Curt Doolittle

Theme: Commons

  • DISAMBIGUATION OF GOVERNMENT (BANKRUPTCY) 1. Military > State > Government > Com

    DISAMBIGUATION OF GOVERNMENT (BANKRUPTCY)

    1. Military > State > Government > Commons > institutions-organization

    2. Rule of Law > Law > Courts > Contracts > Biz-trade

    3. Strategy+Tradition > Religion+Education+Academy+Media > Families/Consumers > People-consumption

    State (corporation holding assets)

    1. Federal State -> Federal Government

    2. … Regional State -> Regional Government

    3. … … Territorial: County Corporation -> County Government

    4. … … Market: Local Corporation -> Local Government

    If a state declares bankruptcy the creditors get screwed all or partly. The state has demonstrated incompetence in the management of state affairs, and then the creditors will seek higher interest rates in the future, and after a cycle or two governments ‘learn’ partly because they have evidence of the consequences after bankruptcy and no evidence prior to bankruptcy – just as we now have evidence of immigration, diversity, monetary policy, and democracy – evidence of failure seems to be necessary to prevent repetition of human hubris.

    The state as a monopoly on violence is evidently false because it was a construct of the westphalian peace. At present it’s falsified, just as it was prior to the westphalian peace. In other words it was always false.

    The state is a corporation. The institutions organize the use of assets. The owners of that corporation consist of a small number of people willing to use sufficient violence to prevent alternative organizations of institutions and assets. The people who govern may or may not constitute sufficient violence to do so.

    Usually they don’t. In china they do. In russia they do. Because the fear of chaos in those countries is the opposite of the love of opportunity in NE European civilizations. – something the rest of the world cannot comprehend – because they never developed trust or commons … as we did.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-23 12:07:00 UTC

  • If we restore strict construction, universal standing in matters of the commons

    If we restore strict construction, universal standing in matters of the commons we will produce class actions in court that make irreciprocal political sector actors pay, and further constrain corporations of scale. Loser pays will prevent abuses. etc. …

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-22 21:00:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253066090877521925

    Reply addressees: @judicialist

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253065501489672193

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @judicialist The problem arose during the industrial revolution when our right to defend the commons in court(our ‘standing’) was revoked by the state – we were disintermediated from defense of the commons.This created opportunity for political corruption in our otherwise adaptive common law.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1253065501489672193

  • The problem arose during the industrial revolution when our right to defend the

    The problem arose during the industrial revolution when our right to defend the commons in court(our ‘standing’) was revoked by the state – we were disintermediated from defense of the commons.This created opportunity for political corruption in our otherwise adaptive common law.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-22 20:57:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253065501489672193

    Reply addressees: @judicialist

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253065089776787459

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @judicialist Well, innovation in the division of knowledge labor, production and distribution creates opportunity for innovation in free riding, fraud, rent seeking, and corruption – so we have to produce a market and incentives to suppress these ir-reciprocities. Endless Competition via +/-.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1253065089776787459

  • 1) It limits the ability of the state to perform it’s primary function of insure

    1) It limits the ability of the state to perform it’s primary function of insurer of last resort.
    2) Is subjects the people to economic competition that they cannot recover from.
    3) It provides the financial sector with unearned income by forcing the people to borrow from them.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-22 18:54:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253034387320590348

    Reply addressees: @judicialist

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253034039637880832

  • How does forcing the government to pay you interest in order to produce commons,

    How does forcing the government to pay you interest in order to produce commons, instead of borrowing against the future productivity of the population, not consist of rent seeking?

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-22 18:22:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253026418470146048

    Reply addressees: @judicialist

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253025805166358530

  • THE PROPERTARIAN COMMUNITY HAS BECOME ITS OWN COMMONS by JWarren Prescott The pr

    THE PROPERTARIAN COMMUNITY HAS BECOME ITS OWN COMMONS

    by JWarren Prescott

    The propertarian circle is a eclectic collection of great people who share a common interest in preserving the elements of civilization that precisely maintain that civilization. Namely, western civilization.

    The propertarian community has become its own commons that is revered by all – even if they either don’t fully understand all the elements, logic or constructs or even if they might disagree – it is still respected. This is our commons – some are hard at work plowing new areas for our commons and some are happy basking in the grass for the time being. It doesn’t matter, at some point, all of us will be needed to defend it – not just this intellectual commons, but the very civilization in which we talk about saving.

    So if you have come to the commons to find relief from the soul-destroying, lying pilpul-laden post-modernist hellscape, rest up and find the ongoing conversation restorative. If you are already on the frontlines of the battlefield, you will find allies here, and if you are the curious intellectual, it will be the most stimulating as your core premises are challenged and exercised in both pleasurable and uncomfortable ways.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-22 12:40:00 UTC

  • A COMPETITION FOR CONTROL AND CONSUMPTION OF THE COMMONS – SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION b

    A COMPETITION FOR CONTROL AND CONSUMPTION OF THE COMMONS – SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION

    by Bill Joslin

    —“…the minute you give up on your other classes, you give up on the commons.”– CurtD

    As soon as social variation gives way to social diversity – regardless of where those dividing line are carved – social stratification becomes competition over the commons. Not so much that we given up on the commons, but rather the point at which commons are no longer viewed as “shared common property”, – but rather viewed as shared private property. Politics becomes a competition for control and consumption of the commons.

