Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • It’s because I designed, proposed, and wrote specifications for more software ov

    It’s because I designed, proposed, and wrote specifications for more software over the past forty years than anyone else I know. And because, aside from a few games, almost all of it was designed to solve business problems – each one a case study. So it’s not so much that I wrote that much software per se. I did. But because I designed and specified and wrote plans for so many different business problems. When combined with ‘austrian’ (operational) economics, and my lifelong business struggle against what I consider the immorality of law, taxation, and government interfering with the information systems that are necessary for business cooperation, I evolved an intuition against aggregates that permitted takings, distortions, and deceits, and in favor of a sequence of testable operations, each of which must survive moral scrutiny. So by 2009, I changed from trying to create transparency, to what I called ‘calculability’, and what today I call ‘decidability’: the use of a sequence of testable operations that remove all discretion from legal prose. But limiting the interpretation (“discretion”) in the law by requiring that any prohibitionary statement include the purpose it is meant to solve and how. This constraint reduces law to a programming exercise that is not open to interpretation, and therefore not open to discretion, and therefore not open to deception.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-17 09:30:00 UTC

  • I suppose it’s hard to accept, that after a century of selling the fictitious vi

    I suppose it’s hard to accept, that after a century of selling the fictitious virtues of the genetic underclasses in order to profit from their consumption, indoctrination, and votes, that the single best action we can take to improve the lot of individual, family, community, nation, and mankind, is to reduce their number.

    World Systems Theory is an odd, Marxist, term for expressing evolution by the replacement of physical warfare with economic warfare, with informational warfare, with reproductive warfare. But evolution remains evolution; devolution devolution; and extinction extinction whether early or late in the process of speciation.

    But then, like the first generations of Abrahamism, Marxism and Critical Theory are just another form of information warfare in which the false promise of universal equality replaces the false promise of socialist prosperity, which replaced the false promise of heavenly life after death.

    Evolve. Kill them all.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-17 09:01:00 UTC

  • Cooperación

    Cuando comienzas por el hecho de presumir que la cooperación es obligatoria, en vez de pensar que la cooperación es meramente optativa entre: depredación, cooperación y boicot. Puedes justificar al pragmatismo, las (((construcciones sociales))) y las religiones de todos los tipos. Cuando partes de la verdad: De que tenemos la opción de que la violencia en todo momento y que la violencia siempre es preferible en todo momento, no puedes justificar al pragmatismo, la (((construcción social))) y las religiones de todo tipo.   Es por ello que las mentiras filosóficas y las mentiras Abrahámicas son tan exitosas: Por el mero hecho de que estamos intentando cooperar, pensamos que hemos puesto de lado a la violencia, y esto hace que pensemos que es “descortés” referirnos a esa opción como una alternativa viable. Pero para el hombre para el cual la cooperación ya no es preferible, no se hacen presuposiciones, y no ha puesto de lado a la violencia como una opción, sino que busca negociar los términos bajo los cuales cooperar “podría” ser preferible al conflicto, conquista o depredación. Con ley natural no hay presuposiciones.

  • Cooperación

    Cuando comienzas por el hecho de presumir que la cooperación es obligatoria, en vez de pensar que la cooperación es meramente optativa entre: depredación, cooperación y boicot. Puedes justificar al pragmatismo, las (((construcciones sociales))) y las religiones de todos los tipos. Cuando partes de la verdad: De que tenemos la opción de que la violencia en todo momento y que la violencia siempre es preferible en todo momento, no puedes justificar al pragmatismo, la (((construcción social))) y las religiones de todo tipo.   Es por ello que las mentiras filosóficas y las mentiras Abrahámicas son tan exitosas: Por el mero hecho de que estamos intentando cooperar, pensamos que hemos puesto de lado a la violencia, y esto hace que pensemos que es “descortés” referirnos a esa opción como una alternativa viable. Pero para el hombre para el cual la cooperación ya no es preferible, no se hacen presuposiciones, y no ha puesto de lado a la violencia como una opción, sino que busca negociar los términos bajo los cuales cooperar “podría” ser preferible al conflicto, conquista o depredación. Con ley natural no hay presuposiciones.

