Form: Mini Essay

  • Did conservative justicies leak or did liberal justices leak? As far as I know,

    Did conservative justicies leak or did liberal justices leak?
    As far as I know, we knew within twelve hours who leaked the abortion judgement, and who she was clerking for.
    We always pay for people to come to our gatherings and proceedings. Justices aren’t paid enough to travel otherwise. Nor are academics or intellectuals – even minor think tank folk like me. All of us have appearance and speaking fees. Most of us will speak for free if we have our expenses covered in advance. The question isn’t if one benefitted, but whether there is a relationship between the benefit and a judgement: a quid pro quo. None of the justices have as far as I know engaged in a quid pro quo. They are aligned as constitutionalists vs populists and they are invited constitutionalist vs populist venues. If that requires buying a book I think that’s probably inappropriate because it is a quid-pro-quo even if not for the purpose of altering a judgement. But it’s not substantive enough. For example Obama’s book deal was pretty substantive and at least appeared to be a quid pro quo.

    Now, should Sotomayor sit the bench? Of course not. She is an anti-constitutional activist happy to bypass the people and the legislature (‘violating the test of concurrency maintaining the sovereignty of the people over the state’), and it’s not clear she even holds to commonality in law (’empirical discovery of common judgements of irreciprocities by the lower courts’). I read her opinions as intellectually incompetent for the office she holds. At least with Justice Ginsberg she was just merely a populist and anti-constitutionalist activist, but she was intellectually capable -and all of us knew that.

    Reply addressees: @KaivanShroff


    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-13 14:16:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1679495130598760450

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1678798468280713216

  • Jay’s list (other than Sowell) consists largely of the NeoCon revolution that ca

    Jay’s list (other than Sowell) consists largely of the NeoCon revolution that captured the republican party. So just as the democratic party under the neo-Marxist influence dragged us out of republicanism into working-class (now underclass) globalism, the NeoCon(NeoTrotsky) influence dragged the republican party into upper-class globalism.

    A republic is a very simple concept: the prohibition on authority, by the rule of law, by the natural law of self-determination by self-determined means by the natural law of cooperation by means of reciprocal insurance (by force of arms) of sovereignty in demonstrated interest, reciprocity in display, word, and deed, limiting us to voluntary markets for cooperation, government of concurrency (falsely claimed as democracy), and commonality in law – meaning a purely empirical civilization.

    (An importance which PeterZ objects to, but I don’t know if it’s because he understands what he’s saying when he states our government under common law is designed to debate (a market), and European governments under continental law are designed to rule (a hierarchy).)

    However, the overproduction of elites, the overexpansion of managerial government, and the false promise of globalism under the guise of multi-ethnic, multiculturalism, are antithetical to a Republic because all overproduction of elites (Turchin), like all overproduction of management in the private sector, or overproduction of researchers in the academy, all drive us out of the prohibition on authority, and into the demand for authority, and the subsequent civilizational collapse.

    So if you don’t recognize the republican party it’s because no longer Neocon, (for the reasons Peter’s Books explain as change in the global equilibrium of comparative advantage), and we are seeing the conservatives instead strive to return to the western tradition of a rule of law republic whose institutions maximize individual responsibility and minimize free riding, rent-seeking, socialization of losses, and privatization of commons, as well as totally ignoring the wants of the population (by our political, academic, media, and financial sectors), while the democratic party, captured by the neoMarxist-to-Woke left consisting of those parasitic classes, and the false promise that those parasitic classes can convey the prosperity of a republic to managerial state, in the service of those classes that seek to evade the maximization of individual responsibility that is the purpose of the western institutional tradition, the common, concurrent, natural law, the constitution, and the very concept of a constitutional republic.

    The problem is that we are so ignorant because of the neoMarxist-to-woke ‘deliberate march through the institutions of cultural production” that we can’t even have an adult conversation about what is possible or not and what is true or not, so between what is true and possible we can choose a compromise position.

    It’s exasperating.
    And the march toward civil war continues.

