Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • THE STATE IS A VEHICLE FOR LYING Women work so DAMNED hard at maintaining relati

    THE STATE IS A VEHICLE FOR LYING

    Women work so DAMNED hard at maintaining relationships. Men work so hard at providing. We are both ignorant of the costs of the other.

    But in my life, I have been awed by the determination of my significant others to preserve and improve the relationship just as diligently as I have worked to provide for it.

    Of all my insights the one I think I have found most helpful is the abandonment of the myth of equality, and its replacement with the explanatory power of an intertemporal division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, and advocacy where voluntary cooperation is like prices and voluntary exchange, the information system by which we make use of our distributed perceptions.

    This is why democratic government has failed: like Keynesian economics, it distorts our information system. So westerners participate in suicidal genocide because our information system is overloaded by lies at every single level: from the pricing system to that of voluntary cooperation. The state is a vehicle for interference in the information system that perpetuates the species by voluntary cooperation between different temporal perspectives: short female. and long male..

    The state is a vehicle for LYING.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-30 06:34:00 UTC

  • WITH STEVEB GONE I HAVE MORE FAITH IN MSFT. BUT….(?) Sure they’re just followi

    WITH STEVEB GONE I HAVE MORE FAITH IN MSFT. BUT….(?)

    Sure they’re just following Apple, but their hardware will always be cheaper, so over time it’s harder to justify the apple ‘cool’ premium if there is decreasing difference.

    Microsoft has the game, technology and business market, and apple has the creative and status market. Microsoft’s market is larger, and always will be larger. And at some point it gets hard to pay a large premium for apple desktop style.

    Microsoft owns the application space, and it’s very hard to see that advantage going away now. Apple would have to enter the app space to compete with Microsoft if the profitability of its phones slips.

    Apple makes its money off it’s iphone (70% of profits), not its laptops and controls 20% of the smartphone market. Samsung competes in the phone space because it’s products are cheaper. Microsoft owns the business space because it’s products are cheaper. Apple’s record profits are not created by market share but because of the higher price it commands.

    For the past few years I have been predicting that if the iPhone stops profitability that the only solution for apple is to directly attack Microsoft’s laptop and desktop base in the workforce.

    This is fairly easily done, first by acquisition and in-window hosting of Microsoft apps, and secondly by developing its own cloud solution and own apps.

    Now one might argue that the network effect is challenging, but I don’t really see Microsoft in an advantageous position. Drastically improving the document (Word) and spreadsheet (Excel) experience is something I know how to do, so someone else might need to also.

    By leapfrogging Microsoft and casting them as the legacy brand it would be possible to undermine Microsoft’s revenue stream, eliminate their price negotiating with the licences that generate most of their revenue, and provide a long term sustained attack on the every aspect of their unnecessarily diverse and complex product line.

    I assume that if I know how to do this someone else does. The problem for apple (or google) is not so much doing such a thing, but it’s having the incentive – which google’s ad revenue, and apple’s hardware revenue don’t yet provide.

    Right now it’s a problem of INCENTIVES, not a problem of ABILITY to compete.

    Now some people might realize that Oversing is a warning shot in this direction. But the fewer that recognize it, the longer I have to make it inevitable.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-30 04:01:00 UTC

