Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • Markets are simply the only means of preserving asymmetry and removing asymmetry

    Markets are simply the only means of preserving asymmetry and removing asymmetry of power and information. Courts are the only means of preserving asymmetry of warranty of performance.

    I don’t think markets are subordinate to hierarchy in any sense other than I think that they themselves prohibit hierarchy by permitting the meritocratic rise and fall of the classes by means of DEMONSTRATED ACTIONS.

    I don’t think a market for commons divided by the classes of production is a hierarchy, it is just a means of recognizing the forms of production that the meritocratic families have managed to produce and hold onto: families, business, enterprises, territories, and monarchy.

    The fact that there is greater SCALE OF MERIT in each class is simply a fact of the market operating to ensure that we demonstrate the greatest rotation and maintain the families businesses, enterprises, and institutions, with the greatest merit.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-07 15:31:00 UTC

  • small new england town. fifty cops outside. motorcycles. cars. why? ’cause, it’s

    small new england town. fifty cops outside. motorcycles. cars. why?

    ’cause, it’s a small town: catholic church next door. funeral. of course.

    i’ve been in eastern europe so long that i just assume a collection of cops means someone worthy of getting killed either has been killed, or someone more worthy of getting killed is being protected from the inevitable consequence of being worthy of getting killed.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-07 12:16:00 UTC

  • NO. THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR THE ORGANIZED AND INSTITUTIONALIZED APPLICATION O

    NO. THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR THE ORGANIZED AND INSTITUTIONALIZED APPLICATION OF VIOLENCE FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF HARM, THEFT, FRAUD, PSEUDOSCIENCE, AND LIES.

    —“How do we realistically become less tolerant of these lies. Reading the culture of critique was pretty eye opening. But whenever I try to have conversations about this stuff with people they tend to shut down pretty hard. Is there anything we can do to get rid of pseudoscience that doesn’t involve violence?” —Pepper Le Angus

    No. All increases in criminal ability are solved by violence distributed by various forms of institutions: education, sheriff, police, judge, courts, politics, and war.

    Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-07 11:38:00 UTC

  • (ok. i am trying to write software today. ok? lol)

    (ok. i am trying to write software today. ok? lol)

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-07 11:11:00 UTC

  • “Some of the West’s people are tolerant of Cosmopolitan Jewish and Anglo Puritan

    —“Some of the West’s people are tolerant of Cosmopolitan Jewish and Anglo Puritan lies because we have members of the other classes who are still fearful of the aristocratic class.

    We must drive a wedge between them and the cosmopolitans and puritans. And it seems like this global employment and immigration crisis provides us with just that opportunity.

    The separate interests of the cosmopolitans and the lower classes of the host nation are becoming apparent – and with it, the lower classes are rebelling.

    The only group I see still tolerant of and allied to the Cosmopolitans is the academic class, most of whom are Underclass or Puritans because they academy has filtered out by intent and design the Aristocracy. But these ‘Secular Priests of Falsehood’ are still too afraid and confused about how they will survive, where they’ll go, what they’ll do once the people rebel against it.

    Showing them a plan during a transition would be helpful in getting them to decouple from the anti-commons crowd, too.”—Josh Jeppson

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-07 10:54:00 UTC

  • “There is so much misunderstanding involved in libertarian equality-bashing. Equ

    —“There is so much misunderstanding involved in libertarian equality-bashing. Equality was not conceived as a leveling process, but as an empowerment project — to let as many people as possible realize their potential. Equality as leveling is harshly criticized by the best minds of Social Democratic theory, such as Roberto Unger.”—Asgeir Theodor Johannesson

    —“Very percipient Mr. Johannesson.

    And what a great difference there was between this noble conception and its fruition.

    To bifurcate the two is useful. That of

    – empowerment of all to fulfill a specialist working within the community (a craft), and

    that of

    – dragging almost everyone down to a rung below the initial average in the name of ‘equality of outcome’, or even more perniciously (seemingly surprising to the unlettered) ‘equality of opportunity’.”—Andy Curzon

    THE PROBLEM OF LIBERTARIANISM’S INCOMPLETE SENTENCES AND MARXIST SUBSITUTION

    Equality is an incomplete sentence open to suggestion, which is why it is yet another example of the fraud of suggestion.

