Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • The Problem Is Paying for the Initial Stages

    [T]he longer I work on the necessity of a judicial priesthood, the longer I study the Templars(bankers), the Inquisition(judges), the closer I come to the model I’m looking for. The problem is always paying for the initial stages. The first phase must produce sufficient confiscation that the men can be fed and armed. Yet wholesale predation on the islamic model (ISIS) is counter-productive.

  • I Am Almost Guaranteed to Offend You At Some Point

    [G]UARANTEED OFFENDER I am guaranteed to offend almost everyone. Why? Because to the last, just like all other people, you start with some axiomatic principle that you hold dear, but which is false. We are all rational actors. Saints and sinners all. The question is not how we have been in the past, but what we choose to be in the future. Truth is not merciful to our creature comforts. It is however, the most empowering method of choosing our actions that we can make use of.

  • I Am Almost Guaranteed to Offend You At Some Point

    [G]UARANTEED OFFENDER I am guaranteed to offend almost everyone. Why? Because to the last, just like all other people, you start with some axiomatic principle that you hold dear, but which is false. We are all rational actors. Saints and sinners all. The question is not how we have been in the past, but what we choose to be in the future. Truth is not merciful to our creature comforts. It is however, the most empowering method of choosing our actions that we can make use of.

  • The Best Curriculum is Not Ron Paul’s. It’s Pacifist Judeo-Christian – not Aristocratic.

    [T]HE BEST CURRICULUM? —“Curt, would you recommend Ron Paul’s Mises-based homeschool curriculum as the best option out there for parents?”— Megan Cyloneight “Best” I don’t know. Ron Paul’s curriculum is pacifist. It produces good middle class universalist judeo-christians. Good subjects. People who can easily be conquered.

    To create aristocracy I would add to it: 1) Grammar, Logic, Testimony, and Prosecution (including the methods of lying) 2) Propertarian psychology, sociology, group competitive strategy. 3) The methods of legal order: american, british, german, russian, chinese – under which the people create commons while holding a government at bay. 4) The conduct of war by means of immigration, religion/conversion, political means, and economic means, and defense against each. 5) Fitness, Sports, Fighting, tactics, strategy, command and control. Ron Paul makes well informed, docile, employees. Curt Doolittle makes well informed unconquerable sheriffs.

    (later in the day…) Thanks for an interesting question by Megan Cyloneight today, I was able to understand that I had to add ‘prosecution’ to the curriculum, in order to change the student of western civilization from a christian servant to an aristocratic judge. 0) The matters of europa (ancient literature): Fairy Tales, Myths, Histories. 1) Grammar, Rhetoric, Logic, Testimony, Prosecution. 2) Propertarian psychology, economics, sociology, politics, evolutionary strategy, war.

    It is no use reserving prosecution and war for the adults. Enfranchise them all.

    ANOTHER THOUGHT There are three technologies of coercion: violence, economics, and shaming (inclusion/exclusion). I advocate teaching ALL THREE methods of ‘moral’ competition. Ron Paul is advocating only one. Economics is not a panacea. We must cover all the bases so to speak.

  • The Best Curriculum is Not Ron Paul’s. It’s Pacifist Judeo-Christian – not Aristocratic.

    [T]HE BEST CURRICULUM? —“Curt, would you recommend Ron Paul’s Mises-based homeschool curriculum as the best option out there for parents?”— Megan Cyloneight “Best” I don’t know. Ron Paul’s curriculum is pacifist. It produces good middle class universalist judeo-christians. Good subjects. People who can easily be conquered.

    To create aristocracy I would add to it: 1) Grammar, Logic, Testimony, and Prosecution (including the methods of lying) 2) Propertarian psychology, sociology, group competitive strategy. 3) The methods of legal order: american, british, german, russian, chinese – under which the people create commons while holding a government at bay. 4) The conduct of war by means of immigration, religion/conversion, political means, and economic means, and defense against each. 5) Fitness, Sports, Fighting, tactics, strategy, command and control. Ron Paul makes well informed, docile, employees. Curt Doolittle makes well informed unconquerable sheriffs.

    (later in the day…) Thanks for an interesting question by Megan Cyloneight today, I was able to understand that I had to add ‘prosecution’ to the curriculum, in order to change the student of western civilization from a christian servant to an aristocratic judge. 0) The matters of europa (ancient literature): Fairy Tales, Myths, Histories. 1) Grammar, Rhetoric, Logic, Testimony, Prosecution. 2) Propertarian psychology, economics, sociology, politics, evolutionary strategy, war.

    It is no use reserving prosecution and war for the adults. Enfranchise them all.

    ANOTHER THOUGHT There are three technologies of coercion: violence, economics, and shaming (inclusion/exclusion). I advocate teaching ALL THREE methods of ‘moral’ competition. Ron Paul is advocating only one. Economics is not a panacea. We must cover all the bases so to speak.

  • The West vs East in a Nutshell: Innovate vs Stagnate. Prohibit vs Prescribe.

    [T]here is a vast difference between a western culture that merely prohibits ‘bads’, and eastern cultures that proscribe ‘goods’. That this difference is also the difference between science and mysticism may be lost on all but the few.

    That which may be good is anything that is not bad. That which may be true is anything that is not false. WE INNOVATE AND THEY STAGNATE Innovation requires innovative people open to new experience and the intelligence to make use of it. Prescription requires only fools. Innovators produce a class of professional warriors. Prescribers product legions of slave armies. Technology under the rifle changed. Technology in the present is changing again.