    I think there’s a subtler understanding to property en toto that gets overlooked.

    We intuit that we defend property by the investment (born cost, contribution) into a property that we’ll bear additional costs to maintain control/access.

    There’s a flip side to this condition. We invest also because we rely upon that property. i.e. lower middle classes rely upon commons for survival – and this reliance forms part of their interest in the property. This reliance then motivates investment.

    How is this relevant? One can invest into a property, but never use our rely upon it. The upper classes don’t need most commons to survive, but form the substantial contribution to it. Where as the lower and middle classes rely heavily upon the commons and thus will seek to invest and defend it.

    This creates a convergence of different types of incentives between different stakeholder concerns. The interplay between them results in robust care for the commons.

    Without a militia, those whose stake in the commons revolves around reliance, have no means to protect their interests, and thus this robust care for the commons declines.

    And the ecology of stakeholder interest devolve into seeking control or, whinging about control, from one stakeholder group to another: competition for control over the commons.

    Thus killing a community, society or civilization is rather simple: Social construction by creating a competing (divergent) frame.

    In doing so the separate factions of the society will consume each other in the competition for consumption and or control over their shared properties.

    Divide and let them conquer themselves for you

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-21 12:43:00 UTC

  • So if Jewish war on western-sensemaking, our realism, naturalism, operationalism

    So if Jewish war on western-sensemaking, our realism, naturalism, operationalism, sovereignty, reciprocity, testimony, commons, and eugenics, is a continuation of their ancient world rebellion against the masculine empires, and an involuntary rebellion against evolution-eugenics.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-21 11:59:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1252567628062826496

    Reply addressees: @TruthRespecter @JonHaidt @berggruenInst

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1252567055997468672

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @TruthRespecter @JonHaidt @berggruenInst Female Social Construction to Manage behavioral growth of children, using her seduction > The Jewish group strategy (undermining host peoples, while riding on their commons) > The Anti Evolutionary (domestication) Canon: Freud, Boas, Marx, Adorno-Fromm, Derrida, Trotsky-Kristol.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1252567055997468672

  • Female Social Construction to Manage behavioral growth of children, using her se

    Female Social Construction to Manage behavioral growth of children, using her seduction > The Jewish group strategy (undermining host peoples, while riding on their commons) > The Anti Evolutionary (domestication) Canon: Freud, Boas, Marx, Adorno-Fromm, Derrida, Trotsky-Kristol.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-21 11:57:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1252567055997468672

    Reply addressees: @TruthRespecter @JonHaidt @berggruenInst

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1252566209201156101

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @TruthRespecter @JonHaidt @berggruenInst Social construction yes. Social construction requires a false promise. The only viable false promises that scale are those that violate physical, natural, and evolutionary laws. Violating those laws baits the victims into hazard.

    Female social construction > Judaism > The Left.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1252566209201156101

  • The problem is getting the rest of the world into middle class manners, ethics,

    The problem is getting the rest of the world into middle class manners, ethics, morals, and values. We can only do that if the self, the family, and the commons are equally valued and defended regardless of class. The minute you give up on your other classes you give up on the commons. The same is true for heterogeneity. Create conflict between groups and we give up on the commons, and devolve to self and family.

    —“There are more books published in Spanish in any one year than there have been in the entire history of Arab publishing.”—

    Feminine, present, experiential civilization.

    There are very few arab intellectuals. Those few, say some version of the same thing “we live in our emotions not in our reason, we can read but we are still illiterate, we have freedom but no discipline.”

    This is the problem with ritual-cultures. it’s extremely successful at solving the problem of social insecurity (mindfulness). It only solves part of the problem and amplifies the rest by making agency impossible.

    Same for fundamentalism in christianity: it makes wonderful citizens and families – perhaps the best in the world – and prepares people for commercial society – but at the cost of needing a parental martial empirical aristocracy to defend, rule, and govern them.

    One of the reasons the french lost to the english was the combination of their effeminacy and excessive faith – the same excessive effeminacy and faith that they demonstrate today. (although you have to read letters from the period prior to agincourt to see how faith-insane they were.)

    The hindus remain caste-and-family, on the effeminate side, and socially lazy and irresponsible – so they are wonderful people lacking the hostility of the muslims, but can’t end familial corruption endemic in the society, nor do they have the military like the west and china to enforce policy so that a non-corrupt bureaucracy can evolve.

    I don’t complain about the chinese and koreans other than their women are as spoiled and hyper-consumptive and civilization destroying as western women and their males are further gone than western men because they were further gone in the first place.

    The upper middle and lower upper classes around the world are all the same. This is because we are not lacking in competitive ability, or dependent upon equally ignorant or uncompetitive peers for information and opinion.

    Without the militia men WILL NOT OWN THE COMMONS.

    From there, everything falls apart.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-21 07:40:00 UTC