    Equality of adjudication of differences in disputes over property in toto? Well, that’s just natural law by which we eliminate all frictions in the hope of developing the highest velocity, and therefore lowest costs, for all.

    When someone says equality, ask them equality of what?

    Cheers

    Curt

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-07 10:50:00 UTC

  • OF COURSE IT’S THE COSMOPOLITAN JEW’S FAULT FOR THE SECOND GREAT LIE, BUT ITS OU

    OF COURSE IT’S THE COSMOPOLITAN JEW’S FAULT FOR THE SECOND GREAT LIE, BUT ITS OUR FAULT FOR BEING OUT-GUNNED BY IT. ESPECIALLY BY THEIR ALLIANCE WITH OUR WOMEN AND PURITANS.

    There is blame for everyone in the enlightenment – perhaps the jews and French the most. As I say, don’t blame the innovator in warfare, blame those who are losign from not developing superior countermeasures because of underinvestment in weaponry.

    —“Ezra Pound had many clever ideas, but his faulting “Big Jew” was not one of them.”— Boris Miroslav Spacek

    He was correct that the cosmopolitans were the originators of the second ‘religious’ conquest of the west, this time by pseudoscience rather than by authoritarian mysticism.

    We have Aesop, Homer, Alexander, Aristotle, Aurelius, Machiavelli, Bacon, Locke, Smith, Hume, Jefferson, Maxwell, Darwin, Spencer, Menger, Nietzche, Hayek, and all those in between.

    But the cosmopolitans reacted to them with the Pseudoscientific Counter-Enlightenment: Boaz (anthropology), Freud (psychology), Marx (economics and sociology), Cantor(mathematical platonism), Mises (economic pseudoscience), Adorno/Frankfurt( anti-aristocratic aesthetics), Rand and Rothbard (anti-commons).

    And sold the pseudoscience to the female and underclass populace as a utopian scheme via the academy for profit, just as the mysticism was sold to the female and underclass via traveling preachers for profit: to rebel against the aristocracy that domesticated them out of ignorance, mysticism, tribalism, and poverty.

    So this is all merely a fact of history now, and the consequences of the first great lie: authoritarian mysticism, and the second great lie of critical pseudoscience are empirically observable as the destruction of common capital in all its forms.

    So no, he was not wrong.

    What he was wrong about, and what all subsequent generations have been wrong about, is that when one is confronted by an act of warfare wether by arms, by immigration(displacement), by economics, by conversion, or by information (falsehood), that one can be out-gunned-out-germed-out-steeled by immigration, economics, conversion, or informational propaganda as well as by force of arms.

    So that the failure to adapt to a new form of warfare is OUR FAULT, rather than the fault of the innovators of the new form of warfare.

    And this is not complicated.

    We have built western civilization into the FASTEST evolving civilization by the domestication of humans under our domain, through nothing more than the use of the common, natural, judge-discovered law, and the use of truth, empiricism, reason, arms and technology despite small numbers to do so. And we have dragged humanity kicking and screaming out of mysticism, ignorance, poverty, and starvation, and disease with those tools – and we profited from it. And there is no shame in that profiting.

    Compare the consequences of the use of western truth to domesticate man, and the consequences of the first reaction to aristocracy (scriptural religion), the second reaction to Aristotelian aristocracy (scriptural monotheism), and the third reaction to Baconian empiricism (pseudoscientific cosmopolitanism).

    Are jews responsible for the second and third great lies and the harm that they have done? Of course they are.

    Are we responsible for not yet advancing our law so that such lies are impossible to propagate through as aggressive punishment of that method of war and crime as every other method of war and crime?

    Yes, we are.

    So the jews are certainly to blame for much of the world’s reliance on the great lies, and the conflicts therefrom. But we are responsible for tolerating the great lies.

    The interesting question is… why are we tolerant of the great lies, either supernatural great lies, or pseudoscientific great lies?

    And why is it that the jews have learned to specialize in ‘the big lies’ as the Russians and Germans have so frequently observed?

