Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • Yes, We Can Restore Western Civilization, and Easily

    YES WE CAN RESTORE WESTERN CIVILIZATION – EASILY —“It appears that a golden bullet would be to reduce the value of [false] advertising, and this ineffectiveness would lead to the media industry being starved of revenue. Any suggestions on how this could be achieved?”—- Julian le Roux GREAT QUESTION!!!! YES!

    EASILY: (a) require testimonial truth in all public speech. (b) rescind copyright protection, replacing it with creative commons protection. (you may not profit from it at civic expense, and then neither may anyone else.). This reduces copyright to a trademark and therefore fraud issue rather than a license for unnecessary and perversive rents. Honestly, it’s that simple. We would crush the entertainment, advertising, media, propaganda, public intellectual, political in 120 days. That is all the cash flow that they have to survive with. Even the threat of it would wipe out the industry. As we have seen with book authorship, artistic authorship, and even independent cinema, the creative works would continue to be produced no matter what. There is no reason to subsidize them if by doing so we subsidize the production of critique (propaganda). The impact on civilization – reversing the economic incentives and economic possibility of engaging in the industrialization of lying, would vanish. If intellectuals professors, advertisers and marketers, industry and politicians, media and artists must warranty their works as truthful, then the size, scale, and composition of the information system will return to that which is possible and rewarding: truthful. We have built a civilization funded by lying just as much as we built the internet funded by pornography. WE MADE IT POSSIBLE BY A GRATUITOUS VIOLATION OF NATURAL LAW. WE CAN UNMAKE THE POSSIBILITY BUT RESTORING NATURAL LAW. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Yes, We Can Restore Western Civilization, and Easily

    YES WE CAN RESTORE WESTERN CIVILIZATION – EASILY —“It appears that a golden bullet would be to reduce the value of [false] advertising, and this ineffectiveness would lead to the media industry being starved of revenue. Any suggestions on how this could be achieved?”—- Julian le Roux GREAT QUESTION!!!! YES!

    EASILY: (a) require testimonial truth in all public speech. (b) rescind copyright protection, replacing it with creative commons protection. (you may not profit from it at civic expense, and then neither may anyone else.). This reduces copyright to a trademark and therefore fraud issue rather than a license for unnecessary and perversive rents. Honestly, it’s that simple. We would crush the entertainment, advertising, media, propaganda, public intellectual, political in 120 days. That is all the cash flow that they have to survive with. Even the threat of it would wipe out the industry. As we have seen with book authorship, artistic authorship, and even independent cinema, the creative works would continue to be produced no matter what. There is no reason to subsidize them if by doing so we subsidize the production of critique (propaganda). The impact on civilization – reversing the economic incentives and economic possibility of engaging in the industrialization of lying, would vanish. If intellectuals professors, advertisers and marketers, industry and politicians, media and artists must warranty their works as truthful, then the size, scale, and composition of the information system will return to that which is possible and rewarding: truthful. We have built a civilization funded by lying just as much as we built the internet funded by pornography. WE MADE IT POSSIBLE BY A GRATUITOUS VIOLATION OF NATURAL LAW. WE CAN UNMAKE THE POSSIBILITY BUT RESTORING NATURAL LAW. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Direct Economic (Empirical) Democracy

    DIRECT ECONOMIC (EMPIRICAL) DEMOCRACY When we say democracy we could be referring to the use of votes for very different purposes. We could be using them to select representatives. We could be using them to choose preferred commons.  We could be using them to select preferred behavior. We could be using them to punish impermissible behavior. I see no case at all for representatives in an era of cheap mass communications.  If we are to use representatives at all, they should be chosen by lot for a single year, and held accountable for their actions by rule of law like any other contract maker. As far as I can tell, direct economic democracy either by proportion or by equal share, where one’s votes may NOT be proxied, will produce (a) the most educated and aware population, and (b) the least corrupt government, as long as (c) all statements must be ‘scientifically’ truthful by the terms i’ve defined elsewhere.

    The dominance of single houses independent of classes the dominance of parties, the use of representatives, and the cheapness of lobbying representatives rather than the voters, are all malincentives.

  • Direct Economic (Empirical) Democracy

    DIRECT ECONOMIC (EMPIRICAL) DEMOCRACY When we say democracy we could be referring to the use of votes for very different purposes. We could be using them to select representatives. We could be using them to choose preferred commons.  We could be using them to select preferred behavior. We could be using them to punish impermissible behavior. I see no case at all for representatives in an era of cheap mass communications.  If we are to use representatives at all, they should be chosen by lot for a single year, and held accountable for their actions by rule of law like any other contract maker. As far as I can tell, direct economic democracy either by proportion or by equal share, where one’s votes may NOT be proxied, will produce (a) the most educated and aware population, and (b) the least corrupt government, as long as (c) all statements must be ‘scientifically’ truthful by the terms i’ve defined elsewhere.

