Curt Doolittle

Form: Outline

  • PROPERTARIAN METHODOLOGY The Secrets of Propertarian (Scientific) Analysis: 1) F

    PROPERTARIAN METHODOLOGY

    The Secrets of Propertarian (Scientific) Analysis:

    1) For any concept you refer to, construct lines of three or more points demonstrating limits not states. This is the most subtle and difficult part of the method since we tend to think in ideal types that invoke a particular experience and not the range of conditions and set of experiences that are invoked. Think in lines not states. Turn any idea into a spectrum. It’s not hard with practice.

    2) Analyze information movement – who possesses it, what it consists of, and when. (programming is great for teaching you how your assumptions of the knowledge of others is tragically flawed).

    3) Analyze incentives given the information individuals have at their disposal at any moment.

    4) Expect people to seek to acquire at all points in time, and to seize rents whenever possible, and wherever possible means whenever they won’t be caught.

    5) Expect Culture, Class, Gender, Race, Tribe, Family, and personal reproductive strategies to provide the dominant influence in decidability: whenever discretion is required these factors will influence the decision because the individual has no other means of decidability without propertarian ethics.

    6) When you write, do so operationally not analogically, experientially, or observationally: use the vectors, information, incentives, biases, and decisions of individuals. Never use the word ‘is’ since it means you do not understand what you are saying.

    7) Test for identity (non-conflationary identification of properties, methods and relations). Test for internal consistency of your argument. Test for external correspondence of your argument. Test for existential possiblity of each step in your argument (which is what propertarianism asks you to do by its nature). Test for Morality (that no involuntary transfers have occurrred, or if they have articulate them). Test for parsimony: that you have defined limits to all your assumptions and terms. Test for explanatory power. Attempt to falsify it: seek contradictory examples and ensure that your analysis (description) holds up.

    Propertarian analysis should produce tests of existential possibility: a proof. A proof is not a truth. But it is the most likely means of constructing a truth candidate that we currently know of.

    Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-21 05:39:00 UTC

  • 7) Rule of Law. Strict Construction. Textualism. Property-en-toto. Informational

    7) Rule of Law. Strict Construction. Textualism. Property-en-toto. Informational commons. Universal standing. Class Houses. Market Gov’t.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-21 04:14:00 UTC

  • 2) Violence. Theft shifts from territory and women, to things, to money, to taxa

    2) Violence. Theft shifts from territory and women, to things, to money, to taxation, to credit, to fraud, to free riding, to conspiracy.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-21 03:58:00 UTC

  • Perception->Free Association->Hypothesis->Theory(science)->Common Practice (Reci

    Perception->Free Association->Hypothesis->Theory(science)->Common Practice (Recipe/Law)->True(perfect parsimony)->Tautology.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-16 08:44:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/666174940308205568

    Reply addressees: @wargfranklin

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/666149651104423936

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/666149651104423936

  • WHY ARE PRICES STICKY? 1) Any change that forces reordering of the PSST (network

    WHY ARE PRICES STICKY?

    1) Any change that forces reordering of the PSST (network of production) is a transaction cost that all seek to avoid, and avoid more so when risk increase from declining price pressure. People hold out. The entire chain gets more efficient. And they only switch when it’s no longer possible. This is just what people do. Particularly if relationships are involved. The more complex the relations the worse it is.

    2) The individual who lives with little savings and high cashflow demands interprets changing jobs as the highest transaction cost other than divorce or devastating illness.

    3) An entire organization can come apart if you reduce pay, because it affects the entire network of responsibilities of each person.

    4) As the marginal value of talent has increased, and the marginal value of fixed capital has decreased, the influence of shocks on talent places higher risk to the organization- people are very difficult to replace but the best are the first to leave.

    5) Net is that the side effect of little savings and higher consumption at high velocity, is stickier everything and worse adjustment to shocks.

    Here in the ‘less advantaged world’ it’s not a problem. Oversupply of labor. Everyone is overqualified for everything. Lack of credit keeps everyone poor. Lack of credit because the government cannot be trusted not to appropriate anything and everything.

    -Curt

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-15 12:32:00 UTC

  • TRANSITIONS IN THE WORKPLACE (worth repeating) 1700’s-1800’s, imitation of the m

    TRANSITIONS IN THE WORKPLACE

    (worth repeating)

    1700’s-1800’s, imitation of the military order in business (command and control) driven by british men doing service, getting some money, and going into business in the colonies.

    1920-1980 the bureaucratic order of management via socialism, as the family is replaced by professional management.

    1980+ the entrepreneurial movement and JIT. (the great purge) the middle managers are fired en mass, and the governments abandon socialism per se.

    1990+ the team model brought to america from japan where it was brought in from japan.

    2000+ the agile movement into technology brings JIT to Agile(iterations) and Kanban(streams) so that higher operational tempo prevents large errors by using many small changes, requiring lower held inventory. side effect is greater social and interpersonal commitment.

    2010+ the social movement into business:

    2016+ the agile and social movement spread to the entire business.

    WHY: the transition from pure slave labor under the military order, to bureaucracy under the socialist order, to entrepreneurialism and teams, to the purely professional order.

