Curt Doolittle

Theme: Constitutional Order

  • Anarcho – *(Rothbard, Hoppe) = at best, discretionary poly-logical, market law.

    Anarcho – *(Rothbard, Hoppe) = at best, discretionary poly-logical, market law. And therefore is limited to defense of intersubjectively verifiable property; since law can only form as such at the minimum tolerable scope of application.

    Just as the church majority parasites then, the state parasites, left parasites, and immigrant parasites, in group feminists, and in group libertines today and the abrahamists in all their forms, more people always want to preserve their means of cheating (parasitism) than want to suppress them – despite all evidence that the forgone parasitisms produce multiples of returns far beyond their individual abilities to produce such returns.

    This is why Anarchism cannot survive – because as the complexity of cooperation increases to produce higher returns, individuals and groups must exit in order to find insurers (governments) that permit the more productive, higher risk, means of production.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-23 10:54:00 UTC

  • Choices vs Necessities

    Tinker Tailor Soldier Sailor Rich-Man, Poor-Man, Beggar-Man, Thief, Doctor, Lawyer, Merchant, Chief. Those are choices. Every man A Warrior, a Sheriff, a Judge, and his own Legislator Those are not choices, but necessities.

  • Choices vs Necessities

    Tinker Tailor Soldier Sailor Rich-Man, Poor-Man, Beggar-Man, Thief, Doctor, Lawyer, Merchant, Chief. Those are choices. Every man A Warrior, a Sheriff, a Judge, and his own Legislator Those are not choices, but necessities.

  • We Are Irrelevant Under the Law, Not Equal

    AFAIK, humans cannot be compared as equal by any measure. The law does not consider equality but reciprocity (“exchange of consideration”). We use the term ‘equal under the law’ as a proxy for reciprocity, simply because in the past, different classes could seek privileges of rank (largely differences in restitution). We are in fact always and everywhere unequal, which is why reciprocity solves the problem of our inequality. Better said we are not considered whatsoever by the law, only our property. We have no part in it. As such the law does not treat us equally, it ignores us entirely and considers only the property transferred.

  • We Are Irrelevant Under the Law, Not Equal

    AFAIK, humans cannot be compared as equal by any measure. The law does not consider equality but reciprocity (“exchange of consideration”). We use the term ‘equal under the law’ as a proxy for reciprocity, simply because in the past, different classes could seek privileges of rank (largely differences in restitution). We are in fact always and everywhere unequal, which is why reciprocity solves the problem of our inequality. Better said we are not considered whatsoever by the law, only our property. We have no part in it. As such the law does not treat us equally, it ignores us entirely and considers only the property transferred.

  • A Moral License. A Set of Demands (Constitution). A Plan of Transition. A Means

    A Moral License. A Set of Demands (Constitution). A Plan of Transition. A Means of Revolt. When the time is right, and not until….

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-22 13:51:31 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1010158342810021889

    Reply addressees: @JonasBr58673834

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1010157310747070464

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1010157310747070464

  • THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EUROPEAN LEGAL CODES WHETHER GERMANIC, HELLENIC, OR ROMA

    THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EUROPEAN LEGAL CODES WHETHER GERMANIC, HELLENIC, OR ROMAN DIFFERED IN LITTLE OTHER THAN SCOPE OF COOPERATION.

    (Note that Rik Storey deleted my comment on the site.)

    Good post, although the argument that they were stateless is specious (questionable). The state existed and is referenced throughout the literature. Applications of the law (“laws”) evolve with demand for them, and demand for them is almost entirely the function of production, distribution, and trade. The universality european customary law, which evolved into germanic law, and the european customary law of the Etru, Ital, Hellenes was as similar as were their religions. As the Lotharingian trade routes expanded, creating inter-territorial trade (particularly between northern italy and the rivers of france, germany, and the north-sea/baltic routes), demand for law increased, and the more advanced versions of the mediterranean commercial codes were adopted. They were adopted in large part because they were logically the same.

    The church functioned as a very weak central government and power between the church (50%) of the lands, and the states (manor-holdings) was in constant competition – the church then tended to take credit for that which was produced organically.

    The ancient traditional law of europeans is was of military necessity, natural law ( reciprocity ). The romans discarded hellenic idealism during the romanization of Greece, just as anglos discarded continental idealism in the enlightenment era. Thereby returning it to its anglo saxon > germanic > west indo european origins. The church then re-idealized it. Anglo enlightenment then restored it. The 20th century can largely be seen as a third attempt to make natural law idealized or supernatural. And some of us struggle to restore it.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-22 11:57:00 UTC

  • WE ARE IRRELEVANT UNDER THE LAW, NOT EQUAL AFAIK, humans cannot be compared as e

    WE ARE IRRELEVANT UNDER THE LAW, NOT EQUAL

    AFAIK, humans cannot be compared as equal by any measure. The law does not consider equality but reciprocity (“exchange of consideration”). We use the term ‘equal under the law’ as a proxy for reciprocity, simply because in the past, different classes could seek privileges of rank (largely differences in restitution). We are in fact always and everywhere unequal, which is why reciprocity solves the problem of our inequality. Better said we are not considered whatsoever by the law, only our property. We have no part in it. As such the law does not treat us equally, it ignores us entirely and considers only the property transferred.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-22 09:27:00 UTC

  • CHOICES VS NECESSITIES Tinker Tailor Soldier Sailor Rich-Man, Poor-Man, Beggar-M

    CHOICES VS NECESSITIES

    Tinker Tailor Soldier Sailor

    Rich-Man, Poor-Man, Beggar-Man, Thief,

    Doctor, Lawyer, Merchant, Chief.

    Those are choices.

    Every man A Warrior,

    a Sheriff,

    a Judge,

    and his own Legislator

    Those are not choices, but necessities.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-22 08:39:00 UTC

  • Parrots can speak. That doesn’t mean we give them legal standing, citizenship, and voting rights.

    (humor) I mean, domesticated animals are fine – assuming that you can take over their dominance hierarchy and train them, keep them in a pen, control their reproduction, put them to useful work, and/or eat them. Otherwise their wild animals. you’re just frequently confused that some wild animals can use some form of language. The fact that parrots can do the same doesn’t mean we give them legal standing, citizenship, and voting rights.