    The dominance of single houses independent of classes the dominance of parties, the use of representatives, and the cheapness of lobbying representatives rather than the voters, are all malincentives.

  • Dear Miseducated World: Logic is at Least Ternary – not Binary

    DEAR MISEDUCATED WORLD: Logic is at least ternary, not binary. (Meaning three states, not two) …………… FALSE…….TRUE……..UNDECIDABLE FALSE…..FALSE…….FALSE……UNDECIDABLE TRUE……FALES…….TRUE……..UNDECIDABLE UNDEC…FALSE…….UNDEC…..UNDECIDABLE MATHEMATICS In mathematics, which for millennia was unfortunately the gold standard of logic, we use the word true when we mean either “balanced” (retaining constant relations), or we mean “proven” (possible to demonstrate), because in mathematics we create proofs of possibility rather than statements of truth. We may claim that we speak truthfully that we have constructed a proof. But mathematics consists of operations, deductions, inferences and guesswork, by which we identify means of demonstrating the possibility and necessity of a series of constant relations (ratios). COMPUTER SCIENCE In the gold standard of reasoning: computer science – when we refer to values, we call this same sequence true, false, and null (unknown). So in computer science, we either possess sufficient information to state something is provable (true or false), or unprovable (false), or undecidable (lacking the information). FORMAL LOGIC I’ll avoid deep discussion of  formal logic (sets) because in my view, like all game theory, beyond use in very simple human perceivable scales, it’s been a waste of a century. I mean. I can dismantle the liars paradox in five minutes or less. it was a wasted century. PHYSICAL SCIENCE In sciences we use the terms False, Possibly True (an hypothesis, theory, or law), and Undecidable. Between the choice of true and false, it is false that we know with certainty. Truth always remains uncertain in all but the most simple of questions. EPISTEMOLOGY In epistemology we say something is knowingly false, possibly true, and undecidable, or unknown. In epistemology, just as in science, we must determine if an argument survives attempts to falsify it. If it is true, then we can decide if it is possible. I it is possible then we can decide if it is preferable. If it is preferable without causing harm to others, then we have determined that it is good. MORALITY, PHILOSOPHY, AND THEOLOGY In morality, philosophy, theology, we say (lie) that if we can find an excuse for something (a justification) it is true, or moral, or good. When that only means that according to the established norms, scriptures, and laws. in other words, one is free of blame if he can justify his actions as permissible, moral or good. In morality philosophy and theology, we attempt to survive justification. LAW When we encounter LAW we use the jury, and debate between two parties, and moderated by a judge, to test both whether we are justified under law, and whether our testimony and our arguments are believable. In law we attempt to survive the battle between three forces: the law as written, the standards of rational behavior of the jury, the logical testing of your statements by the judge, and the subjective testing of your truthfulness by the jury. And in case you don’t know this, most cases are decided by the test of truthfulness, which is why american courts are so useful for commerce. The first sin of american law is failure of informational reciprocity. Failure and error are forgivable. Violation of reciprocity is not. HIERARCHY OF CERTAINTY … FALSE, that which does not survive tests of falsification. … … TRUE, that which survives all tests of falsification … … … PROVEN, that which survives tests of possibility. … … … … UNDECIDABLE that which cannot be decided. THE TRUTH TABLE OF CERTAINTY F:False, T:True, P:Provable, U:Undecidable …..F…..T…..P…..U F…F…..F…..F…..U T…F….*T*…P…..U P…F…..P…..P…..U U..F…..U….U…..U

