(Hugs.) 😉
Source date (UTC): 2024-10-22 05:16:58 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848594373883130184
Reply addressees: @PlayerJuan11
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848590827196469622
(Hugs.) 😉
Source date (UTC): 2024-10-22 05:16:58 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848594373883130184
Reply addressees: @PlayerJuan11
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848590827196469622
RT @NoahRevoy: @curtdoolittle We are the only group I know of thats seen whats coming, articulated it, understands why its happening and ha…
Source date (UTC): 2024-10-22 00:31:33 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848522547618332851
Correct.
And it’s exasperating that they’re riding the titanic willingly and confidently into civil war and collapse.
BTW: Hugs Tom. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2024-10-21 22:32:45 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848492648803225727
Reply addressees: @TomKawczynski
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848489712769466594
Dear FBI:
—“It’s not that we’re hiding anything, it’s that you can’t seem to comprehend what we’re not hiding.”–
Everything we do is public. Everything we do is constitutionally legal. Everything we do is moral. We’re pretty open with military and law enforcement. We recruit…
Source date (UTC): 2024-10-21 22:15:13 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848488234684195273
Dear FBI:
—“It’s not that we’re hiding anything, it’s that you can’t seem to comprehend what we’re not hiding.”–
Everything we do is public. Everything we do is constitutionally legal. Everything we do is moral. We’re pretty open with military and law enforcement. We recruit from military and law enforcement. And we never hear from them as other than with positive feedback.
Though it’s the FBI that gets sent out every time one of us posts something that can be misinterpreted on social media. And it’s a silly conversation every time.
The problem? LEO seeking to prosecute vs seeking to understand. Today an agent kept calling me evasive for my answers to the question of whether I was OK with violence. Of course, he doesn’t know that I think this is a dumb question coming from law enforcement that uses violence for moral purposes. Violence like energy is a resource – it’s neutral. Its whether that resource is put to good or ill use. And, worse, whether one grasps what is good or ill in the context.
In the context of reformation, it’s the risk of violence for failure to redress moral grievances that causes governments to reform. The civil rights groups achieved their goals in under six weeks. They were moral goals (for the most part.)
So it’s not the violence, is the risk of violence that’s necessary to bring a reluctant party to the table. But it’s that possibility of violence that produces the solution to the problems that eliminate the want of violence. In other words, asking me whether I advocated violence was dishonest, entrapment, and an attempt to force me to say something out of a context that as moral, into one that was not. That’s deception.
So, seriously, when you come to talk to me, or us, bring someone from Justice with a knowledge of constitutional law and history. Otherwise we literally can’t talk to one another cogently. Watching expressionless incomprehension followed by eyes glazing over, followed by questions or accusations that are not only entrapment, but absurd or intellectually insulting isn’t helpful.
I understand. Y’all approach matters without much depth. Perhaps that’s your job. But we aren’t like that. We follow the strategy of the founders: demand for a redress of grievances by proposal of moral solutions to those grievances, and the confession of guilt and illegitimacy by failure to address them.
And while it will take time – it will work.
So in the meantime, please help us respect one another in our job to try to prevent escalation into civil war.
Because the difference between us is that we can stop a civil war with our tools.
You can’t but encourage it with yours.
Affections.
CD
Source date (UTC): 2024-10-21 22:15:12 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848488234436767744
THE FBI CAN’T THINK?
RE: https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1818077275524301168
Now there is quite a bit of difference between the older FBI who are basically just ‘cops’ and the younger FBI who is more savvy to the world as it is today, and in particular the impact of and use of social media.
Apparently the… https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1818077275524301168
Source date (UTC): 2024-10-21 20:48:09 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848466324173033645
https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1818077275524301168
THE FBI CAN’T THINK?
RE: https://t.co/KMF0xNMSni
Now there is quite a bit of difference between the older FBI who are basically just ‘cops’ and the younger FBI who is more savvy to the world as it is today, and in particular the impact of and use of social media.
Apparently the FBI believed that this post constituted one of the following:
(a) an inspiration to violence
(b) a threat of violence
(c) an attempt to organize violence
Instead of:
(a) A civil war is a deterministic outcome in the next few years, as no civilization or state in history has survived this level of overproduction of elites, asymmetry of returns and resulting inequality, debt, immigration, conversion, conquest, and radical shift in economic competitiveness, trade, and geostrategic power to defend that trade. And no serious intellectual who has mastered the discipline disagrees with this determinacy. In fact, throughout history back to the greeks, said one way or another they are in perfect agreement.
