Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • TO THE END OF LIBERTARIAN SUPERSTITION I think he mean’s he’s a Rothbardian. Unl

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/05/laurence-m-vance/i-am-a-libertarian/WELCOME TO THE END OF LIBERTARIAN SUPERSTITION

    I think he mean’s he’s a Rothbardian. Unless there is a Copyright on the term ‘libertarian’ held by the some group of rothbardians.

    Unfortunately, Rothbardian is a little too close to ‘stupid-tarian’ and ‘aspie-tarian’ and ‘immoral-tarian’.

    The NAP/IVP is a dead argument. Not by opinion, not by rationalization, but by evidence in our grubby hands, produced by science. It’s also one of the main reasons that the liberty movement has failed: because Rothbard’s ghetto ethics are objectively immoral.

    Period. End. Of. Story.

    Sorry you invested all your self-rewarding status signals out of a false premise, but that’s the price of the early adopter. You were wrong. You need to pick up your shattered dreams and walk out of rothbard’s ghetto, into the sunshine and learn about the logic of cooperation, the necessity of cooperation, and the relationship between cooperation and moral instincts, intuitions and rules.

    The thick folks aren’t doing too well at keeping up with science (that seems to be a conservative or post-libertarian endeavor.) So they’re still hoping that they can reconstruct the church with some kind of continental , kantian, justificationary form of rationalism. The priests of libertarianism that will through genius introspection save us from the evils of statism. But once again the drudgery of science does what introspective gazing cannot.

    Thin is dead. Thick is incomplete. And conservatives are the only people who act anyway.

    Welcome to the scientific method.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-09 09:04:00 UTC

  • FAMILY HISTORY The earliest record is apparently in France, and concerns someone

    FAMILY HISTORY

    The earliest record is apparently in France, and concerns someone who

    served William I who continued to rule Normandy after he became king of

    England.

    “Radulphus de Dolieta: For forgiveness of misdeeds of himself and his predecessors and successors he grants in the time of William, King of England, to the Monks of St. Michael for the brotherhood and the prayers of St. Michael and the Monks, his servants, all the dues on his lands, etc.”

    [Recorded in original charters in archives of La Manche, Abbey of Mont St.

    Michael for Benedictine monks in Diocese of Avranche, France, A.D.

    1085-1087. ]

    Dolieta was the name of a place on the coast of Normandy, probably in the province of Manche (which included the peninsula on which Cherbourg is located) near the town of Avranches and the neighboring Mt. St. Michael; and this Rudolph of Dolieta, a Norman noble, who accompanied the Conqueror appears to have been the progenitor of all our family in England.

    The next record is Wiliam, son of Alan Dolatel or Dolitel, is mentioned m8d.patent 7, Edward I, year 1279.

    Followed by Robert Dolittel for some offense, was granted a royal pardon “by reason of his services in Scotland”. Guildford, Jan. 20. Calendar of Patent Rolls 31, Edward I. year 1303.

    In the 16th century wills and church and other records, the Doolittle family

    turn up in Kidderminster, Worcestershire. Actually a half dozen Doolittle

    families turn up in Kidderminster and its surrounding villages.

    Kederminster (Kidderminster) developed a fair (1228) and later a market (1240). And was home to the weaving and clothing trades (Kederminster “standeth most by clothing”).

    (We have records dating to Kidderminster in 1490 actually. We also have the original allocation of lands for the area to an unstated number of families who asked for new lands ‘in the north’. Although I cannot recall the date. In 1086 William owned a large manor there. )

    Very hard to tell how or why the family moved from Guildford to Kidderminster, and when. But the departure from Kidderminster to Ireland, London and America seems to be both because of the civil war (puritans) and because of the collapse of the textile trade.