  • (TWO THOUGHTS – 1) THE MEANING OF POLICY. Black white fallacy akin to moral fall

    (TWO THOUGHTS –

    1) THE MEANING OF POLICY.

    Black white fallacy akin to moral fallacy akin to criminal fallacy: non intervention, good character, moral action, and non-criminal action does not mean all of us fail to intervene, to possess episodes of poor character, to act immorally, and to break petty crimes.

    From the military POV their policy and our policy has in fact, been non-intervention except when we cannot avoid it for some political or economic or strategic reason. This differs from the cold war policy of continuous intervention in order to stop the spread of world communism.

    2) THE APPLICATION OF THAT POLICY TO INCREASING RATHER THAN DECREASING RESISTANCE

    A policy of intervention over the past 20 years by which we treated islamism with the same interventionism that we did world communism (whose tactics the islamists adopted) might or might not have produced superior results to a policy of non-intervention.

    From the military POV we took our cold war peace dividend and squandered it, since communism in secondary civilizations merely migrated into islamism in tertiary civilizations – as we should have rationally expected it to.

    Modernity is … challenging to male status because modernity decreases the number of options for climbing the male dominance hierarchy to the left of the curve. The importance of male status increases with a decline in economic, emotional, and intellectual ability. So we should see and do see increasing hostility to modernity in both ruling and lower classes, and the affinity for modernity limited to the genetic middle classes.

    This is the correct model for interpreting resistance to modernity. Islamic modernization should, by this analysis, make communist modernization a trivial cost by comparison.)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-14 09:53:00 UTC

  • UPDATING THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE – Part 3 That to secure these rights, G

    UPDATING THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE – Part 3

    That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed — That whenever any Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to produce and preserve those rights.

    Prudence dictates that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience has shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

    But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to deprive them of their rights, it is their right, it is their duty, and it is the demand of Nature and Nature’s God, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their security, rights, and prosperity.

    Such has been the patient sufferance of our Families, Clans, Tribes, and Nations; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.

    The history of the present Federal Government, all its Branches and all its Bureaucracies, is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the circumvention of Natural Law, the subjugation of the different States and their peoples, the suppression of our religion, the adoption and expansion of an Alien and deceitful pseudoscientific, philosophical, and religious cults, the creation and expansion of military, political, and financial empire, and the continuous harm to individuals, family, clan, tribe, and nation through policy and immigration – the object of which is the destruction of our families, clans, tribes, nations, and their civilization through the decimation of our peoples, the prohibition of their history, traditions, and laws.

    To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world:

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-12 15:17:00 UTC

  • THE ORIGIN OF OUR CONSTITUTION Our constitution was proposed as an alternative –

    THE ORIGIN OF OUR CONSTITUTION

    Our constitution was proposed as an alternative – a third way – an alternative to the parasitic rents of the arbitrary commands of the martial aristocracy, and the dysgenia, deceits, and parasitic rents of the church bureaucracy. A *purely meritocratic order* free of rents whether constructed of arbitrary commands or superstitious excuses – A constitution of Natural Law. And the restoration of our ancient meritocratic order.

    Our founders created an *alternative* to the classes of europe, and not a duplication of it.

    All nations need not be the same. Some for the low, some for the strong, and some for the meritocratic. All those who pursue rents via arbitrary command and rents by deceit, merey flee to the green fields of meritocratic orders to parasitically profit from the high trust that they engender. Then drive them asunder through arbitrary command and incremental deception.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-12 14:58:00 UTC

  • DIFFERENCES IN SEXUALITY AND THE SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES (important) Male sexuality

    DIFFERENCES IN SEXUALITY AND THE SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES

    (important)

    Male sexuality differs from female sexuality (which is ‘mental’) in that it is physical… a need … that increases in intensity with the degree of testosterone (in both sexes by the way).

