Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • RELIGION AND REVOLUTION (very important post) Religion functions as a regulatory

    RELIGION AND REVOLUTION

    (very important post)

    Religion functions as a regulatory institution limiting culture. It is one thing to allow religious ‘ghettos’ for political utility, another to tolerate those ghettos for commercial utility, and it’s quite another to create a poly-logical cultural (normative) equivalent to the mono-logical legal system. In other words, it is no more logical(honest) to produce a poly logical legal order, than it is a poly logical ethical order, than it is to produce a poly logical aesthetic order. These are not matters of preference but of truth. And matters of truth are not positive assertions but negative prohibitions. By the possibility of prohibiting that which violates physical, natural, and informational laws, we create a market for goods, but we prohibit a market for bads.

    So the separation of church and state is incorrect. That separation is necessary not so that we may permit competing religions – not so whatsoever – but (a) to prevent the conflation of religion with law, and (b) to allow the evolution of religions increasingly compatible with informational, natural, and physical laws.

    The military, organized crimes(federal police), local crimes (local police), and sheriffs (community police) must be independent because they do not choose, they only ACT. The judiciary must be independent to prevent its conflation, misuse, and corruption as an organization that decides (chooses) not acts. The church (and I use that term very loosely to describe all forms of aesthetics) must be independent for the same reasons as the judiciary and the military – to prevent its conflation, misuse or corruption. These are regulatory bodies for (1) military:force, (2) judiciary:exchange, and (3) aesthetics:good commons.

    The academy must be independent for the same reasons as the military, judiciary, and church: to prevent its conflation, misuse, and corruption. However this limits the academy to the sciences (the true) and preserves ‘the good’ as work for the church. Ergo, the aesthetic (allegorical) disciplines then are the providence of the regulation of the church, not the research and training of the academy. The Academy may produce good as a byproduct of truth, but the church must limit the good.

    Our Laws of Nature: Physical Laws, Cooperative Laws(Natural Law), and Informational Laws (Testimonial Law) must then limit all of these disciplines.

    Our germanic ancestors unfortunately did not grasp the genius of the ethics of the germanic oath (responsibility for truth, life, property, and commons), and the utility of common over continental law which enforced this oath not only upon the citizens but on the very institutions of government and religion themselves. The germans feared anglo truth. The anglos were seduced by the commercial gains of cosmopolitan empire – as are all empires that fail.

    The national socialists did not understand what they had discovered: a post-mystical religion – one that we all desire, and (unfortunately) one that we need. They too practiced conflation. They had one piece of the institutional puzzle but not enough of it to prevent ‘bads’.

    We can create a new ‘church’ and make use of our established monuments. That church must fulfill its duty as a limiter of aesthetics, just as the military(force), and judiciary(cooperation), create limits.

    But we must not make the mistake that other civilizations have made when their primary institutions fail: conflation. The answer we seek to restore western civilization is found in the choice of: Sovereignty, and the consequential choice of Transcendence and the consequential necessity of Markets in Everything. And in the means of decidability under them: The Laws: Physical, Cooperative(Natural), and informational (testimonial). And in the specialized institutions that limit the three means of coercion: Military, Judiciary, Church. And the one institution that provides innovation: Science, Academy, School, and Gymnasium.

    The human mind seeks simple models. We call them under various terms: stereotypes, ideal types, and ideals. It’s the most simple form of comparison. We want one rule,and one institution. But this ‘want’ leads us into conflation, and conflation leads us into misuse, corruption, stagnation, and failure.

    In retrospect our ancestors practiced soveregnty and tripartism (estates of the realm), intuitively and habitually, rather than scientifically (operationally and analytically). When the economic shift provided by the end of the plagues, the evolution of the hanseatic civilization as a competitor to the mediterranean, and the scientific enlightenment, unfortunately the middle class seized power by overestimating the potential of the commercial order and the power of markets.

    The accumulated cultural capital did take a long time to spend down. But spend it down we have. And by spending it down we can claim one benefit: by analyzing our loss, we can understand our error. And having understood our error, we can repair it.

    Deconflate the conflations of the enlightenment. End the attempt to construct an institutional monopoly – the antithesis of our historical reasons for success. Restore markets in everything. Restore markets in everything by restoring a judiciary under natural law, and adding informational law to the responsibility of that judiciary. Restore the church by restoring its responsibilities, and chartering it with a new natural rather than supernatural mission. Restore the military to its pervasive position in society as the central method of emergency services of all kinds.