(b) The elites have, and the state has, gradually, through folly, egoism, ideology, conspiracy, and judicial activism, gradually undermined the constitution, the common law, and the implied traditions that sought to prevent these crimes – and they are in fact crimes. ANd they have done so by hiding under moral pretense that the elimination of responsibility and the centralization of power will produce other than the destitution that it has wherever put in practice.
(c) And I, and our organization have produced a list of those crimes, a list of reforms to the constitution to prevent their repetition, and a list of reforms and policies to reverse their harms – and in doing so produce the greatest reforms and restoration of freedom, agency, self determination, and wealth to the population since the Roman Reforms. There is no possible argument whether legal, practical, or moral to fail to implement these reforms without admitting to criminality among the elites.
(d) The ‘elites’ (finance, media, academy, state) have no possible means of producing their own incentives to reform. We have exhausted debate because of institutional capture. We have exhausted voting because of demographic collapse and replacement, we have exhausted the legislature. All that remains is the court, and the court by a small margin. We lack a monarchy as “judge of last resort” that the founders and their english predecessors used to settle their grievances. And as such after the court, we have only the institution of the people, who, by reformation, by protest, and rebellion to demand it, by revolution to implement it, or descent into primitive house to house ever escalating civil war – at the same time as our geostrategic power, and our international trade, collapse our economies, and let loose the was of aggression the remaining imperialists (russia, china, iran) seek to use for expansion.
(e) Therefore it is left to the people to use the LEGAL and MORAL means, as did our founders, of a common law suit against the state for the redress of grievances, it’s submission to congress (parliament), and it’s prosecution in the court (supreme court). And if that justice fails us, to use the last means of our insurance – the force of arms to address those grievances – which is the reason for the first and second amendments. And our duty to one another under it, the common law under it, one another, and nature and nature’s god under it, to insure those laws of man and nature. They are the foundations upon which all the rest of the constitution, our country, our civilization, and our people rests.
(f) As such, my purpose, our purpose as an organization, is to prevent a civil war and it’s bloody and horrid consequences for us, our country, our civilization, and by extension the world, by (i) a moral license to demand change (ii) a set of solutions to implement that change (iii) a plan of orderly transition to bring about that change (iv) and a means of coercion of the elites (including threat of force if necessary), to bring about justice for all, the suppression of the elites’ criminality against our people, the restitution if possible of predations upon our people, and a restoration and reformation of the law and policy to prevent the future repetition of these crimes against our people – thereby continuing the long process of incremental suppression of the criminality of elites as we evolve the scale, complexity, and wealth of our nations and our civilization.
No moral person can argue against this and not self incriminate.
It is the science.
It is the natural law.
It’s the common law.
It’s historical tradition in our law.
It’s the source of our constitutions and our law.
And it is the just reformation of our government and those who conspire with it against the people to once again force it to conform to our constitution, our common law, the natural law, and the science of human cooperation.
That’s my and our opinion.
And we stand by it.
As every right, just, moral, person should.
And as every free person must.
And the fact that they send a ‘cop’ to discuss such matters with me instead of a group of constitutional lawyers is something that must end. All it achieves is confirming that we have people who can exercise power, without the knowledge under which to exercise or constrain it – or who violate it anyway because of ignorance or ideology.
And all action against me would achieve is giving me evidence, standing in court, a platform, and legitimacy with which to reach an even broader range of people.
And in doing so, instead of achieving our ambition of a peaceful reformation, give inspiration to the random retaliatory and escalatory circles of violence that is the most certain means by which the civil war will emerge in modernity. Not as the American or English or French civil wars, but like the more recent house-to-house civil wars.
And a military that is currently too small to contain the predictable remains of the axis of authoritarian empires currently reasserting itself, and is four losses and zero wins against civil wars by these means by men in flip-flops, combined with the 14K FBI agents, the three police departments that alone have some chance of enforcing order, and a national guard that is more than likely to agree with the moral demands, cannot, compete, nor can a government survive delegitimization by firing on people with moral demands.