  • The West vs East in a Nutshell: Innovate vs Stagnate. Prohibit vs Prescribe.

    [T]here is a vast difference between a western culture that merely prohibits ‘bads’, and eastern cultures that proscribe ‘goods’. That this difference is also the difference between science and mysticism may be lost on all but the few.

    That which may be good is anything that is not bad. That which may be true is anything that is not false. WE INNOVATE AND THEY STAGNATE Innovation requires innovative people open to new experience and the intelligence to make use of it. Prescription requires only fools. Innovators produce a class of professional warriors. Prescribers product legions of slave armies. Technology under the rifle changed. Technology in the present is changing again.

  • Libertarianism Uses Marxist Argumentation To Deceive by Suggestion

     [N]on-descriptive definitions are part of the reason for the failure of libertarianism. With descriptive definitions rather than vague obscurantist “principles” the philosophical vacuousness of the movement is readily exposed. The reason these debates still occur, and the reason this article is just one of thousands of similar pretentions is the fact that the NAP is untestable. And as I have argued, it is untestable just as dialectical materialism is untestable: to allow for individual interpretation of scope of that which can be aggressed upon, and therefore creates a false consensus. NAP sounds meaningful to many but because it’s an incomplete sentence, it leaves the object of aggression substitutable by each individual. AS SUCH NAP IS MORALLY RELATIVE since each person interprets the scope to which aggression must be limited differently. Yet, to form a voluntary polity, one cannot posses moral relativity. The problem with any such polity is (a) whether it is a rational choice versus competing polities and (b) whether it is possible to sustain competition from within such a polity, and (c) whether such a polity would be tolerated by neighboring polities. )
    The NAP is just another variation on dialectical materialism or the labor theory of value. It’s another bit of pseudoscientific nonsense. one does not determine that which is “right” – others do. One determines what is right by whether or not others retaliate against you for it. Walter Bock and Murray Rothbard’s ancestors practiced the NAP in the wildlands and ghettos of eastern europe, and were almost always exterminated or outcast for it. And it is probably the reason why the polity was never able to functionally produce the commons that were necessary for the defense of and holding of territory. The only liberty that is existentially possible is that which prohibits retaliation, because it is the need for costly that causes demand for the state. Period. End of story. Individual moral choice is a lie. Morality is empirically determined by the value of cooperation and the cost of retaliation. But it is a cognitive bias, probably born of developmental defect that causes people to become attracted to libertarianism in order to claim to determine morality on their own, of their own choice, rather than out of necessity. And why? Because as outcasts the desire to escape payment for normative and physical commons is a rational reaction to obtaining less value from the commons than one is required to pay in costs.

  • Libertarianism Uses Marxist Argumentation To Deceive by Suggestion

     [N]on-descriptive definitions are part of the reason for the failure of libertarianism. With descriptive definitions rather than vague obscurantist “principles” the philosophical vacuousness of the movement is readily exposed. The reason these debates still occur, and the reason this article is just one of thousands of similar pretentions is the fact that the NAP is untestable. And as I have argued, it is untestable just as dialectical materialism is untestable: to allow for individual interpretation of scope of that which can be aggressed upon, and therefore creates a false consensus. NAP sounds meaningful to many but because it’s an incomplete sentence, it leaves the object of aggression substitutable by each individual. AS SUCH NAP IS MORALLY RELATIVE since each person interprets the scope to which aggression must be limited differently. Yet, to form a voluntary polity, one cannot posses moral relativity. The problem with any such polity is (a) whether it is a rational choice versus competing polities and (b) whether it is possible to sustain competition from within such a polity, and (c) whether such a polity would be tolerated by neighboring polities. )
    The NAP is just another variation on dialectical materialism or the labor theory of value. It’s another bit of pseudoscientific nonsense. one does not determine that which is “right” – others do. One determines what is right by whether or not others retaliate against you for it. Walter Bock and Murray Rothbard’s ancestors practiced the NAP in the wildlands and ghettos of eastern europe, and were almost always exterminated or outcast for it. And it is probably the reason why the polity was never able to functionally produce the commons that were necessary for the defense of and holding of territory. The only liberty that is existentially possible is that which prohibits retaliation, because it is the need for costly that causes demand for the state. Period. End of story. Individual moral choice is a lie. Morality is empirically determined by the value of cooperation and the cost of retaliation. But it is a cognitive bias, probably born of developmental defect that causes people to become attracted to libertarianism in order to claim to determine morality on their own, of their own choice, rather than out of necessity. And why? Because as outcasts the desire to escape payment for normative and physical commons is a rational reaction to obtaining less value from the commons than one is required to pay in costs.

  • Everyone Must Atone for Their Sins If They Are To Reform

    [I] don’t have mercy on any enlightenment group. We were all wrong. My job is to solve it. Our job – together – is to fix it. High trust societies are much more vulnerable to moral suggestion. And the history of deceit is something that we must blame Jews for; just as a history of ignorance is something that we must blame muslims for; just as a history of hatred of the human being is something we must blame the Chinese for; just as parasitic colonialism is something we must blame whites for. Until Jews atone for over two thousand years of sins they will not reform. No free passes for the creators of most of histories most murderous frauds. Until the Muslims repent for 1500 years of sins they will not reform.  No free passes for the destroyers of the ancient worlds.  Until Chinese repent for 3000 years of sins, they will not reform. No free passes for the most murderous liars on earth.