Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • FREE RIDING IS NOT AN EXCEPTION IT IS THE RULE. PROPERTY IS THE EXCEPTION. AND C

    FREE RIDING IS NOT AN EXCEPTION IT IS THE RULE. PROPERTY IS THE EXCEPTION. AND CREATING THE INSTITUTIONAL HABIT OF PRIVATE PROPERTY IS AN ACTIVE NOT PASSIVE PROJECT.

    Ya’ gotta’ understand: aristocracy is an activist form of defense.

    We evolved in a state of pervasive free riding. To create the institution of Property, you must deny people access to the fruits of your efforts except by voluntary exchange. To deny them access, you must use violence. You must first stop existing free riding. Then you must prevent future free riding. You cannot obtain liberty by pacifism, or reaction alone. Property requires activism. Because aggression against your property: the attempt to free ride upon your efforts, is not an exception – it is the RULE.

    Sorry.

    Aristocracy of the willing, for the willing.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-29 06:37:00 UTC

  • FUTURE OF AMERICA IS NOW “Egalitarianism leads to democracy; democracy leads to

    http://www.amazon.com/Into-Cannibals-Pot-Lessons-Post-Apartheid-ebook/dp/B00564TFM4/THE FUTURE OF AMERICA IS NOW

    “Egalitarianism leads to democracy; democracy leads to socialism; socialism leads to economic destruction; and democratic socialism in multicultural societies leads to death and democide. This, in shocking detail, is what Ilana Mercer illustrates superbly in her case study of post-apartheid South Africa. America’s political and intellectual ‘elites’ will ignore this book, because it is politically ‘incorrect.’ We can only do so at our own peril.” – HANS-HERMANN HOPPE

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-29 06:28:00 UTC

  • (personal) (international) Now I know what immigrants to american feel like when

    (personal) (international)

    Now I know what immigrants to american feel like when they get their green card. It’s awesome. lol… To know I can call Ukraine one of my homes is an awesome feeling.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-29 05:59:00 UTC

  • POSSIBILITIES OF THICK, ARISTOCRATIC, AND THIN LIBERTARIANISM (worth repeating)

    POSSIBILITIES OF THICK, ARISTOCRATIC, AND THIN LIBERTARIANISM

    (worth repeating)

    1) Thick / Humanist / Psychological / Left libertarianism is a luxury good, and it is neither scientifically or rationally formulated, remaining true to the psychological tradition of classical liberalism. We CAN form a polity under Thick libertarianism, as long as luxuries are voluntarily constructed, requiring voluntary participation, rather than mandated.

    2) Aristocratic Egalitarian / Scientific libertarianism is necessary and sufficient for the formation of a voluntary polity in the absence of the state. It is both rationally and scientifically formulated. We CAN form a polity under aristocratic egalitarianism.

    3) Thin / Ghetto / libertine / Brutalist libertarianism is necessary but INSUFFICIENT for the formation of a voluntary polity in the absence of the state. It is rationally but not scientifically formulated. And furthermore, would be the target of conquest and oppression by all nearby polities. We CANNOT form a polity under rothbardian, ghetto, libertinism.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-29 05:52:00 UTC

  • A SELF-STYLED PROVOCATEUR (Thought about this for a day before commenting, and I

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/05/david-hathaway/are-you-talking-to-a-agent-provocateur/FROM A SELF-STYLED PROVOCATEUR

    (Thought about this for a day before commenting, and I won’t tear the author of the post apart for his use of technique of Marxist Critique, despite it being a classic example of the method. Libertarians spent too much time with marxists and not enough time with scientists.)

    I am trying to reform libertine, rothbardian ‘ghetto’ libertarianism for the good of liberty seekers everywhere, and am absolutely, by deliberate choice, using provocation. There is no other means of attacking dogma than to force dogmatists to defend against it by direct confrontation. (Marxist Critiques or no)

    1) Thick / Humanist / Psychological / Left libertarianism is a luxury good, and it is neither scientifically or rationally formulated, remaining true to the psychological tradition of classical liberalism. We CAN form a polity under Thick libertarianism, as long as luxuries are voluntarily constructed, requiring voluntary participation, rather than mandated.

