Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • Q&A: Revolution. Will it Result in the ‘Right’ People?

    (worth repeating)QUESTION:

    —“How do we demand a return to an Aristocracy of the right people? This is a steep hill we’re climbing.”—

    ANSWER: [T]he right people are impossible to know. And even such, it’s not a matter of choosing the right people. It’s a matter of preventing all the WRONG people. And preventing the wrong people is something that we can do. Prosecute the bad, and only the good remain. Determine the false, and only true remains. Fragility is easy to exploit into a cascade. It was one thing to promise democracy when there was no empirical evidence. But the evidence is in. It’s genocidal. Mostly because women lacked the experience and accountability for the votes that they cast. We got what the majority of women and the minority of men desired: largely by destroying the family and expanding immigration, and transferring reproduction from the middle to the lower classes through aggressive taxation. The problem for creating momentum in any revolution is that people need an alternative institutional framework to accept, if not advocate, that will solve present problems and provide them with a means of understanding how the future might unfold. So, we need something for them to demand. Just as the founding fathers did. Just as all enlightenment movements did. And it must take a moral high ground. After that, there are 3 hours of energy, 3 days of water, 6 days of food in the channel, and an economy that cannot tolerate shocks. Long gone are the days where the multitudes must take to the streets with pitchforks. A small number of men with a few pages of instructions can do far more damage than the communist insurgents did. A sustained but short period of unpredictability and a positive set of demands will collapse the channels, and the government with it. All governance is an illusion created by the accumulated momentum of common interests. It is a fragile illusion easily dispelled, which is why governors are so paranoid about the slightest threat. It’s easy, with just a few thousand. With 1% it’s all but certain. We have more than 1% if we give them actionable direction. (Look at the middle east.)

  • Welcome To The Revolution.

    (important piece)(pinned)

    [I] do my work in public, like a medieval street merchant. You get to see the product being made. Including its successes and failures. It’s been an interesting experience for me and those who follow me.

    But for new-comers, my work is radical. Trying to follow or understand it is non-trivial. I place a great deal of burden on the audience for knowledge of physical science, economics, law, and philosophy. On my website is a ‘short list’ of books that I try to keep current that should allow someone with a university education in an empirical discipline to gain a basic scientific knowledge necessary to understand propertarianism. But even reading those works will take time. So I’ll try to give you an outline and a starting place:

    [showhide type=”pressrelease” more_text=”(Show the rest of the Post…)” less_text=”(Hide Text..)” hidden=”yes”]

    [P]ropertarianism is a reformation of truth, epistemology, ethics, politics and aesthetics – and as broad an effort as that any other thinker’s in enlightenment history: Kant’s(rationalism), Marx’s(pseudoscience), and equalled only in recent scope by Heidegger (pseudorationalism) – all of whom were on the opposite end of the spectrum and at best ‘anti-scientific’. Instead, Propertarianism is a continuation of the Locke/Smith/Hume revolution, and a refutation of the Kant/Marx/Heidegger counter-revolution’s introspective revolt using experiential meaning against comparatively autistic science (truth).

    And, even if you possess the underlying knowledge, my program is RADICAL, and that means novel, and somewhat hard to learn:

    1 – Testimonial truth and Testimonialism (epistemology) are themselves a profound innovation that unifies science, philosophy, morality and law into truth-telling or ‘testimony’ which is the only existentially possible truth available for man to write and speak. Under testimonialism, we warranty we have performed the necessary due diligence to claim we testify truthfully. This due diligence is an extension of the scientific method to include ethics constructed as a rigorous logic: a scientific ethics.

    See An Introduction To Testimonial Truth.

    2 – Propertarian Ethics (ethics and morality) is an objective amoral language for expression and comparison of ethics that states that only productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer, free of externalities of the same criteria are rationally tolerable if we are to preserve the incentive to cooperate, and not to retaliate, and thereby preserve the disproportionate rewards of cooperation. As such the preservation of cooperation is the basis for ethics. And all ethical propositions are decidable.

    See An Introduction to Propertarian Ethics.

    3 – Propertarian Liberalism (politics) is a radical reformation of classical liberalism that articulates how and why the classical liberal model failed: failing to create new houses for newly enfranchised classes with competing reproductive interests, and the conflation of law with contract – thereby creating a voluntary market for the production of commons between classes with disparate interests and abilities.

    Propertarianism invalidates democratic assent, replacing it with legal criticism, meaning that any political contract that is not illegal may pass, and other groups may prohibit it only if it fails the legal prohibition on involuntary transfer – thus eliminating monopoly rule under democracy, and converting the legislative branch to a market for the production of commons.

