Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • PERFECT GOVERNMENT They are all just women. That is all that they can be. It is

    PERFECT GOVERNMENT

    They are all just women. That is all that they can be. It is what most prefer to be. And truth is irrelevant to women, since that is a matter of contractual constraint and non compromise. They care only for non-conflict( consensus), possibility, consumption.

    So the journey for men, is to limit women to reciprocity and possibility, not preference, good, or truth.

    “I can do that for you”, and “I cannot do that for you”, and “I can only do that for you (when conditions are met)”, are in the vocabulary of women’s understanding.

    The fact that we added women to the men’s voting pool, but did not provide for them a separate house, as we had the nobility(lords), the property owners people(commons), and the labor (church) is the problem of modernity – not their participation in the market for commons or the market for labor.

    Markets force cooperation on means despite incompatibility of ends, and construct compromises. Whereas democracy and false equality create markets for propaganda, deception, and bribery of voters through forcible takings and distributions..

    When we have opposing reproductive and evolutionary interests, and we have different means of coercion of one another (violence vs seduction), different preferences (numbers versus excellences, equality and consensus vs hierarchy and truth), then the only solution to cooperation that preserves an honest high trust society is a market constructed for the purpose of trade between peoples of different interests.

    The market for consumption (Self), the market for fixed capital (home), the market for reproduction (family), the market for production(goods, services, and information), the market for the production of commons(‘govt’), and the market for polities, all regulated by the one law of reciprocity – provides a ‘perfect’ hierarchy of ‘perfect’ institutions that assist us in achieving our differing goals, with differing abilities, by the service of one another’s means, despite our differing ends.

    We had the perfect government, built by the aristocracy, and the failure of the aristocracy to expand the houses to replace the church (family and labor), and to expand the houses to include women, broke the meritocratic hierarchy that for millennia had maximized liberty and prosperity by demonstrated merit, by assisting in incremental, demonstrated loyalty and ability by the product of one’s efforts, and the demonstrated consistency of the intergenerational family as an insurer of individual performance.

    The one law of reciprocity (tort).

    An independent ‘cult’ of the law: the judiciary.

    An hereditary monarch as a judge of last resort.

    A cabinet of professionals in service of the monarch.

    A market for the production of commons (non-consumables) consisting of houses for each of the classes: military, judicial, regional (governors), commerce (property), mothers (women), and dependents(underclasses).

    That market produces contracts, not legislation or law.

    All contracts ascend unless vetoed by the military, judiciary or King as judge of last resort.

    All funds raised are produced by contract between the houses.

    All employees the monarchy serve at the pleasure of the king – without exception.

    The only ‘Tax’ (non-discretionary cost) for all is 3% of GDP for the military and militia, 1% for the monarchy(use with total discretion), and .01% for the judiciary, raised by the houses.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-30 11:56:00 UTC

  • Perfect Government

    They are all just women. That is all that they can be. It is what most prefer to be. And truth is irrelevant to women, since that is a matter of contractual constraint and non compromise. They care only for non-conflict( consensus), possibility, consumption. So the journey for men, is to limit women to reciprocity and possibility, not preference, good, or truth. “I can do that for you”, and “I cannot do that for you”, and “I can only do that for you (when conditions are met)”, are in the vocabulary of women’s understanding. The fact that we added women to the men’s voting pool, but did not provide for them a separate house, as we had the nobility(lords), the property owners people(commons), and the labor (church) is the problem of modernity – not their participation in the market for commons or the market for labor. Markets force cooperation on means despite incompatibility of ends, and construct compromises. Whereas democracy and false equality create markets for propaganda, deception, and bribery of voters through forcible takings and distributions.. When we have opposing reproductive and evolutionary interests, and we have different means of coercion of one another (violence vs seduction), different preferences (numbers versus excellences, equality and consensus vs hierarchy and truth), then the only solution to cooperation that preserves an honest high trust society is a market constructed for the purpose of trade between peoples of different interests. The market for consumption (Self), the market for fixed capital (home), the market for reproduction (family), the market for production(goods, services, and information), the market for the production of commons(‘govt’), and the market for polities, all regulated by the one law of reciprocity – provides a ‘perfect’ hierarchy of ‘perfect’ institutions that assist us in achieving our differing goals, with differing abilities, by the service of one another’s means, despite our differing ends. We had the perfect government, built by the aristocracy, and the failure of the aristocracy to expand the houses to replace the church (family and labor), and to expand the houses to include women, broke the meritocratic hierarchy that for millennia had maximized liberty and prosperity by demonstrated merit, by assisting in incremental, demonstrated loyalty and ability by the product of one’s efforts, and the demonstrated consistency of the intergenerational family as an insurer of individual performance. The one law of reciprocity (tort). An independent ‘cult’ of the law: the judiciary. An hereditary monarch as a judge of last resort. A cabinet of professionals in service of the monarch. A market for the production of commons (non-consumables) consisting of houses for each of the classes: military, judicial, regional (governors), commerce (property), mothers (women), and dependents(underclasses). That market produces contracts, not legislation or law. All contracts ascend unless vetoed by the military, judiciary or King as judge of last resort. All funds raised are produced by contract between the houses. All employees the monarchy serve at the pleasure of the king – without exception. The only ‘Tax’ (non-discretionary cost) for all is 3% of GDP for the military and militia, 1% for the monarchy(use with total discretion), and .01% for the judiciary, raised by the houses.