    Then we get to the states where we get generals, and captains and all sorts of people against the crown. 🙂

    So Anarchism is I guess, a genetic trait. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-09 08:53:00 UTC

  • THE IDEOLOGICAL WALKING DEAD The problem with intellectually defeating people oc

    THE IDEOLOGICAL WALKING DEAD

    The problem with intellectually defeating people occurs when they’re too stupid to know when to stay down for the count. Unfortunately you can’t fix stupid. And both the Dunning-Kreuger effect, IQ limits and moral blindness conspire to keep the defeated but stupid, fighting like the walking dead.

    You can’t cooperate with stupid either. And if you can’t cooperate then violence is your only option.

    Gimme that shovel.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-09 07:52:00 UTC

  • BASIC INFANTRY KNOWLEDGE – OR STAYING ALIVE FOR THE CAUSE Dear Ukrainian and Syr

    BASIC INFANTRY KNOWLEDGE – OR STAYING ALIVE FOR THE CAUSE

    Dear Ukrainian and Syrian friends.

    There is a difference between ‘cover’ and ‘concealment’.

    Concealment is something that prevents an enemy from seeing you, or at least from seeing you completely. Things that could commonly be used as cover include the walls of normal wood frame houses, trees and foliage or car bodies. Cover just prevents you from being seen. It offers no protection from being SHOT.

    Cover is something that prevents an enemy from (easily) shooting you. Unfortunately, cover is actually pretty rare in the world. Most things we think might stop bullets wont. You can be shot through most block and mud walls built cheaply in the third world. A bullet will pass through a tree two feet thick and kill you. You can shoot through nice plates of steel as if it’s cardboard. The best cover in the world is a wall of reinforced concrete with a triple layer of sandbags behind it, but we don’t see that very often. What will stop a bullet? Piles of dirt are the best, and a firing position in a ditch, depression or behind a hill is great. Next to that, SOLID concrete or brick walls are good, as are the engine compartments of vehicles (especially large trucks.) Standard brick walls are okay as are large trees (two feet plus). Beware, because things will “break down” after being hit with many rounds. It is absurdly easy to just shoot through a concrete wall or saw a tree in half with not very many rounds.

    Now, you know, a spot to shoot from is equally as scarce. SO when you feel all manly shooting at nothing, all you are doing is giving away your position. And so the spot you just shot from is ‘used’. It means “shoot here”. So every time you use a spot to take a shot, you have to go find a different one.

    You see, the smart guy is lying somewhere in the dark, without any light behind him, where he can see down an entire street, and where there is behind some cover. From that bit of safety he’s waiting for a ‘sucker’. So a few of his friends shoot at your position to bait you into puffing your chest, and sticking your head out of the same spot the second time, and – poof. You’re dead.

    Just because you can’t see them, doesn’t mean they can’t see you.

    I hope that helps. Because the daily stream of videos in my inbox where some guy gets shot because he was firing OVER a wall providing only CONCEALMENT rather than AROUND a wall, from behind COVER is really depressing.

    BTW: Americans come at night, in the dark. The dark is awesome concealment.

    Thanks. Yeah. I know. It won’t do any good. It’s just cathartic.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-08 17:26:00 UTC

  • THE END OF THE MYTH OF THE ECONOMIC VIRTUE OF DENSE CITIES Now this is something

    THE END OF THE MYTH OF THE ECONOMIC VIRTUE OF DENSE CITIES

    Now this is something that I wasn’t sure was going to play out. But it appears that the data is starting to work in favor of suburbia (the ring around a city) more so than the downtown itself. The places that are experiencing growth are those that are not benefitting so much from the immigration of numbers (poor) but the immigration of talent.

    So I suspect that the next progressive myth that science is going to undermine, is the virtue of well managed big cities, rather than a number of closely related suburbs.

    I’ve sort of been watching the data that’s been slung around for the past decade and I assumed that it was just a matter of cities making it easier for bureaucrats to seek rents. And that’s actually the ‘first cause’. But it didn’t really occur to me that the “seattle/bellevue/redmond” model was actually the one that worked best.