  • Dear Miseducated World: Logic is at Least Ternary – not Binary

    DEAR MISEDUCATED WORLD: Logic is at least ternary, not binary. (Meaning three states, not two) …………… FALSE…….TRUE……..UNDECIDABLE FALSE…..FALSE…….FALSE……UNDECIDABLE TRUE……FALES…….TRUE……..UNDECIDABLE UNDEC…FALSE…….UNDEC…..UNDECIDABLE MATHEMATICS In mathematics, which for millennia was unfortunately the gold standard of logic, we use the word true when we mean either “balanced” (retaining constant relations), or we mean “proven” (possible to demonstrate), because in mathematics we create proofs of possibility rather than statements of truth. We may claim that we speak truthfully that we have constructed a proof. But mathematics consists of operations, deductions, inferences and guesswork, by which we identify means of demonstrating the possibility and necessity of a series of constant relations (ratios). COMPUTER SCIENCE In the gold standard of reasoning: computer science – when we refer to values, we call this same sequence true, false, and null (unknown). So in computer science, we either possess sufficient information to state something is provable (true or false), or unprovable (false), or undecidable (lacking the information). FORMAL LOGIC I’ll avoid deep discussion of  formal logic (sets) because in my view, like all game theory, beyond use in very simple human perceivable scales, it’s been a waste of a century. I mean. I can dismantle the liars paradox in five minutes or less. it was a wasted century. PHYSICAL SCIENCE In sciences we use the terms False, Possibly True (an hypothesis, theory, or law), and Undecidable. Between the choice of true and false, it is false that we know with certainty. Truth always remains uncertain in all but the most simple of questions. EPISTEMOLOGY In epistemology we say something is knowingly false, possibly true, and undecidable, or unknown. In epistemology, just as in science, we must determine if an argument survives attempts to falsify it. If it is true, then we can decide if it is possible. I it is possible then we can decide if it is preferable. If it is preferable without causing harm to others, then we have determined that it is good. MORALITY, PHILOSOPHY, AND THEOLOGY In morality, philosophy, theology, we say (lie) that if we can find an excuse for something (a justification) it is true, or moral, or good. When that only means that according to the established norms, scriptures, and laws. in other words, one is free of blame if he can justify his actions as permissible, moral or good. In morality philosophy and theology, we attempt to survive justification. LAW When we encounter LAW we use the jury, and debate between two parties, and moderated by a judge, to test both whether we are justified under law, and whether our testimony and our arguments are believable. In law we attempt to survive the battle between three forces: the law as written, the standards of rational behavior of the jury, the logical testing of your statements by the judge, and the subjective testing of your truthfulness by the jury. And in case you don’t know this, most cases are decided by the test of truthfulness, which is why american courts are so useful for commerce. The first sin of american law is failure of informational reciprocity. Failure and error are forgivable. Violation of reciprocity is not. HIERARCHY OF CERTAINTY … FALSE, that which does not survive tests of falsification. … … TRUE, that which survives all tests of falsification … … … PROVEN, that which survives tests of possibility. … … … … UNDECIDABLE that which cannot be decided. THE TRUTH TABLE OF CERTAINTY F:False, T:True, P:Provable, U:Undecidable …..F…..T…..P…..U F…F…..F…..F…..U T…F….*T*…P…..U P…F…..P…..P…..U U..F…..U….U…..U

  • The Middle and Working Classes Are The Targets of Predation

    THE MIDDLE CLASS IS THE TARGET OF PREDATION ****”I see my chief concern from simply living in a world full of relative upper class scoundrels, educated imbeciles and underclass zombies, and a middle and working class that appears to consist of the only moral people extant in western society – and they are the ones that least benefit from the current order – because they are being exterminated by it.”**** Curt Doolittle The Cult of Non Submission The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Natural Law of Sovereign Men The Propertarian Institute, Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Middle and Working Classes Are The Targets of Predation

    THE MIDDLE CLASS IS THE TARGET OF PREDATION ****”I see my chief concern from simply living in a world full of relative upper class scoundrels, educated imbeciles and underclass zombies, and a middle and working class that appears to consist of the only moral people extant in western society – and they are the ones that least benefit from the current order – because they are being exterminated by it.”**** Curt Doolittle The Cult of Non Submission The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Natural Law of Sovereign Men The Propertarian Institute, Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Error Of The Ancients: War is Fine But Economics Beneath Them

    THE ERROR OF THE ANCIENTS: TALKING BIZ WAS “OH, SO, BOURGEOISE” Aside from the conquest of the west by byzantine mysticism, the central problem of western philosophy was thinking and ruling classes avoidance of the centrality of economics. We get philosophy to circumvent the traditional law. And we get science to circumvent the traditional church. And we finally get jewish pseudoscience and puritan outright deceit as ways of circumventing science, economics, an law. Economics really doesn’t come into being until smith’s combination of it with ethics, morality, and politics, or turn into a science until menger. Then just as the german scientific revolution is about to kick in, we get the wars, and the postwar era keynes replaces pseudoscience with obscurantist immoral mathematics that menger and smith had sought to avoid. Then the americans kick in – so proud they are to have found a way to destroy civilization faster using stocks as money.

    Lesson? Get your hands dirty.

  • The Error Of The Ancients: War is Fine But Economics Beneath Them

    THE ERROR OF THE ANCIENTS: TALKING BIZ WAS “OH, SO, BOURGEOISE” Aside from the conquest of the west by byzantine mysticism, the central problem of western philosophy was thinking and ruling classes avoidance of the centrality of economics. We get philosophy to circumvent the traditional law. And we get science to circumvent the traditional church. And we finally get jewish pseudoscience and puritan outright deceit as ways of circumventing science, economics, an law. Economics really doesn’t come into being until smith’s combination of it with ethics, morality, and politics, or turn into a science until menger. Then just as the german scientific revolution is about to kick in, we get the wars, and the postwar era keynes replaces pseudoscience with obscurantist immoral mathematics that menger and smith had sought to avoid. Then the americans kick in – so proud they are to have found a way to destroy civilization faster using stocks as money.

    Lesson? Get your hands dirty.