  • Cultural Variants of Truth and the Consequences July 11, 2014 (repost) Truth and

    Cultural Variants of Truth and the Consequences July 11, 2014 (repost) Truth and Adherence to Rules are two different things. (submission) Truth and Fidelity to Contract are two different things. Truth and Duty are two different things. Truth and Knowledge are two different things. Truth as Adherence – Familialism (most of the world) Truth as Fidelity – Tribalism (judaism) Truth as Duty – Nationalism (germans) Truth as Science – Universalism. (english) [T]hat members of a community follow rules and conventions with one another, does not require whatsoever that they tell the truth to one another. That members of a community fulfill promises or contracts with one another, does not require whatsoever that they tell the truth to one another. Another community may both fulfill it’s promises, its contracts, and the commitment to tell the truth at all times regardless of cost. The principle of truth to to an Adherence community consists of order. The principle of ‘truth’ to a contract community consists of fidelity. The principle of truth to a truth-telling community consists of ***SCIENCE***. If you grasp the profundity of this statement you will understand why some cultures produce science, and some produce trade, and some produce tyranny. Some create science. And some create pseudoscience. And some create only order. Some create science, innovation, trade and trust. Others create only trade, and others create only utilitarian applications of tools. Small things in large numbers have vast consequences. When we use ‘functions” such as the verb to be, or the word ‘truth’ we do not really understand their construction, just that they are shorthand approximations that tend to work. We have just knowledge of use, not knowledge of construction. But the word ‘true’ means very different things in different places: science, fidelity, and adherence. And the consequences are astounding. Truth is a performative declaration. Truth claims then, to different groups, state either epistemology, fidelity, or adherence. I have solved the problem you know. It’s ethics.

  • Cultural Variants of Truth and the Consequences July 11, 2014 (repost) Truth and

    Cultural Variants of Truth and the Consequences

    July 11, 2014 (repost)

    Truth and Adherence to Rules are two different things. (submission)

    Truth and Fidelity to Contract are two different things.

    Truth and Duty are two different things.

    Truth and Knowledge are two different things.

    Truth as Adherence – Familialism (most of the world)

    Truth as Fidelity – Tribalism (judaism)

    Truth as Duty – Nationalism (germans)

    Truth as Science – Universalism. (english)

    [T]hat members of a community follow rules and conventions with one another, does not require whatsoever that they tell the truth to one another.

    That members of a community fulfill promises or contracts with one another, does not require whatsoever that they tell the truth to one another.

    Another community may both fulfill it’s promises, its contracts, and the commitment to tell the truth at all times regardless of cost.

    The principle of truth to to an Adherence community consists of order. The principle of ‘truth’ to a contract community consists of fidelity. The principle of truth to a truth-telling community consists of ***SCIENCE***.

    If you grasp the profundity of this statement you will understand why some cultures produce science, and some produce trade, and some produce tyranny. Some create science. And some create pseudoscience. And some create only order. Some create science, innovation, trade and trust. Others create only trade, and others create only utilitarian applications of tools.

    Small things in large numbers have vast consequences.

    When we use ‘functions” such as the verb to be, or the word ‘truth’ we do not really understand their construction, just that they are shorthand approximations that tend to work. We have just knowledge of use, not knowledge of construction.

    But the word ‘true’ means very different things in different places: science, fidelity, and adherence.

    And the consequences are astounding.

    Truth is a performative declaration. Truth claims then, to different groups, state either epistemology, fidelity, or adherence.