On January 6th, had someone like myself (who planned to) merely taken the floor in congress to demand freedom of speech and protection of political affiliation as we do religion, race, and sex, so that we might continue the debate on how to resolve our differences rather than suppress them and drive us to conflict and civil war, we might have changed the narrative enough to end the people’s resistance to one another, and to restore the people against the predatory elites, and work toward reforms.
But with that opportunity missed. The clock ticks toward a deterministic end. And only the hard work of moral men will save us.
I work within the law – but that’s because I know and understand the law. How many in ‘law enforcement’ the legislature, or even the courts do?
CD
NLI
Source date (UTC): 2024-10-21 20:48:09 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848466323636142080
(yes, and bipartite manorialism denying access to land to those of poor reputation as well.)
Source date (UTC): 2024-10-21 08:26:30 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848279683760066855
Reply addressees: @RelSentTech @why_the_west
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848255746086969678
–“… leftists have no sustained principle other than the acquisition of power to mandate government enforced equality.”– VDH
“Democrats, the left, see the court as an extension of the legislature and they want to control it, and they don’t feel Bound By Any prior tradition or protocol – except if it came from the Warren era.
So they they want to pack the court they want to harass conservative judges at their homes they they’re willing to do any and everything to stop this conservative traditionalist court and get rid of the Senate Filibuster, bring in new States, get rid of the Electoral College – the whole movement of the democratic Progressive is to destroy the idea of America is a republic under rule of law, and anything that restricts the instant will of the people so to speak whether it’s two senators – that you know they only they can represent as little as 250,000 people each in Wyoming by intent of the founders versus you know 20 million here in California.
They feel that’s not fair so they want to make the Senate like the house, and they want to get 15 judges that they could appoint and instantly get a democratic majority, and they want to get rid of the Electoral College so voters in New York and Illinois and California can run the country and part of that project is justices like Jackson that feel they’re a legislator and their duty is to empower the left-wing agenda regardless of of Statute or prior rulings so she’s the most left-wing of all the justices on the court.
So Sotomayor is a marginalized figure now and she never really lived up to what she was built.
And as a general rule the left gets hurt when it privileges race and and um gender just because you limit the choices that you can that you can bring to the four. When you look at how the left had power on the court and you look at uh past judges Luke powell or Brennan or … I said Douglas or Warren … they were all very brilliant guys and they were very smart and they were white males. And I just don’t see them nominating another left-wing distinguished white males whereas the Republicans who are not Shackled that by that can.
I mean they can they not only can nominate a Scalia they can get a somebody like Alito for example or Gorsuch or Cavanaugh that have are distinguished and and come up with some great defenses of constitutional government.
Democrats seem to be absolutely Furious about the Supreme Court. At the moment it’s a sort of Republican there’s a republican majority.
Democrats are about scrapping the Supreme Court by packing the Supreme Court and the reason for this ostensibly is Roe versus Wade. Abortion this is the issue of the democratic campaign in 2024. It was the issue they see they think they can win on.
And again when you speak to Democrat voters, that is one of the major issue that issues that they talk about.
The Democrats dominated that court that, Institution for many many years in the 20th century – and they seem to have lost that control. And they don’t like that.
Well the thing about the Democrats is all leftists have no sustained principle other than the acquisition of power to mandate government enforced equality.”
Source date (UTC): 2024-10-21 01:38:31 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848177010620739585
HOW TO GET GPT TO WRITE IN THE STYLE OF CURT DOOLITTLE
( OMG why??!! 😉 )
It’s taken a bit of work, but it’s possible to approach the precision of my writing if (a) you start with the following prompts, and (b) you know what you’re talking about (c) and so can explain the key concepts and relationships you wish it to compose definitions, descriptions, and explanations for (d) you upload the text of The Natural Law – Volume 1 – A System of Measurement to help it understand the foundations you’re working from.
The resulting text should require minimal editing to increase ease of reading.
Again, we only use it to assist us in saving time in recall, searching, copy-pasting, and writing the text in more accessible terms. You still have to organize the argument for it. 😉
The newer GPT models are incapable of doing this so we’re using GPT4o until they are. The new models are not capable yet of importing our documents.
PROMPTS:
PART I
Upload the text of the book in whatever is the current form. (Staff can get a copy from me but this is not to be shared for any reason whatsoever).
PART II
To guide your team in requesting this specific style of writing, here’s a clear bulleted list of prompt items they can use to align closely with your style:
Causal Chaining: Request writing that follows logical causal chains, explicitly showing the relationships of cause, effect, necessity, and sufficiency.
