have it by the simple means you intuit. Rules must exist, and rules free of human ‘discretion’ because in the end all human discretion ‘swims left’. Jefferson was (correctly) trying to create a THIRD WAY, free of the parasitism of the state and church – who were both tremendous parasites that kept our people in ignorance and poverty. The Enemy can bed defeated by law and prosecution without planting the seeds of another enemy. The natural law is the best civic religion ever invented by man. The natural law, the stoic method, and the Epicurean goals are the optimum personal religion. The Five Rules of Christianity, if limited to Kin, are the optimum method of producing harmony. The only cost one bears under the natural law is christian forgiveness. And Aryan Intolerance. Every Man a Sheriff.

  • Why Universal Nationalism vs Globalism

    WHY UNIVERSAL NATIONALISM VS GLOBALISM by Curt Doolittle

    —“I do universal nationalism. Why? Because natural law judges it as the only not-immoral means of cooperation. But that doesn’t tell you much. Instead it’s because “all men are distant relations cooperating to raise their people by the production of commons information, goods, and services, best suited to doing so despite our differences in rate of development bias in temperament and bias in distribution of abilities.” And if we construct states as extensions of the family, household, clan, tribe, and nation, we have elites who serve the interests of their people on their terms, and the smallest proximity-to-influence-and power that is possible. And we ameliorate our differences not through politics, power, and commons, but through trade of information, goods, and services. If we do otherwise, under globalism, we put those people into competition, where there is one small global elite with interest in one another, and a host of common people suffering their rule. So there is no system of rule superior to universal nationalism, with tolerance for migration of elites for trade purposes – but prohibiting them from local political enfranchise and social involvement, and public speech.”–

  • Why Universal Nationalism vs Globalism

    WHY UNIVERSAL NATIONALISM VS GLOBALISM by Curt Doolittle

    —“I do universal nationalism. Why? Because natural law judges it as the only not-immoral means of cooperation. But that doesn’t tell you much. Instead it’s because “all men are distant relations cooperating to raise their people by the production of commons information, goods, and services, best suited to doing so despite our differences in rate of development bias in temperament and bias in distribution of abilities.” And if we construct states as extensions of the family, household, clan, tribe, and nation, we have elites who serve the interests of their people on their terms, and the smallest proximity-to-influence-and power that is possible. And we ameliorate our differences not through politics, power, and commons, but through trade of information, goods, and services. If we do otherwise, under globalism, we put those people into competition, where there is one small global elite with interest in one another, and a host of common people suffering their rule. So there is no system of rule superior to universal nationalism, with tolerance for migration of elites for trade purposes – but prohibiting them from local political enfranchise and social involvement, and public speech.”–