    Cheers

    Reply addressees: @PeterZeihan


    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-11 19:36:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1678850691584933889

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1678844221359529985

  • Without writing a missive: it’s poverty, ignorance, false prosperity in decorati

    Without writing a missive:
    it’s poverty, ignorance, false prosperity in decoration vs wealth, knowledge, and true prosperity in design.
    Today: Hindu buses, jewelry. Southeast asian temples vs German industrial design.
    The more competent the more purity of form, the less competent the more use of detail and decoration.
    General the MENA studied the Stars, and supernatural, and Europeans studied nature and supernormal. The difference between europeans saw a heroic man, the asians a disgusting man, and the MENA a hatred of man. This is their representationalism. Now, this also reflects the trust in societies: European high trust, Chinese medium trust. MENA low trust.
    All artistic variation between civlizatations can be explaind as a projection of their metaphisical, economic, political and technoligical development. Art is a technology like any other.

    Reply addressees: @BronzesolTiger @ArtyArtHistory @histofarch


    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-11 14:34:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1678774826906062851

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1678755604423229440

  • “Q: Curt: Can you summarize your views on this in a short essay? No more than 10

    –“Q: Curt: Can you summarize your views on this in a short essay? No more than 1000 words?”– Faraj Al Rashidi

    Yes. Or at least we can try in 1200 words. 😉

    Though, I summarize it here daily in shorter form,. But the ‘proof’ requires far more explanation, and an increasingly broad hierarchy of contexts, and that proof is what causes people to understand why our behavior is what it is, and why there is no alternative to our behavior other than increasing conformity to the laws of nature by taking responsibility for ourselves

    How? “By The pursuit of self-determination by self-determined means, by mutual demand for responsibility, the resulting mutual insurance of sovereignty, reciprocity, duty, truth, excellence, and beauty, and the resulting markets association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, polities, and war, limiting us to truthful debate, disassociation, and courts for the resolution of disputes.”

    Nature is not the kind god we were promised by submission to our priests and philosophers. Instead, the universe is a vast, hostile, irradiated wasteland, and this solar system, this planet, its geology, its climates, and completing life forms from bacteria and viruses to our near-peer super predators have nearly exterminated us over and over again in just our short history, beginning with homo erectus. Nature, nature’s laws, and God if there is one have no mercy: evolve or die.

    So, the fundamental problem we face, is that the more people we attempt to integrate into this responsibility for insurance (citizenship, the polity, the civilization), the less able and less willing and the more discipline and training that it takes for the (costly) inclusion (integration, indoctrination) into that responsibility. And while it was somewhat difficult to integrate the Europeans, it has been difficult to integrate the working classes, extremely difficult to integrate, and it has been almost impossible to integrate women who are in every fiber of their beings, hostile to it.

    Why? The fundamental instincts of men and women are opposites: males to obtain status for cooperation and mating opportunity by demonstration of excellence and accumulation of responsibility for capital, females obtain status by gaining access to male responsibility and capital without producing that capital and responsibility themselves. In other words, women seek irresponsibility and unaccountability at all times. And worse, they are by and large excellent at selection (shopping) and consumption and signaling, but they are terrible to incompetent at innovation, production, capitalization and demand for responsibility from themselves or others.

    So, in summary, we are ‘evolving’ Western civilization and dragging others behind us, at great resistance, out of peasant agrarian irresponsibility that allows the expansion of the underclasses into aristocratic responsibility. And in the West we have gradually introduced classes and paid the price of their responsibilities by forcing them by institutions, both formal and informal, into responsibility. And women are the lowest level of tolerance for responsibility for the polity in any demographic distribution. And as such, we are paying the cost of integration of women into the polity and have not yet outlawed female irresponsible antisocial-antipolitical seditious and treasonous behavior.

    Worse, the only other group capable of intellectual innovation in the world is the Ashkenazim (female European male semitic Jews). But the Ashkenazim like the Jews and truthfully like all of the Semites, practice the low trust seditious means of warfare by undermining. And these Ashkenazim have invented the marxist sequence of pseudoscientific cults, to replace their invention of the Abrahamic sequence of cults (maternal priesthood), the purpose of both is to prevent indo-europeans (paternal aristocracy) from demanding responsibility, and with that responsibility demanding truth, reciprocity, and trust, that low trust tribal societies and frankly the lower classes and women are incapable of.