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-07 09:26:00 UTC

  • Q&A: WHAT IS PLATONISM AND WHY IS IT AN ERROR? (advanced philosophy made meaning

    Q&A: WHAT IS PLATONISM AND WHY IS IT AN ERROR?

    (advanced philosophy made meaningful)

    Platonism can refer to AT LEAST the following:

    … 1) the philosophy of Plato in toto.

    … 2) that imperceptible reality is intelligible by appeal to abstract analogy.

    … 3) the use of fantasy and imaginary as substitution for ignorance or to obscure deception.

    … 4) the prior existence of abstract objects – or at least their determinism as an appeal to authority for the use of imaginary entities.

    … 5) the existence of a third reality beyond that of the physical, and the thinking – the supernatural – in which these entities exist.

    (ed: re-orderd for clarity)

    All of which are means of avoiding the COSTLY actions necessary to observe the unobservable through the development of instrumentation.

    I tend to think of it as the set of metaphysical, cultural, normative, habitual, and genetic information that users either cannot imagine exist competitors or alternatives.

    But people use it basically as a means of saving costs in order to justify their priors.

    I suspect that is because we all have a greater genetic interest in moral priors, and knowledge priors, such that we seek to preserve our investment or make use of the wayfinding that current investment allows us. So we all need bridges from whatever wayfinding we use, to some alternative.

    In other words, we have a habit of using informational substitution of the unknown as if it is of equal empirical content to the known, as a means of preserving our ability to make judgments, whether those judgments be avoidance of cost, the preservation of investments(priors), perpetuation of existing frauds, or production of new frauds.

    THIS IS PLATONISM:

    the substitution of fantasy for information as either a means of cost avoidance, of obscuring comforting and advantageous deceptions, or of preserving comforting falsehoods.

    Platonism is to philosophy(truth) what suggestion is to deceit.

    CONFLATIONISM

    I suspect that the majority of conflationsm in thinking that affects the non-European world’s thought, is the consequence of their failure to isolate the observable and actionable, from the analogistic and the narratives we use to form consensus.

    The importance of western non-conflation is something that is obvious in our institutions. We separate religion and law and science. But it is not so obvious that our martial epistemology and our sovereignty is the cause of it. (Or even if we are more mentally predisposed to it for some reason).

    Platonism is something we struggle to be rid of by operationalism, and thereby separate the deterministic (numbers from identical categories) from an imaginary reality (a mathematical reality).

    So I view operationalism as an extension of western non-conflation, and a necessary test of existential possibility, and likewise a necessary test of appeals to truth that are in fact, appeals to imagined unknowns wherein we lack knowledge of causality due to (a) cost, (b) convenient preservation of investments, (c) conveneint preservation of frauds.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-07 08:58:00 UTC

  • “Austrian economics is true insofar as it is descriptive about the nature of the

    —“Austrian economics is true insofar as it is descriptive about the nature of the business cycle, the incentives surrounding central banking etc. Propertarianism is descriptive in ALL social sciences not just economics. Thus we allow the calculation problem to be solved without moral loading, pseudo science, deceit or wish full thinking across disciplines. Which is why the Austrians are hated by fellow economists, and why we will be hated by everybody.”—Con Eli Khan

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-06 20:16:00 UTC

  • ENSLAVEMENT OF ENEMIES IS PREFERABLE TO ENSLAVEMENT BY THEM. —“It is preferabl

    ENSLAVEMENT OF ENEMIES IS PREFERABLE TO ENSLAVEMENT BY THEM.

    —“It is preferable to ME to enslave rather than to be enslaved. For some others, the reverse may be true, or may or may not be true, depending on circumstances. Therefore, slavery may be a mutually beneficial institution.

    However, even where this is not the case, if someone desires, and acts, to enslave me, then we are not cooperating, we are at war.

    And the preferences of my enemies in war carry no positive weight with me. It is MY preferences which I will act to realize, unless and until the enemy offers terms in good faith which make cooperation preferable.”—Eli Harman

    (The left is our enemy. Because they have made our women our enemy. And our women have voted to empower our enemies.)

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-06 18:55:00 UTC