  • The Battle We Face Today: Non-Parasitic Production of Commons

    (important piece) [I] know I’m not the first person to say this, but it’s pretty clear that Russia is not only the ultimate expression of postmodernism (lying), but that it evolved to this state by reforming jewish strategy, philosophy, and law: destroy the trust of the outsiders in order to create demand for authority and group cohesion, thereby creating opportunity for predation. While the founders of Russia were disproportionately jewish, and while their secret service was disproportionately jewish, what is more important is that the jewish strategy was useful for the Mongolian/Tatar/Islamic authoritarianism that is the source of Russian political culture. Russia combines ‘white’ people, Steppe totalitarianism, and jewish deceit (propaganda) as the complete economic, social, political and martial expression of the jewish strategy: destroy the higher trust societies and create demand for authority, and create opportunity for predation. If we go back through history and see the success of lying created through zoroastrian monotheism: jewish, it’s revolutionary reformation: christianity, and it’s counter-revolutionary authoritarianism: Islamism, then it’s modern branches in Marxism, Western Postmodernism, Russian secular judaism, and anglo progressive pseudoscience and outright lying, then We can not only cure ourselves, but we can disarm the world: TRUTH IS ENOUGH. The Truthful and Trusting society may not be the end of history, but social democracy is certainly not. There are three means of production of commons: – Truthful and Trustful (libertarian: rule of law, civic society) – Pragmatic and Utilitarian (social democracy) – Deceitful and Parasitic (authoritarianism) We have focused our efforts too long on the economy. Consumer capitalism has won the battle for the production of goods and services. We no longer fight that battle. And focusing our efforts on it is a waste of energy. We won not by arguments but by resisting the state long enough so that the logically obvious could result in the empirically demonstrable: the voluntary organization of production is the only successful technology for the production of consumer goods and services. Instead of the battle for a voluntary economy, the battle we face today is the suppression of parasitism in central bureaucracy and the expansion of trust and thereby increase of economic velocity. We must create the non-parasitic voluntary production of commons just as we created the non-parasitic voluntary production of goods and services. At present there is only one way we know of by which to destroy all parasitism, increase trust, increase economic velocity, increase prosperity, ad therefore increase choices. That is universal standing under the common law, the legal prohibition of parasitism, by mutual insurance: the exchange of guarantee of defense and restitution of property-en-toto. But we must also provide for the construction of commons by voluntary means, by changing what is currently a monopoly constructed by majority ascent into a market wherein any non-parasitic exchange between the classes, or objective of the classes can be constructed. We succeeded in transforming humanity into the voluntary organization of production of goods and services we call consumer capitalism. Our next mission – purely out of self defense – is to transform our government into a voluntary organization of commons. This project is eminently possible. It will forever render the corporeal state to the dustbin of antiquity, categorically relegated to another attempt at pseudoscience for the purpose of pure power accumulation and nothing more. We have a very simple mission then. To reform every possible constitution such that the judiciary shall prohibit all parasitism without exception. And that the provision of commons be one of adjudication of differences, not of ascent. And that the defense of the realm be the province of every man, under universal standing under the common law. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Battle We Face Today: Non-Parasitic Production of Commons

    (important piece) [I] know I’m not the first person to say this, but it’s pretty clear that Russia is not only the ultimate expression of postmodernism (lying), but that it evolved to this state by reforming jewish strategy, philosophy, and law: destroy the trust of the outsiders in order to create demand for authority and group cohesion, thereby creating opportunity for predation. While the founders of Russia were disproportionately jewish, and while their secret service was disproportionately jewish, what is more important is that the jewish strategy was useful for the Mongolian/Tatar/Islamic authoritarianism that is the source of Russian political culture. Russia combines ‘white’ people, Steppe totalitarianism, and jewish deceit (propaganda) as the complete economic, social, political and martial expression of the jewish strategy: destroy the higher trust societies and create demand for authority, and create opportunity for predation. If we go back through history and see the success of lying created through zoroastrian monotheism: jewish, it’s revolutionary reformation: christianity, and it’s counter-revolutionary authoritarianism: Islamism, then it’s modern branches in Marxism, Western Postmodernism, Russian secular judaism, and anglo progressive pseudoscience and outright lying, then We can not only cure ourselves, but we can disarm the world: TRUTH IS ENOUGH. The Truthful and Trusting society may not be the end of history, but social democracy is certainly not. There are three means of production of commons: – Truthful and Trustful (libertarian: rule of law, civic society) – Pragmatic and Utilitarian (social democracy) – Deceitful and Parasitic (authoritarianism) We have focused our efforts too long on the economy. Consumer capitalism has won the battle for the production of goods and services. We no longer fight that battle. And focusing our efforts on it is a waste of energy. We won not by arguments but by resisting the state long enough so that the logically obvious could result in the empirically demonstrable: the voluntary organization of production is the only successful technology for the production of consumer goods and services. Instead of the battle for a voluntary economy, the battle we face today is the suppression of parasitism in central bureaucracy and the expansion of trust and thereby increase of economic velocity. We must create the non-parasitic voluntary production of commons just as we created the non-parasitic voluntary production of goods and services. At present there is only one way we know of by which to destroy all parasitism, increase trust, increase economic velocity, increase prosperity, ad therefore increase choices. That is universal standing under the common law, the legal prohibition of parasitism, by mutual insurance: the exchange of guarantee of defense and restitution of property-en-toto. But we must also provide for the construction of commons by voluntary means, by changing what is currently a monopoly constructed by majority ascent into a market wherein any non-parasitic exchange between the classes, or objective of the classes can be constructed. We succeeded in transforming humanity into the voluntary organization of production of goods and services we call consumer capitalism. Our next mission – purely out of self defense – is to transform our government into a voluntary organization of commons. This project is eminently possible. It will forever render the corporeal state to the dustbin of antiquity, categorically relegated to another attempt at pseudoscience for the purpose of pure power accumulation and nothing more. We have a very simple mission then. To reform every possible constitution such that the judiciary shall prohibit all parasitism without exception. And that the provision of commons be one of adjudication of differences, not of ascent. And that the defense of the realm be the province of every man, under universal standing under the common law. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Purpose of Aristocracy: Parenting Man

    ARISTOCRACY (PATRIARCHY) IS A CRITICAL RESPONSIBILTY: WE SET LIMITS. WE DON’T ENGAGE IN ADVOCACY. WE PRODUCE THE FIRST COMMONS: THE REQUIREMENT FOR PRODUCTIVE COOPERATION. [O]ur function is to incrementally but consistently evolve our people (and prevent their devolution) by preventing parasitism, and forcing productive cooperation. We force the development of markets for good and services by prohibiting parasitism. We force the production of markets for commons by prohibiting parasitism.

