Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • I didn’t realize that when people gear up, wear masks, helmets, shields, bring r

    I didn’t realize that when people gear up, wear masks, helmets, shields, bring rocks and explosives to throw at police, stop traffic and trash vehicles, beat white people, shoot weapons, set buildings on fire, tear down public artworks,and loot businesses its “Freedom of Speech.”

    Reply addressees: @bdholtzman @tgbrooks

  • John mark did in no way repudiate propertarianism- just the opposite. He said so

    John mark did in no way repudiate propertarianism- just the opposite. He said so

    John mark did in no way repudiate propertarianism- just the opposite. He said so in his final post on Patreon that’s still up.

    Instead we both repudiated the dissident right as hopeless chimps – and that our 18 month effort to make those subhuman animals into a political m… https://t.co/SuFQQfShyp

  • Well, categorizing a set of arguments as a philosophy means ‘not science’, and i

    Well, categorizing a set of arguments as a philosophy means ‘not science’, and is only slightly better than ‘theology’ or nonsense.

    Law(Science) = Truth (Top)
    Philosophy = Choice (Middle)
    Theology = Obedience (Bottom)

    Reply addressees: @oscara7oscargeh

  • So what you mean is you like young adult moral literature that confirms your bia

    So what you mean is you like young adult moral literature that confirms your biases, and didn’t study the evidence -the history of the common law, constitutional law, how our law was undermined, and what would be needed to formally construct it. 😉

    Reply addressees: @joanlarma @billtalts @JulieBorowski

  • No. HA is sophistry; MES half so, that demonstrates a civilizational lack of res

    No. HA is sophistry; MES half so, that demonstrates a civilizational lack of responsibility for territory, economy, and commons; Bastiat an unempirical work of moral philosophy without prescription of how to achieve it. And Might is necessary to create rights vs beg for them. 😉

    Reply addressees: @joanlarma @billtalts @JulieBorowski

  • RWANDAN REFUGEE WORKING AS A SECURITY GUARD LIT THE ARSON FIRE

    RWANDAN REFUGEE WORKING AS A SECURITY GUARD LIT THE ARSON FIRE https://t.co/wQHKpEijul

  • Please, you and your Social Justice harpies, STAY GONE from social media. 😉 It

    Please, you and your Social Justice harpies, STAY GONE from social media. 😉 It was fine for Jewish communists, socialists, postmodernists, anti-male feminists, and HBD-denialists to demand free speech, but not for us to argue against them?
    Where is the ‘reciprocity’, two-faced?

    Reply addressees: @KathyBurke

  • lol. No. That’s … horrible. This is Sabine Hossenfelder – physicist in a missi

    lol. No. That’s … horrible.

    This is Sabine Hossenfelder – physicist in a mission to end pseudoscience by mathiness in physics.

    Reply addressees: @DownEthots

  • Libertarianism – Common Property Version of Private Property Marxism

    Libertarianism – Common Property Version of Private Property Marxism https://t.co/xz9T9MsbUI

  • Libertarianism – Common Property Version of Private Property Marxism

    —“The problem with libertarianism is that libertarians don’t agree on what libertarianism means. Some libertarians say that if you truly believe in the non-aggression principle then you must be an anarchist. Other libertarians say that anarchists are not libertarians. Wanting to abolish the state vs. minimize it is a big Some libertarians say that being a libertarian is about minding your own business and not judging other people’s lifestyles. Other libertarians say that libertarianism is solely about the role of the state. Which one is it?”— Julie Borowski

    “Non Aggression Principle” is an incomplete sentence, that deceives by suggestion: any idiot will agree he wants to be free of aggression. But every idiot will also substitute his definition of property(interests) to aggress against. Ergo, the statement is absolutely meaningless.

    Rothbardian ethics of Ghetto and Pale, were designed with malice of forethought NOT to equal European rule of law of reciprocity in interests both public and private. So that the Jewish method of fraud by baiting into hazard could persist, and European retaliation prohibited.

    There is only one source of liberty, and that is armed men with sufficient force to demand rule of law by self-determination, legal sovereignty, by reciprocity, adjudicated in an adversarial market(jury) of peers. Jews never had sovereignty, liberty, and never used reciprocity.

    So stop advocating Jewish libertarianism’s war against reciprocity, rule of law, and commons – because it’s another fraud like marxism, postmodernism, anti-male-feminism, and neoconservatism. It’s bait, argued by suggestion, to lure well-meaning fools into the hazard of failure.