    So we should have expected this ‘anglo enlightenment project’ of creating an ‘aristocracy of responsibility of everyone’ to be offset by the Jewish ‘priesthood of the irresponsibility of everyone’, where the aristocracy uses the state law and economy to produce a natural aristocracy: hierarchy that is capable of success at producing a high velocity of evolutionary competition, by adaptation that brings us into correspondence with the laws of nature, versus the Jewish and female priesthood of irresponsibility that as we have seen with the Abrahamic, religions relies not on correspondence with nature but the illusion of social construction of falsehoods that deny the laws of nature, but prevent the need for responsibility to adapt to those laws, thus creating semitic dark ages, and explaining why there are no female-dominant civilizations.

    So we choose between the female method of depriving others of responsibility, by manipulation, seduction, and social construction of falsehoods that she uses to mollify the neurology of her children as well as other women who are likewise in need of mollification, and thereby creating and empowering a political priesthood using the same feminine techniques of manipulation, seduction, fraud, and social construction to maintain power over these feminine and the feminine minded at the cost of infantilization and devolution (which we are seeing). Or we choose the masculine aristocratic method of demanding responsibility by insurance of self-determination by self-determined means by truth, duty, reciprocity, excellence and beauty. In other words, left to their own devices the infantile classes are simply criminals and should never have access to political influence.

    Solving this problem is a matter of encoding into law the prohibition on female, semitic, jewish, Abrahamic, Islamic, marxist lies and false promises that, like all religions, seduce our ‘weak’ into social construction of some salvation from adaptation to the laws of nature, by evasion of responsibility for personal and private adaptation to the laws of nature and nature’s god.

    My work, our organization’s work, consists of preventing more dark ages, preventing more devolution, dysgenia, decline, and collapse, by preventing both the female antisocial behavior and the promotion of theology, philosophy, ideology, and institutionalization of any of them, so that we are as capable of ending fraud, sedition, treason, cultural, and political warfare in politics, as we are in the commercial sector, and as a consequence improving our ability at both public and private sector fraud.

    That’s the summary.
    But that’s just the explanation.

    Our work on The Method, The Science, The Logic, and the Grammars, contains all the complexity necessary to produce unambiguous law to do so.

    And the Constitution contains the amendments that produce the institutional outcomes by law. This produces a market for suppressing feminine-semitic-abrahamic-marxist fraud that will, within a decade, cleanse our civilization of harm.

    This will not only prevent a civil war, but will prevent the dark age that was launched by Marx in 1850, was brought to the US as race and cultural Marxism in the 1950s, matured with the capture of the academy in the 1970s, and has culminated in the destruction of our institutions of the cultural production of responsibility (aristocracy) in their ‘last step’ we call Woke today.

    As such my objective (though not all of the Fellows as the institute agree), is to assist those of feminine cognition to mature into mindfulness and responsibility so that we may preserve our inheritance: The uniqueness of Western Civilization as the only civilization that DIDN’T FAIL nature’s law of evolutionary adaptation despite the high emotional and psychological costs of responsibility for self-determination, sovereignty reciprocity truth duty excellence and beauty.

    Every other civilization failed by 800ad. That means between the bronze age collapse in 1200bc and the recovery in 800bc, every civilization failed within one thousand years, by exhausting the opportunity provided by agrarian production: creating authoritarian polities with a small extractive ruling clan, and a vast horde of peasants who remained irresponsible.

    Cheers

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute
    The Science of Cooperation
    “The Law of Man, Nature, and Nature’s God”


    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-10 16:38:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1678443651012218880

  • ON THE UK VIOLATION OF THE COMMON LAW, BY “DEBANKING” POLITICAL FIGURES #uk #ban

    ON THE UK VIOLATION OF THE COMMON LAW, BY “DEBANKING” POLITICAL FIGURES
    #uk #banking #canceling

    The purpose of the State’s “insurance of cooperation” (keeping the king’s peace) is to limit us to private behavior that is reciprocal, limit public behavior to fulfillment of rights, obligations(duties), and inalienations necessary for the production of intergenerational families of citizens, and political behavior to the production of concurrency, and court behavior to the resolution of conflicts by crime, tort, contract, and property, producing commonality.