    Same happens to organization sizes and durations. Companies rely less on fixed capital and more on tech and talent. Companies get smaller and more specialized.

    Careers move from lifetimes to decades.

    Now arguable we are in seven year cycles of both.

    So when you say ‘social’ all it means is that people practice more ‘discretion’ in the workplace because they do increasingly dynamic or custom or small-run work, and less repetition of the same process (and if they do, they get paid peanuts).

    Theoretical limit is we’re all unmarried, all unemployed, and all part time contractors, and companies all make small bits for each other.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-15 10:25:00 UTC

  • Aesthetics: for me. Investment: for Kin. Ethics: Cooperation for allies; and non

    Aesthetics: for me. Investment: for Kin. Ethics: Cooperation for allies; and nonaggression for potentials, war: conquest for enemies.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-13 12:54:00 UTC

  • The R-Selection Hierarchy (The Female Reproductive Strategy)

    R-SELECTION HIERARCHY (The Female Reproductive Strategy) —————————————————————————————— Women, Socialists + Communists Libertine Libertarians Ashkenazim Gypsies Tinkers Career Criminals Incompetents Invalids

    TECHNOLOGY: (LIARS AND THIEVES). —————————————————————————————— Lie, Gossip, Rally, Shame, Obscure Conflate, Load, Frame, Overload. PURPOSE —————————————————————————————— Given that the only moral cooperation one can engage in is productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange, free of imposition of cost by externality, then the purpose of the GOSSIPERS is to obtain a discount by imposing costs upon others. Women bear a high cost of reproduction long term and men bear a high risk of death long term. With voluntary exchange this relationship is symmetric. Without voluntary exchange this relationship is predatory. If a relationship is predatory then it is not cooperation it is predation. Neither men nor women may obtain their perfect preferences. We must conduct exchanges that function as compromises between our different strategies and preferences. Granting women equal property rights allowed voluntary exchange between the genders with opposing reproductive strategies. But granting women political privileges empowered them to destroy rule of law, and meritocracy and the compromise between the genders. As such it is a choice for males whether we allow this predation instead of voluntary exchange to persist. He who can destroy a thing controls a thing. We can destroy the government and return to voluntary exchange. We need only choose to. (This ought to get me into trouble all over the place.)

  • The R-Selection Hierarchy (The Female Reproductive Strategy)

    R-SELECTION HIERARCHY (The Female Reproductive Strategy) —————————————————————————————— Women, Socialists + Communists Libertine Libertarians Ashkenazim Gypsies Tinkers Career Criminals Incompetents Invalids

    TECHNOLOGY: (LIARS AND THIEVES). —————————————————————————————— Lie, Gossip, Rally, Shame, Obscure Conflate, Load, Frame, Overload. PURPOSE —————————————————————————————— Given that the only moral cooperation one can engage in is productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange, free of imposition of cost by externality, then the purpose of the GOSSIPERS is to obtain a discount by imposing costs upon others. Women bear a high cost of reproduction long term and men bear a high risk of death long term. With voluntary exchange this relationship is symmetric. Without voluntary exchange this relationship is predatory. If a relationship is predatory then it is not cooperation it is predation. Neither men nor women may obtain their perfect preferences. We must conduct exchanges that function as compromises between our different strategies and preferences. Granting women equal property rights allowed voluntary exchange between the genders with opposing reproductive strategies. But granting women political privileges empowered them to destroy rule of law, and meritocracy and the compromise between the genders. As such it is a choice for males whether we allow this predation instead of voluntary exchange to persist. He who can destroy a thing controls a thing. We can destroy the government and return to voluntary exchange. We need only choose to. (This ought to get me into trouble all over the place.)

  • The Intertemporal Division of Coercive Specialization

    [C]oercive Specialization: Conservative, Libertarian, and Progressive May / may not = conservative. Can / can not = libertarian. Should / should not = Progressive.
    Accumulate = conservative. Produce = libertarian. Consume = progressive. K selection = conservative.* Exchange selection = libertarian.* R selection = progressive.* Long term = conservative. Medium term = libertarian. Short term = progressive. Law = conservative. Trade = libertarian. Gossip = progressive. Commodity Money (gold) = conservative. Fiduciary Media (notes) = libertarian. Fiat Currency (shares) = progressive. Force : Law (limit on parasitism) : Conservatism. Remuneration. : Trade (utility) : Libertarianism. Gossip (shaming) : Religion and Norms ( deprivation of opportunity to cooperate) : Progressivism. There exist only three technologies of coercion. It should not surprise us that humans specialize in each. Or that we should organize into groups led by specialists in each. Of that some would master more than one : Statism: Lying(gossip), bribing(remuneration) and commanding (law). Or that mastery of a positive use of coercion would also produce mastery of a negative use of coercion. The only “truth” we can ever know in politics, is productive, fully informed voluntary exchange, free of imposition of costs by externality. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine * “K” is for carrying capacity. “r” is for rate of growth. If you have limited resources, you need competition, that’s where K excels – The male reproductive strategy. If you have free resources, your best option is to grow wildly, that’s where r excels – The female reproductive strategy. Exchange reproductive strategy refers to the strategy of ‘homo economicus’: productivity.