Curt Doolittle

Theme: Class

  • WESTERN POLYTHEISM AND THE LANGUAGES OF THE CLASSES While truths must exist univ

    WESTERN POLYTHEISM AND THE LANGUAGES OF THE CLASSES

    While truths must exist universally but are invariant (the meaning of a truth), there are also some universal goods (like truth), but many variable and often competing goods (wants and needs).

    And as such we require narratives to explain both the universal truth, the universal good, and the particular goods that are used by each class.

    That said, the strong rule and decide, the burghers organize, produce, distribute, and exchange, and the poor and weak gossip and complain.

    And each tells the story of his class by attributing virtue to his utterances.

    We learn to speak the law of the strong, the philosophy of the utilitarian, and the religion of the weak.

    These are not complicated concepts to master.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-29 12:10:00 UTC

  • HERE IS WHY YOU’RE AN IDIOT: CAPITALISM VS SOCIAL DEMOCRACY, SOCIALISM, COMMUNIS

    HERE IS WHY YOU’RE AN IDIOT:

    CAPITALISM VS SOCIAL DEMOCRACY, SOCIALISM, COMMUNISM?

    Morons fall into the trap of capitalism vs communism, neither of which are possible, and both of which constitute means of parasitism, rather than advocating Rule of Natural Law.

    One can rule by command, one can rule by Religion, one can rule by Credit, and one can rule by Natural Law. Command does not require information, just obedience. Religion is a deception with which anything can be justified. Credit and financialization are a deception by which to abstractly steal from you.

    And only RULE OF NATURAL LAW requires productive, fully informed, voluntary transfer free of imposition of costs by externality.

    So markets in everything – public and private – MUST result from Natural Law. But natural law DOES NOT RESULT FROM CAPITALISM.

    (If you read this, I assume you’re not a moron. lol)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-27 07:57:00 UTC

  • PROMISES Promise salvation to the underclasses. Promise plunder to the laboring

    PROMISES

    Promise salvation to the underclasses.

    Promise plunder to the laboring classes.

    Promise opportunity to the merchant classes.

    Promise rents to the priestly and intellectual classes.

    Promise conquest to the aristocratic classes.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-25 18:28:00 UTC

  • Women are the Problem. Domestically and Internationally

      Understand. There is only one international problem: the size of the underclass population – under say, 100. That’s it. We will some day soon have to face the fact that it’s populations under 115 that are the problem for humanity and for the planet – and that all the talk-talk-talk in history is created by people above 115, who simply can’t grasp the world of the people under 100. Understand. There is only one problem. Women voters. That’s the only problem we have. It’s the only problem we have ever had. The question is not ‘what do we do’ but ‘how do we do it’. If women can destroy the civilization by vote, then what means do we use to prevent their abilty to destroy the civilization by vote? So there is only one domestic problem: female voters. And one international problem: female reproduction under the the minimum. Both of these problems are solvable. They just aren’t pleasant to solve. Seriously. The problem isn’t complicated at all.

  • Women are the Problem. Domestically and Internationally

      Understand. There is only one international problem: the size of the underclass population – under say, 100. That’s it. We will some day soon have to face the fact that it’s populations under 115 that are the problem for humanity and for the planet – and that all the talk-talk-talk in history is created by people above 115, who simply can’t grasp the world of the people under 100. Understand. There is only one problem. Women voters. That’s the only problem we have. It’s the only problem we have ever had. The question is not ‘what do we do’ but ‘how do we do it’. If women can destroy the civilization by vote, then what means do we use to prevent their abilty to destroy the civilization by vote? So there is only one domestic problem: female voters. And one international problem: female reproduction under the the minimum. Both of these problems are solvable. They just aren’t pleasant to solve. Seriously. The problem isn’t complicated at all.

  • Becker’s Use of Marginalism in Violence and Revolution

    BECKER’S USE OF MARGINALISM IN VIOLENCE AND REVOLUTION (predatory gains are linear, losses to prey are exponential) —“…a simple calculation that predatory interest groups and their taxpaying victims make: what return on my investment can I get by lobbying government? Becker’s insight is that the gains to predators are linear, but the losses to prey are exponential, thereby stiffening the resistance of victims as the aggression of predators plods on without similarly increased vigor. Think of a gang of robbers taking half the crop from peasants. They then return for the second half. The gain to the gang of the second half cut is the same as in their first extortion. Yet for peasants to lose the last half of their crops means possible starvation and the certain loss of seed corn. They can be expected to resist violently…”— Violence is always extant. This of course, is why the government’s search for pareto optimums, and biology and the market’s search for nash equilibriums are so different, and why Pareto optimums are so dangerous: the state produces ‘trigger events’ by some linear increase that produces a revolution: the exponential cost is too high and war or revolution is preferable to on more incremental predation.