    And yes, there are some ‘big words’ in there that you might need to understand. So let’s simplify it a bit:

    In other words, we are prohibited from interference in occupation, business, employment, family, access to the market of goods services, and information, the provisioning of utilities, and yes, the provisioning of financial services (banking). We may only resolve disputes by boycott, debate or argument, ‘duel’ (fighting) in defense of honor or commons, appeal to the hierarchy of courts, including that court we call parliaments.

    The US court is restoring the obligation of the people to use the legislature to produce changes by tests of concurrency (agreement between regions and classes). This is achieved by reversing lawfare through the courts, and limiting activism in the private sector, where both are simply means of bypassing the democratic process of legislating by successful concurrency, and never by mere majority, and certainly not by authority.

    As such, one may not interfere with ‘banking’ for political reasons, and arguably political affiliation demands as high protection as religious affiliation because fundamentally, under majority democracy, the natural outcome is for political parties to represent feminine left and masculine right factions, whose difference is feminine irresponsibility and masculine responsibility. And these biases are largely genetically determined.

    I will, at some point, have the organization take this issue to court and try to push it to the supreme court. For the same reason, the court is reforming now: the private sector does not have the right to engage in negative coercion, especially for political ends, and that applies doubly so to institutions that provide necessary utilities for ordinary life.

    Cheers

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute
    The Science of Cooperation


    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-09 22:18:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1678166849412816897

  • Food For Thought. 😉 Stephen Wolfram, a computer scientist, physicist, and entre

    Food For Thought. 😉

    Stephen Wolfram, a computer scientist, physicist, and entrepreneur, uses the terms “mathematical reducibility” and “computational irreducibility” in the context of his work on cellular automata and his broader philosophical framework known as “A New Kind of Science”.

    Mathematical Reducibility: In the context of Wolfram’s work, mathematical reducibility refers to the idea that certain systems or patterns can be simplified or reduced using mathematical equations or formulas. For example, in classical physics, the motion of a pendulum can be described by a simple mathematical equation. This means that we can predict the future state of the system without having to observe every intermediate state.

    Mathematical Formula: ( … )

    Computational Algorithm ( … )

    Computational Discoverability ( … )
    One algorithm

    Computational Adversarial Simulation ( … )
    Competing algorithms

    Causal Density and Externality: ( … )

    Computational Reducibility ( vs Mathematical Reducibility). ( … )

    Computational Irreducibility: This is a concept that Wolfram introduced to describe systems that cannot be simplified in the way that mathematically reducible systems can. In a computationally irreducible system, the only way to determine the future state of the system is to essentially simulate each step. There’s no “shortcut” in the form of a simple mathematical equation. Many of the systems that Wolfram studies, such as cellular automata, exhibit this property of computational irreducibility.

    Wolfram’s idea of computational irreducibility is closely related to the concept of undecidability in computer science and the halting problem described by Alan Turing. It has profound implications for our understanding of complex systems, including physical systems, biological systems, and even the universe itself, according to Wolfram’s theories


    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-09 06:53:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1677934013481205760

  • I’ll just run through this briefly because I’m tired. Education in aristotelian

    I’ll just run through this briefly because I’m tired.

    Education in aristotelian sciences should improve capacity by one standard deviation. But (g) doesn’t change – it’s biological. IQ tests are now capable of distinquishing between (fluid) neural performance and demonstrated intelligence (crystallized) and between culture neutral and culture specific, where older tests weren’t.

    The increase you are talking about is the flynn effect. This is largely a correction in the health of the underclasses, combined with a marginal shift in the improvement of reason by moving from ancient discrete knowledge to european scientific systemic knowledge.

    The flynn effect is reversing due largely to declining gene pools and declining pressure for performance in school systems to minimize inequality (or at least feelings of it.)
    This applies to all groups. The ratios remain the same between the races no matter what we do.