    I have solved the problem you know.

    It’s ethics.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-29 17:39:00 UTC

  • Cultural Variants of Truth and the Consequences July 11, 2014 (repost) Truth and

    Cultural Variants of Truth and the Consequences July 11, 2014 (repost) Truth and Adherence to Rules are two different things. (submission) Truth and Fidelity to Contract are two different things. Truth and Duty are two different things. Truth and Knowledge are two different things. Truth as Adherence – Familialism (most of the world) Truth as Fidelity – Tribalism (judaism) Truth as Duty – Nationalism (germans) Truth as Science – Universalism. (english) [T]hat members of a community follow rules and conventions with one another, does not require whatsoever that they tell the truth to one another. That members of a community fulfill promises or contracts with one another, does not require whatsoever that they tell the truth to one another. Another community may both fulfill it’s promises, its contracts, and the commitment to tell the truth at all times regardless of cost. The principle of truth to to an Adherence community consists of order. The principle of ‘truth’ to a contract community consists of fidelity. The principle of truth to a truth-telling community consists of ***SCIENCE***. If you grasp the profundity of this statement you will understand why some cultures produce science, and some produce trade, and some produce tyranny. Some create science. And some create pseudoscience. And some create only order. Some create science, innovation, trade and trust. Others create only trade, and others create only utilitarian applications of tools. Small things in large numbers have vast consequences. When we use ‘functions” such as the verb to be, or the word ‘truth’ we do not really understand their construction, just that they are shorthand approximations that tend to work. We have just knowledge of use, not knowledge of construction. But the word ‘true’ means very different things in different places: science, fidelity, and adherence. And the consequences are astounding. Truth is a performative declaration. Truth claims then, to different groups, state either epistemology, fidelity, or adherence. I have solved the problem you know. It’s ethics.

  • LIBERALS, LIBERTARIANS, AND CONSERVATIVES. – Just read **The Righteous Mind** by

    LIBERALS, LIBERTARIANS, AND CONSERVATIVES.

    – Just read **The Righteous Mind** by Jonathan Haidt.

    – Then read **The Essential Difference **by Simon Baron Cohen.

    – Then read **Thinking Fast and Slow **by Daniel Kahneman.

    – Then read **Explaining Postmodernism** by Stephen Hicks.

    (a) liberalism (female-child: parasitism upon capital), libertarianism (marginal male: innovation in capital), conservatism (established male: conservation of capital) differences in moral perception are genetically granted to us and reinforced by a lifetime of experience.

    (b) Conservatives can understand everyone but disagree. Libertarians can understand themselves and conservatives. Liberals (leftists) can only understand themselves.

    (c) Liberals argue in psychologists, consensus over truth, and blame (short term consumption). LIbertarians argue in truth, voluntarism, and economics(medium term production, and profits.) Conservatives argue in intertemporal and unfortunately vague terms (“what happens if everyone does this?”) When they should be arguing in the language of capital.

    (c) we have very little control over altering this process as it’s a reproductive necessity

    (d) By specializing in the reproductive, productive, and capital time cycles, we divide the labor of sense-perception, work, and advocacy, and by voluntary cooperation we calculate the optimum possible at any given moment, without having to understand ‘everything from everyone’s position in the demand cycle.”

    In simple terms, the female and underclass reproductive strategy is to control reproduction, production, and evolution by dysgenia, and the male is to control them by eugenia. And until we can look darwin in the face, we will continue to battle between the female/preisthood/underclass, and the male/aristocracy/middle class forever.

    The history of western civilization’s successin the prehistoric, ancient, and modern worlds is that we have, aside from the chinese, produced the most eugenic civilization. So much so that by the late middle ages, we had dramatically shifted the median of the population more fully into the emiddle classes than any in history (not counting the distribution under slavery)>

    For most of the 18–19th and up until … max of 1940, there was underutilized human capital in european civilization. But since about 1940, if not 1890, that’s not been true. Most of the remaining undeveloped world is burdened by an excessively left distributed underclass that is not underutilized, and possibly cannot now be utilized. The reason being that we have gone from many multiples of return on investment to a maximum of about ten, and this appears to be a declining trend.

    So the future, with a huge underclass, leaves only really, Japan and maybe coastal china, safe from the hordes.

    Liberalism has been a cancer.

    We had the perfect government:

    0 – A Universal Militia (shareholders whose share was purchased by risk)

    1 – A judge of last resort (king)

    2 – An independent judiciary and rule of law under the law of reciprocity.