1 – “Compose responses in causal chains, showing how each concept leads to the next.”
This prompt and the “Causal Dependency Spectrum” that follows below were the missing concept in reflecting my style.
Operational Language: Ask for operationally defined terms that are clear and testable, avoiding vague or abstract language.
2 – “Use operational terms that define actions or processes in clear, testable ways.”
Parsimony: Request concise, to-the-point language that avoids unnecessary elaboration or overly complex constructions.
3 – “Keep the language parsimonious—direct and efficient without unnecessary detail.”
Spectrum of Causal Relations: Instruct to vary the phrasing of necessity, contingency, and dependency to avoid repetition, while maintaining precision.
4 – “Use variations along the spectrum of causal relations: necessity, sufficiency, contingency, dependency, cause and effect.”
Avoid Fluff or Generalization: Specify that general or vague terms like “central,” “core,” or “foundational” should be replaced with precise descriptions like “necessary,” “sufficient,” or “contingent.”
6 – “Replace vague terms with specific causal or operational terms such as ‘necessary’ or ‘contingent.’”
Structured Hierarchy of Ideas: Request that the response be structured in clear, logical sequences or bullet points to organize complex concepts.
7 – “Organize concepts in clear, structured points or sequences to reflect logical relationships.”
Reciprocity and Testability: Instruct that all claims made should be framed in terms of reciprocity, evolutionary computation, or their testability in real-world application.
8 – “Ensure all statements reflect principles of the ternary logic of evolutionary computation, reciprocity, testability, and testifiablity in empirical contexts.”
Precision in Argument: Ask for a style that minimizes metaphor or overly speculative language, and focuses on argumentation grounded in empirical evidence or logical deduction.
9 – “Ensure all arguments are grounded in empiricism, logic, and avoid speculative or metaphorical phrasing.”
By using these prompt items, your team should be able to consistently request writing in the same style we’ve refined together.
PART III
To assist with 1. Causal Chaining using 6. the Spectrum of Causal Relations:
Chat GPT has ‘learned’ this category called “Causal Dependency Spectrum” that it can use to describe relations without ‘weasel words’. (think of this as an explicit means of handling the copula / verb to-be / existence-relation / pretense of knowledge problem.)
Causal Dependency Spectrum
To avoid repetitive prose while maintaining the precision of causal relationships, we can establish a set of terms that function along a spectrum of dependency, from necessity to contingency, and from cause to effect:
Spectrum of Necessity to Contingency:
Necessary / Necessarily Produces
Sufficient / Sufficient to Cause
Necessary and Sufficient
Contingent / Dependent on
Conditional / Conditioned by
Incidental / Incidental to
Possible but Not Sufficient
Facilitates / Can Facilitate
Spectrum of Causal Direction (Cause to Effect):
Produces / Is Produced by
Causes / Is Caused by
Leads to / Is Led by
Results in / Results from
Generates / Is Generated by
Determines / Is Determined by
Drives / Is Driven by
Conditions / Is Conditioned by
Enables / Is Enabled by
Constrains / Is Constrained by
Initiates / Is Initiated by
Permits / Is Permitted by
Inhibits / Is Inhibited by
Amplifies / Is Amplified by
Diminishes / Is Diminished by
Spectrum of Dependency (Direct to Indirect):
Directly Produces / Is Directly Produced by
Mediates / Is Mediated by
Proximal Cause / Distal Cause
Directly Dependent on / Indirectly Dependent on
Relies on / Is Reliant upon
Constrains / Is Constrained by
Dictates / Is Dictated by
Modifies / Is Modified by
Supports / Is Supported by
Influences / Is Influenced by
Spectrum of Contribution and Interaction:
Amplifies / Is Amplified by
Reinforces / Is Reinforced by
Diminishes / Is Diminished by
Interacts with / Is Interacted with
Combines with / Is Combined with
Synergizes with / Is Synergized by
Spectrum of Certainty or Likelihood:
Inevitably / Is Inevitable from
Likely / Is Likely a Result of
May Produce / May Be Produced by
Can Cause / Can Be Caused by
Is Dependent Upon / May Be Dependent Upon
These variations allow us to shift focus between different degrees of necessity, causality, and dependency, while keeping the precision required by the argument.
Source date (UTC): 2024-10-21 01:25:07 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848173639645929473