    2) Aristocratic Egalitarian / Scientific libertarianism is necessary and sufficient for the formation of a voluntary polity in the absence of the state. It is both rationally and scientifically formulated. We CAN form a polity under aristocratic egalitarianism.

    3) Thin / Ghetto / libertine / Brutalist libertarianism is necessary but INSUFFICIENT for the formation of a voluntary polity in the absence of the state. It is rationally but not scientifically formulated. And furthermore, would be the target of conquest and oppression by all nearby polities.

    We CANNOT form a polity under rothbardian, ghetto, libertinism.

    So this particular provocateur is doing his moral duty in the pursuit of a state of liberty. I do not care whether we choose luxuries or not. But we have no option to choose a libertine / Ghetto / Thin polity. It is irrational to construct one on transaction costs alone. It is unsurvivable given external hostility to all groups who have demonstrated ghetto ethics: (Gypsies and pre-modern Jews the most common examples).

    Cheers.

    An admitted Provocateur.

    PS: The revolution in Ukraine would not have been possible if it were not for the risks taken by the Right Sector. Most people (like rothbardians) are free riders. They won’t participate until there isn’t any risk.

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/05/david-hathaway/are-you-talking-to-a-agent-provocateur/

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-29 05:51:00 UTC

  • RENOUNCING IDEOLOGY –“Only by renouncing *ALL* ideology, can we see man as he i

    RENOUNCING IDEOLOGY

    –“Only by renouncing *ALL* ideology, can we see man as he is.”— James Burnham.

    I’m going to state that a bit differently: only through science can we see man as he is. All else is justification.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-29 05:23:00 UTC

  • HEADLINE IN ALL CAPS (context tag in lower

    <start type=’Publication Style Post’>

    HEADLINE IN ALL CAPS

    (context tag in lower case) (audience tag) (importance tag)

    Attribution to author if someone else.

    Introduction / positioning.

    —“block quotes”—

    Closing.

    Source link.

    </end>

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-29 04:34:00 UTC

  • Proportionality vs Trust. (note to self) Haidt refers to the moral instinct agai

    Proportionality vs Trust.

    (note to self)

    Haidt refers to the moral instinct against free riding as “proportionality”, because our instinct includes a prohibition against disproportionate reward and consumption.

    In a family or polity, that might be a correct projection. But I see it as constraint on consumption similar to the control of alphas. I am not sure it is a question of trust necessary for cooperation.

    Free riding affects trust – willingness to cooperate. Punishment for violation of trust. Criminal (violence theft), Unethical (fraud and deception), Immoral (externalization).

    Overconsumption may be immoral, perhaps. A deprivation of the commons. I suspect that is a better answer than proportionality – which is incalculable.

    Yes. That’s probably correct.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-29 02:15:00 UTC

  • Why brunettes? They are fine as they are, and don’t feel the need to get more at

    Why brunettes? They are fine as they are, and don’t feel the need to get more attention. The more I think about america as the country of attention-starved children, the more obvious it becomes.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-28 11:33:00 UTC

  • FRINGE (ODE TO LEW ROCKWELL DOT COM) (What is the attraction of lunatics to LRC?

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/LUNATIC FRINGE (ODE TO LEW ROCKWELL DOT COM)

    (What is the attraction of lunatics to LRC?)

    Lunatic fringe

    I know you’re out there

    You’re in hiding

    And you hold your meetings

    I can hear you coming

    We know what you’re after

    We’re wise to you this time

    We won’t let you kill the laughter

    ‘Cause you gotta blame someone

    For your own confusion

    But I’m on guard this time

    Against your final solution

    We can hear you coming

    No you’re not going to win this time

    We can hear the footsteps

    Out along the walkway

    Lunatic fringe

    We all know you’re out there

    Can you feel the resistance?

    Can you feel the thunder?

    www.lewrockwell.com

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-28 11:30:00 UTC