    Women cannot grasp this whatsoever. In general, women can’t empathize except in social matters. I tell women to compare how a male feels about sex to a MUCH stronger version of the moodiness or ‘cranky-ness’ they feel during their PMS – except it’s ten times more aggressive, and it returns ‘returns’ gradually within three to seven days after the last time they had sex. In other words, men tend to ‘cycle’ about two to four times as fast as women do. And that men have no more control over that impulse than women do over their PMS impulses.

    This explanation tends to help women understand it. We are both victims of those cycles. But we feel attraction very differently. Women cycle slower, and men faster. Men physically and women mentally. Men visually and women experientially. It’s not very complicated.

    So a male with reasonably high testosterone but who, for genetic, psychological, intellectual, cultural, personal, or age reasons is unable to gain access to sex, will seek outlets for this ‘anger’ – and will be a happier and more peaceful person because of it.

    I usually suggest that between low cost protein, msg-saturated foods, video games, and pornography, it appears that we can explain the decline in violence, crime, and particularly sex crimes over the past three decades. Adding ‘robotic sex’ will only increase this effect. (BTW: anti-depressants can solve this problem for men as well, while physical exercise may increase it.)

    Single men unable to obtain sex are very dangerous between 15-25 in the white population, and 13-29 in the black population. They impose DIRECT costs on the society by their frustration and aggression.

    Single women under 25 without children are just as dangerous, but INDIRECTLY dangerous – their ‘crimes’ are those that impose costs on society by externality rather than directly.

    And this is the problem with our education system providing very little value after 6th grade, the extension of childhood rather than incremental participation in the economy, and the reduction of marriage because of extended childhood.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-12 11:54:00 UTC

  • ON RELIGION: SOCIAL RELIGION VS POLITICAL LAW Your religion does not matter unde

    ON RELIGION: SOCIAL RELIGION VS POLITICAL LAW

    Your religion does not matter under strictly constructed Natural Law. Because under natural law you cannot speak, publish, or act in discord with natural law. And as such those aspects of any religion that are in violation of Natural Law cannot be spoken of, published, or acted upon. As such all religions must adapt to Natural Law by eliminating those propositions that violate Natural Law – whether you like, dislike, rationalize or fail to, those propositions. As such we do not need to construct a religion, and can allow religions to evolve such that they are no longer immoral by violation of Natural Law. And religions will retain their spiritual and social value while abandoning their political utility, by reverting to wisdom literature, rituals, and celebrations.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-12 09:22:00 UTC

  • MORE ON POLYGAMY (possibly important) Polygamy provides an UNDERCLASS and OUTLIE

    MORE ON POLYGAMY

    (possibly important)

    Polygamy provides an UNDERCLASS and OUTLIER solution to specific problems given general failures of the society. At present, that I know of, something like 5% of white westerners have some sort of continuous non exclusive relationship; some larger percentage ‘cheats’ frequently, at least 1/3 ‘cheat’ at some point, and about half of marriages end in divorce.

    As we move down the IQ spectrum to increasingly ‘darker’ peoples, we see the center of the distribution change, so that the percentage of long term exclusivity decreases proportionally with intelligence and discipline. We should see increases in polyamory(promiscuity), polygamy(limited promiscuity), serial marriage (more limited promiscuity), and divorce (more limited promiscuity)… and that is what we DO see.

    So it is more appropriate to say that we observe a normal distribution of exclusivity and non-exclusivity, with declines in promiscuity and increases in monogamy as the quality of the gene pool increases. But we will never see an end to some % of promiscuity at the top and bottom of the spectrum no matter what we do.

    So as an individual and a libertarian I hold the position that

    (a) you should do what you want to do.

    (b) what you want to do may or many not be ‘good’ objectively, merely preferable for you.

    (c) that the community will always favor exclusivity except at the bottom where it is impossible and top where it is unnecessary.

    (d) and that as a political question the ‘interests’ of the social group are absolutely in favor of limited promiscuity, which increases the responsibility of intergenerational care taking to the clan, rather than redistributing it to the society.

    That said, some of us have shitty families and shitty gene pools so collecting together into polygamous contractual relationships is simply good evolutionary strategy even if it is a bad normative strategy, and as such we should not interfere with those relations, even if we do not sanction them.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-11 18:02:00 UTC