    There is a great difference between RULE (conflict resolution) and GOVERNANCE (production of commons). Our function is to RULE (judiciary, rule of law, property rights, property en-toto.) The entrepreneurial aristocracy’s function is to organize PRODUCTION using the voluntary organization of production. Our gossip class’s function is to ADVOCATE for the allocation of resources to particular ends. But in all cases we must prevent parasitism. It is epistemologically impossible for an aristocratic minority to police all of these functions for parasitism without tyranny. It is on the other hand, trivially easy for individuals to police these functions for parasitism without tyranny. The means by which we engage individuals in the process of policing is to grant them universal standing in the prosecution of parasitism, expressed as the right to property-en-toto, and to include them in the restitution under conspiracy if they fail to prosecute parasitism. Our function is to create order by prohibiting parasitism- to create the first commons: cooperation (property-en-toto). Not to advocate. Others’ functions are to produce goods and services for the commons, and advocate for and produce commons.

  • The Purpose of Aristocracy: Parenting Man

    ARISTOCRACY (PATRIARCHY) IS A CRITICAL RESPONSIBILTY: WE SET LIMITS. WE DON’T ENGAGE IN ADVOCACY. WE PRODUCE THE FIRST COMMONS: THE REQUIREMENT FOR PRODUCTIVE COOPERATION. [O]ur function is to incrementally but consistently evolve our people (and prevent their devolution) by preventing parasitism, and forcing productive cooperation. We force the development of markets for good and services by prohibiting parasitism. We force the production of markets for commons by prohibiting parasitism.

    There is a great difference between RULE (conflict resolution) and GOVERNANCE (production of commons). Our function is to RULE (judiciary, rule of law, property rights, property en-toto.) The entrepreneurial aristocracy’s function is to organize PRODUCTION using the voluntary organization of production. Our gossip class’s function is to ADVOCATE for the allocation of resources to particular ends. But in all cases we must prevent parasitism. It is epistemologically impossible for an aristocratic minority to police all of these functions for parasitism without tyranny. It is on the other hand, trivially easy for individuals to police these functions for parasitism without tyranny. The means by which we engage individuals in the process of policing is to grant them universal standing in the prosecution of parasitism, expressed as the right to property-en-toto, and to include them in the restitution under conspiracy if they fail to prosecute parasitism. Our function is to create order by prohibiting parasitism- to create the first commons: cooperation (property-en-toto). Not to advocate. Others’ functions are to produce goods and services for the commons, and advocate for and produce commons.

  • The Media as Drug Dealer

    [I]t doesn’t make financial sense to operate a newspaper. The FT generates 35M of profit per year on over 500M in revenues. That’s what, 7%? The reason to own a newspaper is influence: gossip. Now the financial times is, like the Journal, a financial rather than political newspaper. So by definition it’s an empirical and heroic medium rather than one of complaining, for the purpose of rallying shaming, and power accumulation.

    I went through five daily issues of Canada’s main newspaper a few years ago, circling correspondent articles (what I consider truthful) and you could find about three small articles a day. The rest were entertainment, created by appealing to the anglosphere’s erroneous sense of moral superiority. In other words, the newspaper business sells advertising to marketers, and then consumers buy signaling: a form of conspicuous consumption, that carries signals. And quite the opposite of what we expected: people are not able to insulate themselves from the most influential drug after sex: signals of moral fitness. If we look at the evolutionary reasons why this all works, it’s obvious: moral fitness makes us generous, and moral violation makes us punish. But we should look at the non-financial media as what they are: drug dealers. They’re causing suicide through addiction.

  • The Media as Drug Dealer

    [I]t doesn’t make financial sense to operate a newspaper. The FT generates 35M of profit per year on over 500M in revenues. That’s what, 7%? The reason to own a newspaper is influence: gossip. Now the financial times is, like the Journal, a financial rather than political newspaper. So by definition it’s an empirical and heroic medium rather than one of complaining, for the purpose of rallying shaming, and power accumulation.

    I went through five daily issues of Canada’s main newspaper a few years ago, circling correspondent articles (what I consider truthful) and you could find about three small articles a day. The rest were entertainment, created by appealing to the anglosphere’s erroneous sense of moral superiority. In other words, the newspaper business sells advertising to marketers, and then consumers buy signaling: a form of conspicuous consumption, that carries signals. And quite the opposite of what we expected: people are not able to insulate themselves from the most influential drug after sex: signals of moral fitness. If we look at the evolutionary reasons why this all works, it’s obvious: moral fitness makes us generous, and moral violation makes us punish. But we should look at the non-financial media as what they are: drug dealers. They’re causing suicide through addiction.