    Now, I’ve looked at various Georgist theories, and there is definitely something to e said there since density increases productivity (of smart people) so much. And I’ve also worked at my preferred solution: pay people to do the work of policing laws, commons and norms. And you know that they accomplish slightly different things. My solution would actually distribute the poor into the surrounding territory where their lower value in production is not hampering the productivity of more productive people by forcing them out. Unfortunately the less well off want the value of the city even if they’re a net drag on the generation of tax revenue because really all they serve to do is allow vote buying that allows political and bureaucratic rent seekers to capture more of the revenue for themselves. Also, normative pressure is higher in rural areas, so the more ‘troublesome’ populations are more subject to normative pressures to ‘behave’ than in urban environments. ALso we are stuck with the fact that raising children in a city in no way is as awesome as raising them in a suburban home. (Spoken as someone raised in a small rural farm town, but who has lived in cities or suburbia for most of his adult life.)

    Anyway, I want to keep working on this a little more before taking a better position on it.

    Net is, that the progressive fantasy is the walking dead at this point. The conservative fantasy is impossible. The Rothbardian fantasy is immoral and impossible. So, what is our solution to the problem of formal institutions that is both moral and possible, even if it’s not ‘efficient’.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-08 15:11:00 UTC

  • THAT WE’VE FULLY DISMANTLED THE PROGRESSIVE FANTASY, MAYBE WE CAN CREATE POLICY

    http://www.amazon.com/Troublesome-Inheritance-Genes-Human-History/dp/1594204462NOW THAT WE’VE FULLY DISMANTLED THE PROGRESSIVE FANTASY, MAYBE WE CAN CREATE POLICY RELEVANT TO REAL HUMAN NEEDS.

    When, I dunno how many years ago it was, but the Economist and Science came out with the uncomfortable truth that the human genome project was producing quite different results than had been promised. We started speciating rapidly upon exiting Africa, and we evolve much more quickly than we though. And we’re different. Meaningfully different. And while the law must treat us equally in matters of dispute, to be just in any sense of the word, policy in any collective must be of necessity tailored to the ‘tribe’ that it is intended to support. Why do we put all our children through school at the same ages despite their different rates of maturity (control of impulse)? Why do we treat humans as industrial products? They’re not.

    My position is that I would rather deal with the aristocracy of each tribe on behalf of his tribe, than some assumed proxy that portents to possess the wisdom necessary to discover what is best for ALL tribes. I mean, you can’t really know that, and we’ve proven we can’t know that now. What we can do is facilitate cooperatoin between tribes.

    I view it as my moral obligation to help members of other tribes. But I view the state as our common enemy – an interference between aristocratic classes. An obstacle to our mutual cooperation. The state was invented to finance war. Any tribe with a nuclear weapon can defend its territory. And any tribe with a trained militia can defend its people. I prefer to live in a world where we cooperate, because non-cooperation is suicidal, than one in which we are in competition with a conflict-generating state.

    A world of families, tribes and nations is a beautiful thing. a world of predatory parasitic states is not.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-08 14:41:00 UTC

  • OF THE WOMEN ARE TRYING TO ENTRAP MEN”

    http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/05/07/seen-at-11-positive-pregnancy-tests-up-for-sale-online/”95% OF THE WOMEN ARE TRYING TO ENTRAP MEN”

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-08 02:08:00 UTC

  • OF RUSSIA’S STRATEGIC ECONOMIC FACTOIDS: 1) “Russia supplies about a third of th

    http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/04/10/How-Europe-Could-Finally-Call-Putin-s-Bluff#sthash.KHmNFCMK.dpufTWO OF RUSSIA’S STRATEGIC ECONOMIC FACTOIDS:

    1) “Russia supplies about a third of the European Union’s energy but that supply is responsible for 40 percent of the Russian government’s budget,”

    2) “50% of Russians live off income provided by the government”

    TWO DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS

    “Even in Russian speaking areas, a minority want federal ties to Russia. The majority want a unified Ukraine”

    “Only old people who remember communism want ties with Russia. The young want ties with Europe. In ten years the 15% who want ties with Russia will disappear.”