    4 – Propertarian Strict Construction (law) is a reformation of law that completes the now-failed american constitutional program by requiring strict construction equal to that of mathematical proofs, thereby eliminating legal activism, parasitism, and providing universal decidability to matters of law, reducing the court’s function to determination of truth telling, and responsibility for causal relations.

    5 – Propertarian Informational Commons (law) is an extension of the prohibition on “Abusus” (pollution or abuse) with which we protect the commons of the air, water, land, infrastructure, parks and monuments from damage, privatization, and consumption. Under universal standing in matters of the commons, activists can use the courts to protect not only air, land, sea, wildlife, but the truthfulness of information.

    [P]ropertarianism provides the missing logic of cooperation that has caused the artificial separation between science, philosophy, and law for 2500 years. This has stumped great minds for over two millennia. I am just a lucky man, standing on the shoulders of giants, peering into history, and by accident at the right point in time; and I see the errors of the past only because I am keenly aware of the failure of the 20th century philosophers, the success of operational thinking we call 20th century computer science, and the recent innovations in genetic, biological, cognitive, behavioral sciences since Pinker fired the first volley.

    If this problem stumped so many greater minds than mine, it is no wonder that it’s hard for some of you to grasp the scope of the revolution in intellectual history. I understand it.

    There will always be passionate activists and those heavily invested in dogma that will hold desperately to their priors and criticize innovations that they do not understand. This is natural human conservatism regardless of which point of the political and moral compass they originate from. And it is very hard to ask passionate people who are heavily invested in comforting justificationary priors to spend a great deal of effort in learning a radical program that requires substantial effort and knowledge to understand and apply. Those people may possess the ability, not possess the ability, have the time and effort, or not have the time and effort, be willing to invest, or not willing to invest.

    So the only means of demonstrating to them that they should or must invest in learning such a thing, is for those who choose to make that investment for whatever reason, by their arguments and by their numbers, provide evidence that they should do so.

    That is where you come in.

    [P]ropertarianism is the antidote to Marxism, Pseudoscience, Postmodernism and Deceit. It is the correction and completion of the classical liberal project, which is itself an expansion of the anglo saxon franchise, and in turn an expansion of the european and indo-european project: the heroic society. Where the greatest heroism is the costly burden of truth telling and personal sovereignty.

    If there is any end of history, it is not marxist socialism, or democratic secular humanism, but the truthful society made possible by the reformation of classical liberalism to facilitate cooperation between heterogeneous peoples while prohibiting every possible means of parasitism, and demanding productive efforts in order to survive. By prohibiting all parasitism we leave only productive voluntary exchange as a means of survival.

    So it may indeed be work to follow me on this journey. But buy doing so you are participating in the greatest revolution since Marxism, and together we are constructing the only means I have found for the restoration and perpetuation of western civilization: the people who speak the truth, and the vast benefits that we westerners bring to mankind by having spoken the truth; despite the terrible difficulty in learning how to speak truthfully, and the enormous cost of truthful speech that each of us pays every day, as the most important tax, so that with truth telling that we have used in both the ancient and modern eras, to drag humanity kicking and screaming against its will, out of illness and disease, malthusian poverty, constant conflict, universal ignorance and crippling mysticism.

    Liberty in our lifetimes.

    Welcome to the revolution.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Philosophy of Aristocracy
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

    [/showhide]

  • Welcome To The Revolution.

    (important piece)(pinned)

    [I] do my work in public, like a medieval street merchant. You get to see the product being made. Including its successes and failures. It’s been an interesting experience for me and those who follow me.

    But for new-comers, my work is radical. Trying to follow or understand it is non-trivial. I place a great deal of burden on the audience for knowledge of physical science, economics, law, and philosophy. On my website is a ‘short list’ of books that I try to keep current that should allow someone with a university education in an empirical discipline to gain a basic scientific knowledge necessary to understand propertarianism. But even reading those works will take time. So I’ll try to give you an outline and a starting place:

    [showhide type=”pressrelease” more_text=”(Show the rest of the Post…)” less_text=”(Hide Text..)” hidden=”yes”]

    [P]ropertarianism is a reformation of truth, epistemology, ethics, politics and aesthetics – and as broad an effort as that any other thinker’s in enlightenment history: Kant’s(rationalism), Marx’s(pseudoscience), and equalled only in recent scope by Heidegger (pseudorationalism) – all of whom were on the opposite end of the spectrum and at best ‘anti-scientific’. Instead, Propertarianism is a continuation of the Locke/Smith/Hume revolution, and a refutation of the Kant/Marx/Heidegger counter-revolution’s introspective revolt using experiential meaning against comparatively autistic science (truth).