    Evolution followed a simple path with four speciation events and a subsequent set of hybridization events. In this sense despite the discomvort with it, our races are subspecies that adapted to local environment. The direction of our adaptation was neotenic. And the racies represent a spectrom of neotenic evolution out of africa to extremes in western europe and eastern asia.

    Current knolwedge of Speciation events: African(RiftValley) > South Eurasian(Dry Persian Gulf) > Hybrids(Everywhere) > European(European Forests) > East Asia(Tibetan plains).

    The hybridization events are numerous and small but the major events are due to the agrarian revolution and expansion. Prior to that event all races were as different as europeans and east asians.

    If I err here anywhere it’s because I should be sleeping not trying to draw from memory when I’m tired. lol

    Reply addressees: @FarajRashi93307


    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-04 23:54:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1676379079933587457

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1676374714208473088

  • FEMALE > JEWISH > MARXIST STRATEGY I’d explain again in detail, but I’m tired. ;

    FEMALE > JEWISH > MARXIST STRATEGY
    I’d explain again in detail, but I’m tired. 😉

    Simple version:
    Females want attention, hyper consumption, are descriminative in shopping, superior at verbal but inferior at mechanical skills, are devoted but not loyal, want will monkey branch when possible, climb social ladders, evade responsibility for commons, seek free riding and rent seeking whenever possible, willingly profit by seduction into false promise, and war by undermining, sedition, and treason, while hiding behind claims of innocence, victimhood and plausible deniability. And it doesn’t matter if they’re progressive (majority) or conservative (minority).

    Why: “All jews are female.” It’s instinctual.

    I’ve spent decades on this problem and so has MacDonald. And it’s fascinating that underneath it all, it’s that simple: instinct.

    So can you blame women for behaving like women or do you blame men for letting them? Do you blame jews and muslims for their behavor or do you blame europeans for tolerating it.

    The hard problem (and I haven’t solved it yet) is why do we tolerate female antisocial behavior whether at small or large scale? Why is it that we put up with female antisocial behavior from our women and from the jews who use the same strategy (but are more capable)?

    Reply addressees: @FarajRashi93307 @_faraharif


    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-04 23:44:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1676376422963728384

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1676373875783868417

  • Natural religion is necessary for mindfulness (reduction of neuroticism and anxi

    Natural religion is necessary for mindfulness (reduction of neuroticism and anxiety due to uncertainty in social animals).

    Organized Religion was necessary to create a standard of weights and. measures for behavior as trade and cooperation increased, and the importance of cooperation and trade at scale increased.

    All our living religions evolved in response to the Bronze Age Collapse and the restoration of civilization during that ‘dark age’.

    Just as our modern religions (humanism, marxism, tc) emerged in response to modernity as we evolved in response to recovery from the Abrahamic dark age.

    Reply addressees: @PepeFisher


    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-04 19:27:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1676311915897712644

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1676310358779129860

  • “HOW THE CHURCH COULD HAVE WON BUT FAILED” We can’t discard myth and ritual. Nee

    “HOW THE CHURCH COULD HAVE WON BUT FAILED”

    We can’t discard myth and ritual.

    Needs: Child > Youth > Young Adult > Mother > Warrior > Priest > Judge > King.

    Fulfillment of Needs: Mythology> Theology > Philosophy (reason) > Empiricism (evidence) > Science (testimony) > Computational (description).

    Graceful increase in precision with graceful increase in knowledge and ability.

    It’s only a question of whether we create religions or reform religions to increasingly correspond to reality. The scholastics pretty much had it.

    Had the church taken the opposite reaction to darwin it would have ‘won history’.

    All they had to say was ‘look at our gradual evolution of natural law throughout history – Aquinas was right, the scholastics were right, … God is the universe, gods laws are the law of the universe, and the natural law is god’s law. So hey, we were right!

    Etc. Easy win. Biggest screw-up in theological history.

    Reply addressees: @SClaus1984


    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-04 19:25:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1676311362840981519

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1676299560056963072