    MY BIAS IN ALL THIS

    I didn’t know all of this because while I live in Kiev, and Keiv is a “Russified” area (meaning everyone speaks Russian), I both associate with and employ young people in their 20’s. All of whom have some sort of extended family ties to Russia.

    Ukrainian’s are very reserved, quiet and gentle people. I rail all the time about how I love them so much. And they sort of think of Russians as ‘rude, drunk people who start fights’ – but they’re cousins so to speak. So they’re like ill behaved family members. And when someone is behaving badly in public (or in my case, starting a fight in a club) you here “It’s Ok. (he is/they are) Russian.” (My favorite weapon is the ubiquitous ceramic coffee mug. Much better than brass knuckles, and less visible than bottles, which also break.)

    So I don’t have a lot of experience with people who look to Russia. Everyone I know looks to Europe for the future, and to Russia for family. And Until I’ve started to see reliable polls, I simply have been using voting data to tell me what people think. And it turns out to be “vote for people like me” just like everywhere else. But only a weird minority want to be something other than Ukrainian. An those that do, too many are part of the gangster-tribe out of Donetsk that knows if they lose their ‘protection’ from the (russian sponsored) government, then the gangster days are over. The older people who were better taken care of under communism I agree with and sympathize with. But the only moral position that I know how to take on this matter is self determination. and the numbers are pretty clearly, universally in favor of “I’m a Ukrainian”.

    Now my personal bias is obvious:

    (a) I have invested a good portion of my worth here and I don’t want to risk it because of external aggression.

    (b) I watched people I care about fight for freedom from one of the world’s most corrupt governments – a vast criminal enterprise that preys on people that I love.

    (c) I believe I must support self determination. In no small part because that is the problem MY PEOPLE face.

    (d) I don’t think to much of the Russian government, and I shouldn’t, but I freaking love russians – more so than I americans. I would rather spend my time with russians than with americans. And I love everything about them. I just am not sure this is a people who are terribly good at self government for very complex cultural reasons.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-07 23:25:00 UTC

  • ARE SLOW AS SNAILS BUT THEY FINALLY GET THERE

    http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/ukrainians-form-militias-to-defend-nation-against-chaos-346813.htmlUKRAINIANS ARE SLOW AS SNAILS BUT THEY FINALLY GET THERE

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-07 16:18:00 UTC

  • LIBERTARIANS FIGHT THE LAST WAR, OR THE ONE BEFORE THAT MAYBE. I’M PLANNING FOR

    LIBERTARIANS FIGHT THE LAST WAR, OR THE ONE BEFORE THAT MAYBE. I’M PLANNING FOR THE NEXT ONE.

    (reposted and edited) (thanks to Juan Sebastian Ortiz for the inspiration.)

    Rather than make plans on how to manipulate democracies, I am more in line with global theorists who suggest that the nation state, which was invented in response to Napoleon’s combination of state credit and total war, will be brought down by the fragility of our modern systems (which are very fragile), the low cost of interrupting or damaging those systems, the enormous economic impact of those system disruptions, the small numbers (and value of small numbers) needed to conduct interruptions of systems, the universal availability of communications previously only available to governments, the inability of states to either control those insurrections, or to violently suppress them, and the demand of the populace for respite from system shocks, by giving into demands.

    It is this particular trend, not the polite democratic one, that I am constructing my logical arguments in support of. A moral code, a system of arguments, that gives moral authority to such actions, and the institutional model to replace the nation state with.

    I want to construct the program for the establishment and organization of private governments and the restitution of the militia and the aristocracy from whence our freedoms came. Because it is only that model under which we hold freedom of our choosing, rather than by the mere permissions of others.

    Libertarians like horsemen in an age of machines, are still fighting the war before the last war. I’m making plans for the next one.

    Sure, I’m working a little ahead of the curve, but my health is not in my favor.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-07 15:27:00 UTC