    And, even if you possess the underlying knowledge, my program is RADICAL, and that means novel, and somewhat hard to learn:

    1 – Testimonial truth and Testimonialism (epistemology) are themselves a profound innovation that unifies science, philosophy, morality and law into truth-telling or ‘testimony’ which is the only existentially possible truth available for man to write and speak. Under testimonialism, we warranty we have performed the necessary due diligence to claim we testify truthfully. This due diligence is an extension of the scientific method to include ethics constructed as a rigorous logic: a scientific ethics.

    See An Introduction To Testimonial Truth.

    2 – Propertarian Ethics (ethics and morality) is an objective amoral language for expression and comparison of ethics that states that only productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer, free of externalities of the same criteria are rationally tolerable if we are to preserve the incentive to cooperate, and not to retaliate, and thereby preserve the disproportionate rewards of cooperation. As such the preservation of cooperation is the basis for ethics. And all ethical propositions are decidable.

    See An Introduction to Propertarian Ethics.

    3 – Propertarian Liberalism (politics) is a radical reformation of classical liberalism that articulates how and why the classical liberal model failed: failing to create new houses for newly enfranchised classes with competing reproductive interests, and the conflation of law with contract – thereby creating a voluntary market for the production of commons between classes with disparate interests and abilities.

    Propertarianism invalidates democratic assent, replacing it with legal criticism, meaning that any political contract that is not illegal may pass, and other groups may prohibit it only if it fails the legal prohibition on involuntary transfer – thus eliminating monopoly rule under democracy, and converting the legislative branch to a market for the production of commons.

    4 – Propertarian Strict Construction (law) is a reformation of law that completes the now-failed american constitutional program by requiring strict construction equal to that of mathematical proofs, thereby eliminating legal activism, parasitism, and providing universal decidability to matters of law, reducing the court’s function to determination of truth telling, and responsibility for causal relations.

    5 – Propertarian Informational Commons (law) is an extension of the prohibition on “Abusus” (pollution or abuse) with which we protect the commons of the air, water, land, infrastructure, parks and monuments from damage, privatization, and consumption. Under universal standing in matters of the commons, activists can use the courts to protect not only air, land, sea, wildlife, but the truthfulness of information.

    [P]ropertarianism provides the missing logic of cooperation that has caused the artificial separation between science, philosophy, and law for 2500 years. This has stumped great minds for over two millennia. I am just a lucky man, standing on the shoulders of giants, peering into history, and by accident at the right point in time; and I see the errors of the past only because I am keenly aware of the failure of the 20th century philosophers, the success of operational thinking we call 20th century computer science, and the recent innovations in genetic, biological, cognitive, behavioral sciences since Pinker fired the first volley.

    If this problem stumped so many greater minds than mine, it is no wonder that it’s hard for some of you to grasp the scope of the revolution in intellectual history. I understand it.

    There will always be passionate activists and those heavily invested in dogma that will hold desperately to their priors and criticize innovations that they do not understand. This is natural human conservatism regardless of which point of the political and moral compass they originate from. And it is very hard to ask passionate people who are heavily invested in comforting justificationary priors to spend a great deal of effort in learning a radical program that requires substantial effort and knowledge to understand and apply. Those people may possess the ability, not possess the ability, have the time and effort, or not have the time and effort, be willing to invest, or not willing to invest.

    So the only means of demonstrating to them that they should or must invest in learning such a thing, is for those who choose to make that investment for whatever reason, by their arguments and by their numbers, provide evidence that they should do so.

    That is where you come in.

    [P]ropertarianism is the antidote to Marxism, Pseudoscience, Postmodernism and Deceit. It is the correction and completion of the classical liberal project, which is itself an expansion of the anglo saxon franchise, and in turn an expansion of the european and indo-european project: the heroic society. Where the greatest heroism is the costly burden of truth telling and personal sovereignty.

    If there is any end of history, it is not marxist socialism, or democratic secular humanism, but the truthful society made possible by the reformation of classical liberalism to facilitate cooperation between heterogeneous peoples while prohibiting every possible means of parasitism, and demanding productive efforts in order to survive. By prohibiting all parasitism we leave only productive voluntary exchange as a means of survival.