    How can this be done?

    – Moral Permission (we have it)

    – A set of demands (a more precise version of that which is stated above)

    – A plan of transition (a demand for a new constitution, the reformation of our institutions, and the purge of certain institutions).

    – A plan of ‘persuasion’ ( Promise violence against the status quo, then incrementally increase it, until those demands are either met- or we descend into civil war, and we impose them ourselves.)

    Why is it possible?

    – because no civilization in history other than perhaps the Late Roman or Late Ottoman has been as fragile as ours is today.

    Opportunity knocks.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-18 09:42:00 UTC

  • CHINESE CONFLATIONISM Not only were there no terms for politics vs society, but

    CHINESE CONFLATIONISM

    Not only were there no terms for politics vs society, but there was no distinction. It’s one vast hierarchy. An enormous family. Which many of us agree with, and which produces exceptional ends. However, there also exists nothing but conflation and the total absence of competition. And without competition one relies on outsiders to force one to evolve. And without others to force one to evolve, one adopts the decision of ‘stability’ rather than ‘innovation’. which is desirable in many cases. But in the end, it means you will stagnate and eventually be conquered.

    Man must transcend the animal, the domesticated animal, the fully human.

    The universe’s clock ticks.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-18 09:17:00 UTC

  • CHOOSING BETWEEN FASCISM AND CLASSICAL MONARCHY (important post) I think that on

    CHOOSING BETWEEN FASCISM AND CLASSICAL MONARCHY

    (important post)

    I think that once you ‘lose hope’ in democracy and equality and return to hierarchy, you have a range of choices available. National socialism on the one end and classical monarchy on the other.

    The ‘good’ in national socialism existed in their use of nationalism, aesthetics, and the creation of rituals and festivals – the kind of ‘religion’ that replaces otherworldly mysticism with real-worldly art in all aspects of life. This was genius. But while Germany had created the next flowering of Europe (after Italy’s renaissance and England’s scientific enlightenment), and brought european civilization to it’s highest achievements therein, national socialism overextended itself like most religions do, into “purity” for its own sake.

    Moreover, National socialism was dependent upon finding a leader who can do good. Classical Monarchy is dependent upon a leader who prevents people from doing bad. It is very hard to do good other than build monuments (which is what monarchs do). It is very easy to prevent harm without doing harm, which is what monarch’s do.

    So, IMHO, it is better to have an aesthetic monarchy IN GENERAL, and call out the fascists in time of economic and political war. In other words I think it is useful to constitute both a military, a police force, a judiciary, and an aesthetic ‘priesthood’ that maintains purity.

    And let them work together to suppress evils of all kinds. In my opinion, natural law can be used to allow the policing of aesthetics. If that is the case, then culture can be policed just as information is policed. This form of policing merely limits the bad without limiting the innovative.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-18 08:21:00 UTC

  • “Lead them with government and regulate them by punishments, and the people will

    –“Lead them with government and regulate them by punishments, and the people will evade them with no sense of shame. Lead them with virtue and regulate them by ritual, and they will acquire a sense of shame—and moreover, they will be orderly.”–

    the laws of nature, myth(history), rituals, celebrations.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-18 03:43:00 UTC

  • THIS AS LEGIT? If it’s true I’m making cupcakes and celebrating. Thieves. Guess

    http://worldpoliticus.com/2017/01/16/hillary-clinton-decided-fire-employees-clinton-foundation-done/CONFIRM THIS AS LEGIT?

    If it’s true I’m making cupcakes and celebrating. Thieves.

    Guess i’ll never get my 2m back from them now… lol

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-18 03:22:00 UTC

  • “This is so awesome. To finally find a way of looking at the world that doesn’t

    —“This is so awesome. To finally find a way of looking at the world that doesn’t cause me massive cognitive dissonance, as well as endless qualifiers in conversations.

    Propertarianism is the future of the right.

    Thanks Curt and Ely.”—- Daniel Travis

    Made my day.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-17 19:46:00 UTC

  • Reasoning via negativa. You know a rather large number of my positions are drawn

    Reasoning via negativa.