    3 – A house for each of the natural classes (church, commons, nobility, king)

    4 – And a market for polities, commons, production, reproduction, cooperation, and association.

    And we blew it. Democracy was nothing but a means of bourgeois seizure of power. And the long term transformation from rule of law, to rule by credit.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-29 15:56:00 UTC

  • Liberals, Libertarians, And Conservatives.

    – Just read **The Righteous Mind** by Jonathan Haidt. – Then read **The Essential Difference **by Simon Baron Cohen. – Then read **Thinking Fast and Slow **by Daniel Kahneman. – Then read **Explaining Postmodernism** by Stephen Hicks. (a) liberalism (female-child: parasitism upon capital), libertarianism (marginal male: innovation in capital), conservatism (established male: conservation of capital) differences in moral perception are genetically granted to us and reinforced by a lifetime of experience. (b) Conservatives can understand everyone but disagree. Libertarians can understand themselves and conservatives. Liberals (leftists) can only understand themselves. (c) Liberals argue in psychologists, consensus over truth, and blame (short term consumption). LIbertarians argue in truth, voluntarism, and economics(medium term production, and profits.) Conservatives argue in intertemporal and unfortunately vague terms (“what happens if everyone does this?”) When they should be arguing in the language of capital. (c) we have very little control over altering this process as it’s a reproductive necessity (d) By specializing in the reproductive, productive, and capital time cycles, we divide the labor of sense-perception, work, and advocacy, and by voluntary cooperation we calculate the optimum possible at any given moment, without having to understand ‘everything from everyone’s position in the demand cycle.” In simple terms, the female and underclass reproductive strategy is to control reproduction, production, and evolution by dysgenia, and the male is to control them by eugenia. And until we can look darwin in the face, we will continue to battle between the female/preisthood/underclass, and the male/aristocracy/middle class forever. The history of western civilization’s successin the prehistoric, ancient, and modern worlds is that we have, aside from the chinese, produced the most eugenic civilization. So much so that by the late middle ages, we had dramatically shifted the median of the population more fully into the emiddle classes than any in history (not counting the distribution under slavery)> For most of the 18–19th and up until … max of 1940, there was underutilized human capital in european civilization. But since about 1940, if not 1890, that’s not been true. Most of the remaining undeveloped world is burdened by an excessively left distributed underclass that is not underutilized, and possibly cannot now be utilized. The reason being that we have gone from many multiples of return on investment to a maximum of about ten, and this appears to be a declining trend. So the future, with a huge underclass, leaves only really, Japan and maybe coastal china, safe from the hordes. Liberalism has been a cancer. We had the perfect government: 0 – A Universal Militia (shareholders whose share was purchased by risk) 1 – A judge of last resort (king) 2 – An independent judiciary and rule of law under the law of reciprocity. 3 – A house for each of the natural classes (church, commons, nobility, king) 4 – And a market for polities, commons, production, reproduction, cooperation, and association. And we blew it. Democracy was nothing but a means of bourgeois seizure of power. And the long term transformation from rule of law, to rule by credit.

  • Liberals, Libertarians, And Conservatives.