    So it may indeed be work to follow me on this journey. But buy doing so you are participating in the greatest revolution since Marxism, and together we are constructing the only means I have found for the restoration and perpetuation of western civilization: the people who speak the truth, and the vast benefits that we westerners bring to mankind by having spoken the truth; despite the terrible difficulty in learning how to speak truthfully, and the enormous cost of truthful speech that each of us pays every day, as the most important tax, so that with truth telling that we have used in both the ancient and modern eras, to drag humanity kicking and screaming against its will, out of illness and disease, malthusian poverty, constant conflict, universal ignorance and crippling mysticism.

    Liberty in our lifetimes.

    Welcome to the revolution.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Philosophy of Aristocracy
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

    [/showhide]

  • The Conduct of a Contemporary Revolution

    [T]HE CONDUCT OF A CONTEMPORARY REVOLUTION

    1) Develop a political solution to issue as a demand, and a plan for orderly transition.

    2) Raise the cost of the status quo until the status quo is intolerable.
    ….a) inform the population of demands, and warn them to inventory goods.
    ….b) begin civil disobedience and malicious compliance (raise costs of maintaining order)
    ….c) create lists of names, and issue threats (create fear in state, academy, and media.)
    ….d) start fires (cheap, effective friend)
    ….e) disrupt infrastructure (power largely)
    ….f) selective kidnapping and assassination (make locals unwilling to govern)
    ….g) tactical entrapment and assassination (make locals unable to govern or protect)
    ….h) draw in the military and hold them in many locations. (delegitimize the government and show it is incapable of rule, and bankrupt it and the economy.)

    3) Allow transition to occur by any of the possible means:
    ….a) enactment of changes (modify government)
    ….b) nullification (incrementally replace government)
    ….c) secession (create new governments)
    ….d) coup-d’-etat (military take over the government)
    ….e) insurrection and revolution (replace the government)
    ….f) civil war (replace the government after costly warfare)

    Each of these solutions is more costly than the previous. But thankfully, contemporary economies and governments are very fragile when subject to economic and infrastructure disruption. So lower cost solutions are likely.

    It is easier to replace a government today than at any time in history. And it takes a smaller number of people to cause disruption than at any time in history.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Philosophy of Aristocracy
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine.

  • The Conduct of a Contemporary Revolution

    [T]HE CONDUCT OF A CONTEMPORARY REVOLUTION

    1) Develop a political solution to issue as a demand, and a plan for orderly transition.

    2) Raise the cost of the status quo until the status quo is intolerable.
    ….a) inform the population of demands, and warn them to inventory goods.
    ….b) begin civil disobedience and malicious compliance (raise costs of maintaining order)
    ….c) create lists of names, and issue threats (create fear in state, academy, and media.)
    ….d) start fires (cheap, effective friend)
    ….e) disrupt infrastructure (power largely)
    ….f) selective kidnapping and assassination (make locals unwilling to govern)
    ….g) tactical entrapment and assassination (make locals unable to govern or protect)
    ….h) draw in the military and hold them in many locations. (delegitimize the government and show it is incapable of rule, and bankrupt it and the economy.)

    3) Allow transition to occur by any of the possible means:
    ….a) enactment of changes (modify government)
    ….b) nullification (incrementally replace government)
    ….c) secession (create new governments)
    ….d) coup-d’-etat (military take over the government)
    ….e) insurrection and revolution (replace the government)
    ….f) civil war (replace the government after costly warfare)

    Each of these solutions is more costly than the previous. But thankfully, contemporary economies and governments are very fragile when subject to economic and infrastructure disruption. So lower cost solutions are likely.

    It is easier to replace a government today than at any time in history. And it takes a smaller number of people to cause disruption than at any time in history.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Philosophy of Aristocracy
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine.

  • The Deceitful Use of “We”

    (verbalism)(deception)(theft)(predation) [T]he misuse of the word “we” imposes costs upon others, since it is a form of deception that is to distract us from actions of predation and theft. Most frequently, the deceptive use of the word “we” is employed in the political sphere, in the west, is to further violate property en toto under the pretense of equality of interest. It’s a verbal parlor trick for the purpose of theft. It’s chicanery. –William Benge

  • The Deceitful Use of “We”

    (verbalism)(deception)(theft)(predation) [T]he misuse of the word “we” imposes costs upon others, since it is a form of deception that is to distract us from actions of predation and theft. Most frequently, the deceptive use of the word “we” is employed in the political sphere, in the west, is to further violate property en toto under the pretense of equality of interest. It’s a verbal parlor trick for the purpose of theft. It’s chicanery. –William Benge

  • Our Inescapable Cultural Biases

    THE PERSISTENCE OF ENLIGHTENMENT CULTURAL BIAS IN PHILOSOPHY
    (anarchism, neo-reaction, testimonialism)

    [C]urtis Yarvin kinda did the Jewish thing: rhetorically loaded criticism (gossip).