  • Conceptual Laundry: Twitter.

    Philosophy, to be true, must be critical. There are no answers in philosophy itself. It’s conceptual laundry detergent. Philosophy consists either of telling us how to speak truthfully, or it is just a means of loading, framing and overloading The greatest lies in history have been produced philosophically: monotheism, marxism, freudianism, postmodernism. Philosophy has done more harm that good. That’s because it’s an exceptional vehicle for deception by suggestion. Philosophy can be performed wishfully, morally, rationally, historically, and scientifically. Only the last has any value. Does your government improve cooperation and exchange, or create conflict and takings? That’s an easy question to answer. But why must we persist in a submissive mythos of federation, truth, trust and love, instead of just truth, trust and love? The Church then chartered nobility with love and trust – and left them to war and justice (production). They federated our tribes The Church manufactured idealism, and used Love to break kin and tribal biases, extending trust, and creating economic velocity. Aristocracy must rule by the formal logic of cooperation: non parasitism expressed as property. Else be ruled by worse. That is my answer to yesterday’s question about the failure of South Africa and the genocide conducted against its farmers. Rule of law, and production of commons are two different things. Democracy is a catastrophe because it merges law and commons. Failing to parent the young, and failing to parent less advanced polities differ only in scale. Aristocracy must parent. Take nothing not paid for. Master a craft. Speak the truth. Safeguard the weak. Mete justice. Improve commons. Show love. Add beauty. Cultures vary in their needs for commons. But rule of law, common law, property rights are objectively universal for all men. Rule of Law and Contractually Constructed Commons are different things. Rulers can adjudicate while leaving commons to locals. Rule and Colonization are two different things. Rule by rule of law and strict property rights is objectively universally moral. Religions evolved for the poor. Philosophy for the middle. And Law for the Ruling classes. The three metodologies reflect perceived control. Islam is a religion of submission, Christianity less so. But western Aristocracy is a cult of non-submission to man, government, or god. I don’t like analogies. They’re used to lie. Myths are analogies. But at least Christianity’s myths teach us love, truthfulness and beauty. The obvious failure of progressivism is that it is constructed entirely of lies. It isn’t philosophy then. It’s just lying. Cultures are not equal. They suppress parasitism more or less, display corruption more or less, and speak the truth more or less.

  • Conceptual Laundry: Twitter.

    Philosophy, to be true, must be critical. There are no answers in philosophy itself. It’s conceptual laundry detergent. Philosophy consists either of telling us how to speak truthfully, or it is just a means of loading, framing and overloading The greatest lies in history have been produced philosophically: monotheism, marxism, freudianism, postmodernism. Philosophy has done more harm that good. That’s because it’s an exceptional vehicle for deception by suggestion. Philosophy can be performed wishfully, morally, rationally, historically, and scientifically. Only the last has any value. Does your government improve cooperation and exchange, or create conflict and takings? That’s an easy question to answer. But why must we persist in a submissive mythos of federation, truth, trust and love, instead of just truth, trust and love? The Church then chartered nobility with love and trust – and left them to war and justice (production). They federated our tribes The Church manufactured idealism, and used Love to break kin and tribal biases, extending trust, and creating economic velocity. Aristocracy must rule by the formal logic of cooperation: non parasitism expressed as property. Else be ruled by worse. That is my answer to yesterday’s question about the failure of South Africa and the genocide conducted against its farmers. Rule of law, and production of commons are two different things. Democracy is a catastrophe because it merges law and commons. Failing to parent the young, and failing to parent less advanced polities differ only in scale. Aristocracy must parent. Take nothing not paid for. Master a craft. Speak the truth. Safeguard the weak. Mete justice. Improve commons. Show love. Add beauty. Cultures vary in their needs for commons. But rule of law, common law, property rights are objectively universal for all men. Rule of Law and Contractually Constructed Commons are different things. Rulers can adjudicate while leaving commons to locals. Rule and Colonization are two different things. Rule by rule of law and strict property rights is objectively universally moral. Religions evolved for the poor. Philosophy for the middle. And Law for the Ruling classes. The three metodologies reflect perceived control. Islam is a religion of submission, Christianity less so. But western Aristocracy is a cult of non-submission to man, government, or god. I don’t like analogies. They’re used to lie. Myths are analogies. But at least Christianity’s myths teach us love, truthfulness and beauty. The obvious failure of progressivism is that it is constructed entirely of lies. It isn’t philosophy then. It’s just lying. Cultures are not equal. They suppress parasitism more or less, display corruption more or less, and speak the truth more or less.