  • Becker’s Use of Marginalism in Violence and Revolution

    BECKER’S USE OF MARGINALISM IN VIOLENCE AND REVOLUTION (predatory gains are linear, losses to prey are exponential) —“…a simple calculation that predatory interest groups and their taxpaying victims make: what return on my investment can I get by lobbying government? Becker’s insight is that the gains to predators are linear, but the losses to prey are exponential, thereby stiffening the resistance of victims as the aggression of predators plods on without similarly increased vigor. Think of a gang of robbers taking half the crop from peasants. They then return for the second half. The gain to the gang of the second half cut is the same as in their first extortion. Yet for peasants to lose the last half of their crops means possible starvation and the certain loss of seed corn. They can be expected to resist violently…”— Violence is always extant. This of course, is why the government’s search for pareto optimums, and biology and the market’s search for nash equilibriums are so different, and why Pareto optimums are so dangerous: the state produces ‘trigger events’ by some linear increase that produces a revolution: the exponential cost is too high and war or revolution is preferable to on more incremental predation.

  • Deep States

    DEEP STATES AND HOW TO DEAL WITH THEM Asking forgiveness for analytic exposition in advance….. THE HIERARCHY OF MODELS: 1) Michels-ian View (Evolutionary): Deep state – a deterministic and necessary consequence of all human orders, because of the value and need for synthesis of information and provision of decidability necessary to concentrate forces of coercion (persuasion) – necessities that cannot be rectified. 2) Economists View (Systematizing): Deep state – a conspiracy of common interests – interests that must be rectified by the correct incentives. 3) Common Folk’s view (Intentional-izing): Deep state – a deliberate conspiracy of common interests – indicating immoral people with immoral interests that must be punished or replaced. 4) Ancient Folk’s View (anthropomorphism): The gods intend it so…. We are the Victims of the vicissitudes of the gods, and nothing can be done except to fight or submit to them. THEORIES 1) The Chinese Proposition: the state is the most profitable and important industry and should be run as an industry, by the best people, selected from the best universities, and professionally trained with increasing responsibility from the local to the regional to the national level. 2) Fukuyama’s Theory: (German Model) That the professionalization of a bureaucracy prior to democracy, under continental law will create a deep state that uses prior restraint, and serves the public interest out of tradition and self interest. 3) The Anglo Saxon Theory (Classical Liberalism): That patronage leadership of the bureaucracies should provide a means of correcting and cleansing the bureaucracies. But as Fukuyama has shown, this leads to the opposite effect. 4) The American Theory (minimalism): the only means of preventing endemic corruption, and providing maximum quality of goods services and information is maximum privatization of all services despite the resistance by the bureaucracy (monopoly). 5) The Science: States that produce monopoly services as investor of last resort (or monopoly investor in the commons) can produce industries, and retreat into the german, anglo saxon, or american theory depending upon the degree of trust in the judiciary to resolve disputes between the citizenry and the service organizations. In other words, the problem is the degree of trust and trustworthiness present in the culture – which in and of itself is created by those courts. GENERAL LAWS: 1) Iron Law of Oligarchy : oligarchies whether formal, patronage, kin, ‘specialized knowledge’, or ‘social networks” will evolve because decisions that concentrate resources (forces of coercion) cannot be created otherwise, and the organization cannot survive competition. 2) “Cthulu Swims Left”: any organization without a formal logic (law) to bind it, will exploit all opportunities for discretion to expand to the point of maximum rent seeking – until met by shock which it lacks the free resources to use in re-creating incentives necessary to reorganize under the new conditions. 3) Law of Maximizing of Rents: All organizations whether public or private will seek to maximize rents while providing the minimum returns to customers, creditors, and investors that customers, creditors, and investors will tolerate. THE SCIENCE Either we implement a strictly constructed, exceptionless, constitution of natural law (reciprocity) requiring markets in every aspect of life (association, cooperation, reproduction, production, production of commons (government), production of polities) with universal standing, universal application (rule of law), an insurer of last resort (Singapore Model), or we will continue (as we have) to deliver a private economy for association and reproduction, a mixed economy for the production of goods, services, and information, and a majoritarian monopoly economy, for the provision of commons whether goods, services, and information, and an absolute monopoly for insurer of last resort. You can evolve a population through rule of law, if you can evolve a court through rule of law, but you cannot evolve a court through rule of law, if your system of law is discretionary rather than one of rule of law. In other words, it is not possible to produce a non-discretionary rule of law, and therefore a government of low corruption, unless you produce first a law that is not open to interpretation and ‘fudging’. All societies require a system of government equal to their degree of imposition of rule of law. The problem is demographics, the percentage of people in a legally bound economy (the size of the middle class). As such we should expect to see small homogenous societies with strong rule of law and heavy redistribution on one end, and large heterogeneous societies with heavy corruption on the other. And that is what we see. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine

  • Deep States

    DEEP STATES AND HOW TO DEAL WITH THEM Asking forgiveness for analytic exposition in advance….. THE HIERARCHY OF MODELS: 1) Michels-ian View (Evolutionary): Deep state – a deterministic and necessary consequence of all human orders, because of the value and need for synthesis of information and provision of decidability necessary to concentrate forces of coercion (persuasion) – necessities that cannot be rectified. 2) Economists View (Systematizing): Deep state – a conspiracy of common interests – interests that must be rectified by the correct incentives. 3) Common Folk’s view (Intentional-izing): Deep state – a deliberate conspiracy of common interests – indicating immoral people with immoral interests that must be punished or replaced. 4) Ancient Folk’s View (anthropomorphism): The gods intend it so…. We are the Victims of the vicissitudes of the gods, and nothing can be done except to fight or submit to them. THEORIES 1) The Chinese Proposition: the state is the most profitable and important industry and should be run as an industry, by the best people, selected from the best universities, and professionally trained with increasing responsibility from the local to the regional to the national level. 2) Fukuyama’s Theory: (German Model) That the professionalization of a bureaucracy prior to democracy, under continental law will create a deep state that uses prior restraint, and serves the public interest out of tradition and self interest. 3) The Anglo Saxon Theory (Classical Liberalism): That patronage leadership of the bureaucracies should provide a means of correcting and cleansing the bureaucracies. But as Fukuyama has shown, this leads to the opposite effect. 4) The American Theory (minimalism): the only means of preventing endemic corruption, and providing maximum quality of goods services and information is maximum privatization of all services despite the resistance by the bureaucracy (monopoly). 5) The Science: States that produce monopoly services as investor of last resort (or monopoly investor in the commons) can produce industries, and retreat into the german, anglo saxon, or american theory depending upon the degree of trust in the judiciary to resolve disputes between the citizenry and the service organizations. In other words, the problem is the degree of trust and trustworthiness present in the culture – which in and of itself is created by those courts. GENERAL LAWS: 1) Iron Law of Oligarchy : oligarchies whether formal, patronage, kin, ‘specialized knowledge’, or ‘social networks” will evolve because decisions that concentrate resources (forces of coercion) cannot be created otherwise, and the organization cannot survive competition. 2) “Cthulu Swims Left”: any organization without a formal logic (law) to bind it, will exploit all opportunities for discretion to expand to the point of maximum rent seeking – until met by shock which it lacks the free resources to use in re-creating incentives necessary to reorganize under the new conditions. 3) Law of Maximizing of Rents: All organizations whether public or private will seek to maximize rents while providing the minimum returns to customers, creditors, and investors that customers, creditors, and investors will tolerate. THE SCIENCE Either we implement a strictly constructed, exceptionless, constitution of natural law (reciprocity) requiring markets in every aspect of life (association, cooperation, reproduction, production, production of commons (government), production of polities) with universal standing, universal application (rule of law), an insurer of last resort (Singapore Model), or we will continue (as we have) to deliver a private economy for association and reproduction, a mixed economy for the production of goods, services, and information, and a majoritarian monopoly economy, for the provision of commons whether goods, services, and information, and an absolute monopoly for insurer of last resort. You can evolve a population through rule of law, if you can evolve a court through rule of law, but you cannot evolve a court through rule of law, if your system of law is discretionary rather than one of rule of law. In other words, it is not possible to produce a non-discretionary rule of law, and therefore a government of low corruption, unless you produce first a law that is not open to interpretation and ‘fudging’. All societies require a system of government equal to their degree of imposition of rule of law. The problem is demographics, the percentage of people in a legally bound economy (the size of the middle class). As such we should expect to see small homogenous societies with strong rule of law and heavy redistribution on one end, and large heterogeneous societies with heavy corruption on the other. And that is what we see. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine

  • Privilege? Earned Stereotype

    —“Privilege is something any group will create for its members if they are able. I think we would do better to ask what’s wrong with groups that are unable, rather than tolerating lectures on account of we trust each other more than we trust them; when they evidently don’t even trust each other (because they would prefer to interact, or do business, or live among, us.)”— Eli Harman If you, as an individual, find yourself benefitting from the stereotypes developed by your people, is it not ‘true’ and is it not ‘moral’? The more interesting question is why do others not benefit from the stereotypes developed by their people? Trust, truth telling, and signals of trust and truth telling are very expensive investments a people must make. Why is it that some are more or less willing and able to make those investments and produce that stereotype? Why should people pay high costs to test a stereotype that was paid for at such high cost? And why have you and yours failed to produce an equally valuable stereotype?