    You know a rather large number of my positions are drawn from the observations of the kinds of errors humans make, rather than some particular insight about the subject matter.

    you can, if you have the time, master pretty much every field on this earth in one lifetime. You cannot master it’s protocols, processes, and habits, but you can at least grasp the methodology each discipline employs – and they’re all relatively similar. The fact that each is expressed in teh class and IQ range of the practitioners simply confuses us – we think it is all more complex than it is.

    And if you know what common ingorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, loading/framing/overloading, obscurantism/pseudoscience/pseudorationalism, and various forms of deceit people engage in then you can seek for examples of those things in the field, and then suggest alternatives.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-17 19:43:00 UTC

  • CLEARING THE MARKET FOR CONFLICT WITH VIOLENCE One of Eli Harman’s most importan

    CLEARING THE MARKET FOR CONFLICT WITH VIOLENCE

    One of Eli Harman’s most important contributions to Propertarianism is the insight that violence functions as a market clearing mechanism for disputes, just as cooperation forms a market clearing mechanism for agreements.

    –“Violence is the means of expressing the subjective evaluations not captured by price signals, which are as vast and varied as those which are.”—Eli Harman

    Define “Market Clearing?”

    The application of a concept from economics to cooperation proper:

    “That which restores disequilibrium to equilibrium.”

    In economics we state a market has been cleared when supply=demand: meaning no ‘problem’ exists for the market to calculate.

    You can solve political problems by agreement or physical conflict. They are all solvable. You can clear the market for cooperation or the market for conflict. Both markets are clearable.

    Via Negativa in Everything.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-17 18:35:00 UTC

  • ADMITTING OUR ‘GERMANNESS’, THAT ANGLOS WERE WRONG, AND THAT EVERYONE ELSE WAS T

    ADMITTING OUR ‘GERMANNESS’, THAT ANGLOS WERE WRONG, AND THAT EVERYONE ELSE WAS TOO.

    (lolz)

    —“We anglos acknowledge our own german-ness and have included you germans in the circumpolar civilization club (we even jump in snow banks on new years eve)…but you will never be forgiven for Kant.”— Bill Joslin

    I just say we we anglos were wrong about everything but at least we speak scientifically – in deflationary language. The germans were right about everything, but they speak in conflationary nonsense. The french were wrong about everything and took down Europe and poisoned the world’s information system because of it. And they simply are too ashamed to admit it. The jews were either wrong about everything or lied about everything and killed 100M people this time around – but even they themselves aren’t still don’t know the difference between truth and lying. Same agency problem as women for the same reason. lol

    We’re all freaking nuts. We had evolved the perfect government. And we screwed it up.

    The scientific enlightenment was awesome, and the rest of the so called ‘enlightenment’ is actually a counter-revolution against it.

    Truth has a name but it’s uncomfortable to speak it,

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-17 18:17:00 UTC

  • AVOIDANCE OF EXISTENTIAL GRAMMAR AS COGNITIVE SOLIPSISM: INABILITY TO DISTINGUIS

    AVOIDANCE OF EXISTENTIAL GRAMMAR AS COGNITIVE SOLIPSISM: INABILITY TO DISTINGUISH EXPERIENCE FROM EXISTENCE.

    The deceit is in failing to use EXISTENTIAL GRAMMAR, the same way we use gender-grammar, or temporal grammar, or locational grammar.

    Not sure why it’s so hard for people to grasp this concept.

    Not quite sure why people want to rely on the pretense of ‘god mode’ to make their statements.

    or rather, I think it is a form of cognitive solipsism: inability to separate the self from existence.

    Actually, that’s what I”m going to call it: cognitive solipsism.

    Just as so many women cannot distinquish between experience and consequence, some people cannot distinquish between experience and existence.

    cognitive solipsism.

    Not sure if it’s a developmental disorder, or a failure of maturity, or an uneven evolutionary distribution of intellectual capacity… hmmm…..

    (edit: added)

    Existential Grammar is only important once an individual makes claims to truth because of a premise or conclusion. Now, I’might argue that it’s necessary to ensure you’re not making a mistake, but then, meaning for the purpose of ideation and testimony for the purpose of warrantying due diligence prior to making a truth claim are different things. So I would hope that people would grasp that almost all philosophical arguments I run across are SOPHOMORIC because of nothing more than trickery accomplished by conflation by using the verb to-be to make existential and deducible claims, rather than simply using existential grammar and making the fraudulent claim to existential ‘authority’.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-17 13:45:00 UTC