    Hans Hoppe kinda did the German thing: rational justification of moral priors.

    Doolittle (that’s me), I kinda did the Anglo thing: science and law.

    –“Your life is the sum of a remainder of an unbalanced equation..”—

    So true. We are just reminders in the algorithm that we call our cultural traditions. Free will? Maybe.

    But I feel like I’m a tiny rider on the elephant of Indo-European, Anglo Saxon, and Norman traditions.

    Curt Doolittle

  • Our Inescapable Cultural Biases

    THE PERSISTENCE OF ENLIGHTENMENT CULTURAL BIAS IN PHILOSOPHY
    (anarchism, neo-reaction, testimonialism)

    [C]urtis Yarvin kinda did the Jewish thing: rhetorically loaded criticism (gossip).

    Hans Hoppe kinda did the German thing: rational justification of moral priors.

    Doolittle (that’s me), I kinda did the Anglo thing: science and law.

    –“Your life is the sum of a remainder of an unbalanced equation..”—

    So true. We are just reminders in the algorithm that we call our cultural traditions. Free will? Maybe.

    But I feel like I’m a tiny rider on the elephant of Indo-European, Anglo Saxon, and Norman traditions.

    Curt Doolittle

  • Classical Contractualism and Rule of Law

    (law) (definitions) (learning propertariansim) [O]liver Wendel Holms really screwed American and anglo law. The more I study American history the more obvious it becomes that without the many nearby competitors we had faced as Europeans in Europe, that the new continent provided an excuse for the conquerors to take license with the law given the unanimity of sentiment: seizure of the opportunity to profit from the conquest of the continent. A unanimity that was not present in Europe (and which is only present under empire.) Law consists of the one rule necessary to preserve cooperation: the prohibition on parasitism that causes cooperation to be a rational preference.  And by causing cooperation to be a rational preference, we create and preserve the disproportionate rewards of cooperation, and the disproportionate rewards of the division of labor and knowledge in that is possible under cooperation. The one rule of prohibition on parasitism includes all forms of parasitism: violence, theft, extortion, fraud, externality and conspiracy. 

    Parasitism must be performed against something: Life, Mates and Offspring, Relations, Property,  Shareholder Property, Informal Institutional Property, and Formal Institutional Property. And we must know how NOT to perform parasitism: by limiting our actions to Productive, fully informed,  warrantied, voluntary exchange, free of parasitism by the same criteria. And we must agree to enforce this requirement in fulfillment of the prohibition on parasitism, by providing insurance to one another consisting of both the Obverse: we will provide a means of retaliation against violations of the rule; and Reverse: we will not retaliate against  retaliations that are performed against a violation of the rule. To provide means of insurance by providing an organizational means of retaliation against violations of the one rule, we will construct a court (testimony), a jury, presided by one or more judges. To simplify the act of determining whether violations have or have not occurred, we will record our decisions as the obverse: property rights, and the reverse: prohibitions on violations of those rights. THE EVOLUTION OF NON-LAW FROM LAW 1) LEGAL SCIENTISM (SCIENTIFIC) or CLASSICAL LEGAL THEORY Law consists of a set of axioms which cannot be violated (true). As such, law is if not a science, at least a formal logic, that is both internally consistent, externally correspondent and universally decidable. Political preference cannot override these principles. (Rule of Law) 2) LEGAL REALISM (RATIONAL) – THE FIRST AMERICAN VIOLATION OF RULE OF LAW Law is constructed from both political and logical origins. 3) LEGAL POSITIVISM (ARATIONAL) – THE SECOND AMERICAN VIOLATION AND THE TOTAL ABANDONMENT OF RULE OF LAW Law is a social construction unbound by any constraint other than its origin. REFORMATION: LEGAL SCIENTIFIC CONTRACTUALISM (RATIO-SCIENTIFIC) Law consists of a set of axioms which cannot be violated, since such violation whether singular grand and visible, or invisibly accumulated from multitudinous and minor errors, would violate and destroy the incentive to cooperate within a government by rule of law. However, nearly any desirable contract can be constructed by voluntary agreement of parties, so long as the internal transfers are enumerated and the net result is productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange free of external imposition of costs upon others. PROPERTARIANISM = LEGAL CONTRACTUALISM = CLASSICAL LAW See Also: “The First Principles of Propertarian Ethics” Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine, (Tallinn, Estonia)