    – Just read **The Righteous Mind** by Jonathan Haidt. – Then read **The Essential Difference **by Simon Baron Cohen. – Then read **Thinking Fast and Slow **by Daniel Kahneman. – Then read **Explaining Postmodernism** by Stephen Hicks. (a) liberalism (female-child: parasitism upon capital), libertarianism (marginal male: innovation in capital), conservatism (established male: conservation of capital) differences in moral perception are genetically granted to us and reinforced by a lifetime of experience. (b) Conservatives can understand everyone but disagree. Libertarians can understand themselves and conservatives. Liberals (leftists) can only understand themselves. (c) Liberals argue in psychologists, consensus over truth, and blame (short term consumption). LIbertarians argue in truth, voluntarism, and economics(medium term production, and profits.) Conservatives argue in intertemporal and unfortunately vague terms (“what happens if everyone does this?”) When they should be arguing in the language of capital. (c) we have very little control over altering this process as it’s a reproductive necessity (d) By specializing in the reproductive, productive, and capital time cycles, we divide the labor of sense-perception, work, and advocacy, and by voluntary cooperation we calculate the optimum possible at any given moment, without having to understand ‘everything from everyone’s position in the demand cycle.” In simple terms, the female and underclass reproductive strategy is to control reproduction, production, and evolution by dysgenia, and the male is to control them by eugenia. And until we can look darwin in the face, we will continue to battle between the female/preisthood/underclass, and the male/aristocracy/middle class forever. The history of western civilization’s successin the prehistoric, ancient, and modern worlds is that we have, aside from the chinese, produced the most eugenic civilization. So much so that by the late middle ages, we had dramatically shifted the median of the population more fully into the emiddle classes than any in history (not counting the distribution under slavery)> For most of the 18–19th and up until … max of 1940, there was underutilized human capital in european civilization. But since about 1940, if not 1890, that’s not been true. Most of the remaining undeveloped world is burdened by an excessively left distributed underclass that is not underutilized, and possibly cannot now be utilized. The reason being that we have gone from many multiples of return on investment to a maximum of about ten, and this appears to be a declining trend. So the future, with a huge underclass, leaves only really, Japan and maybe coastal china, safe from the hordes. Liberalism has been a cancer. We had the perfect government: 0 – A Universal Militia (shareholders whose share was purchased by risk) 1 – A judge of last resort (king) 2 – An independent judiciary and rule of law under the law of reciprocity. 3 – A house for each of the natural classes (church, commons, nobility, king) 4 – And a market for polities, commons, production, reproduction, cooperation, and association. And we blew it. Democracy was nothing but a means of bourgeois seizure of power. And the long term transformation from rule of law, to rule by credit.

  • ACTIONS AS CONSTANT RELATIONS (important concept) Identity Consists of a set of

    ACTIONS AS CONSTANT RELATIONS

    (important concept)

    Identity Consists of a set of Constant Relations (Properties) – all the way up from the senses and all the way down from our ideas.

    Identity is discovered by free association, followed by elimination of non-constant relations. (falsification)

    Commensurability can be produced by use of a third reference that renders more than one referent measurable by another. (money, length, space, volume, current).

    Numbers consist of nothing more than names of positions and as such can refer to any constant positional relation, and as such we achieve scale independence. And as such numbers allow us to produce commensurability of most if not all phenomenon.

    All complex phenomenon consists of multiple, and often very dense causal relations and produce semi-constant intermediary relations. And we put our primary effort into determining which of those relations both direct and intermediary contribute to the production of changes in state and which of them do not.

    Humans possess marginally indifferent senses, emotions, and physical capabilities – at least in the sense that we differ in amplitude rather than existence. And for this reason we can imitate (act), sympathize (think), and empathize (feel) one another’s actions, thoughts, and emotions sufficiently to cooperate on means and ends.

    But it rarely occurs to us that while we cannot equate our valuations and therefore emotions, and we cannot equate our understanding unless reduced to a series of simple decidable propositions, we CAN equate actions, the five senses, and simple logical vs illogical relations. And as such, we CAN equate any statements represented as a series of actions that change state.

    In other words, just as prices consist of money and numbers, and those prices create create commensurability between goods, so can our perceptions and actions produce statements that provide commensurability regardless of our knowledge, understanding, and ability.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-29 13:39:00 UTC

  • Actions As Constant Relations

    (important concept) Identity Consists of a set of Constant Relations (Properties) – all the way up from the senses and all the way down from our ideas. Identity is discovered by free association, followed by elimination of non-constant relations. (falsification) Commensurability can be produced by use of a third reference that renders more than one referent measurable by another. (money, length, space, volume, current). Numbers consist of nothing more than names of positions and as such can refer to any constant positional relation, and as such we achieve scale independence. And as such numbers allow us to produce commensurability of most if not all phenomenon. All complex phenomenon consists of multiple, and often very dense causal relations and produce semi-constant intermediary relations. And we put our primary effort into determining which of those relations both direct and intermediary contribute to the production of changes in state and which of them do not. Humans possess marginally indifferent senses, emotions, and physical capabilities – at least in the sense that we differ in amplitude rather than existence. And for this reason we can imitate (act), sympathize (think), and empathize (feel) one another’s actions, thoughts, and emotions sufficiently to cooperate on means and ends. But it rarely occurs to us that while we cannot equate our valuations and therefore emotions, and we cannot equate our understanding unless reduced to a series of simple decidable propositions, we CAN equate actions, the five senses, and simple logical vs illogical relations. And as such, we CAN equate any statements represented as a series of actions that change state. In other words, just as prices consist of money and numbers, and those prices create create commensurability between goods, so can our perceptions and actions produce statements that provide commensurability regardless of our knowledge, understanding, and ability. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine