Theme: Constitutional Order

  • ONLY CAN WE HAVE A PERFECT GOVERNMENT – WE HAD IT. We had the perfect government

    https://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-to-have-a-perfect-government-and-make-everyone-happy/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=75598c1cNOT ONLY CAN WE HAVE A PERFECT GOVERNMENT – WE HAD IT.

    We had the perfect government: Monarchy, Multi-House Parliaments with one house per class, and the Common Law under Rule of law, under Nationalism (tribalism).

    The Monarch had only power of veto. The houses functioned as a market for trading commons between the different socio-economic classes. And an homogenous polity can act redistributively because everyone is a near relation (kin) and not a competitor.

    This is why the Nordic countries are as they are: small homogenous protestant nations that have practiced eugenic reproduction for more than a thousand years, and perhaps as long as 3500 years. They bypassed the empire phase during colonialism and so they did not develop state corporatism, and therefore the ability to commercially and militarily profit from heterogeneous polities.

    Nordic countries then produce the ideal because they are small homogenous eugenic nation states with common interests, little diversity, and lack the population, territorial, economic, and military scale needed to engage in conquest by immigration, territorial expansion, economic conquest, or military conquest.

    The dirty secret of the Human Genome project is that our tribes and races are vastly unequal, largely because some of our tribes and races have been better at suppressing the rates of reproduction of the lower classes (eugenics). And the reason is that the northern climates do not allow marginal individuals to survive under agrarianism. And that most northern peoples aggressively used hanging, delayed marriage and childbirth, regulated access to farmland to people of good character, and effectively engaged in active upward redistribution of reproduction.

    If you want a Denmark you need to fill it with Danes. The northeast of Europe developed “Bipartite Manorialism” earliest, and the church’s ban on cousin marriage the earliest, and that is one of the significant reasons for northern europe’s advantage.

    Why? Because while you need to reach the Pareto optimum of both 80% of resources in the control of your top 20%, AND your top 20% must have IQ’s above 106, this cannot be done by improving the intelligence of your best, but by by reducing the numbers of your worst, until your best are the top 20% of your population.

    This is counter-intuitive. But the point being that your lower classes are a tragic burden on your people.

    This is the dirty secret of the west’s success: we hung 1% of the population every year. Over twenty years, this has a profound effect. Over five hundred years it will raise a people out of ignorance and poverty.

    How can we do the same without hanging our troublemakers? We can do it by preventing their births.

    Otherwise there is no way to get to Denmark. And instead, under normative dysgenia we will decline just as the entire Arab world has declined under islam: through dysgenic reproduction, that depresses the reproduction of our best, and increases the reproduction of our worst.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Science and Uncomfortable Truth

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-22 07:32:00 UTC

  • Is It Possible To Have A Perfect Government And Make Everyone Happy?

    We had the perfect government: Monarchy, Multi-House Parliaments with one house per class, and the Common Law under Rule of law, under Nationalism (tribalism).

    The Monarch had only power of veto. The houses functioned as a market for trading commons between the different socio-economic classes. And an homogenous polity can act redistributively because everyone is a near relation (kin) and not a competitor.

    This is why the Nordic countries are as they are: small homogenous protestant nations that have practiced eugenic reproduction for more than a thousand years, and perhaps as long as 3500 years. They bypassed the empire phase during colonialism and so they did not develop state corporatism, and therefore the ability to commercially and militarily profit from heterogeneous polities.

    Nordic countries then produce the ideal because they are small homogenous eugenic nation states with common interests, little diversity, and lack the population, territorial, economic, and military scale needed to engage in conquest by immigration, territorial expansion, economic conquest, or military conquest.

    The dirty secret of the Human Genome project is that our tribes and races are vastly unequal, largely because some of our tribes and races have been better at suppressing the rates of reproduction of the lower classes (eugenics). And the reason is that the northern climates do not allow marginal individuals to survive under agrarianism. And that most northern peoples aggressively used hanging, delayed marriage and childbirth, regulated access to farmland to people of good character, and effectively engaged in active upward redistribution of reproduction.

    If you want a Denmark you need to fill it with Danes. The northeast of Europe developed “Bipartite Manorialism” earliest, and the church’s ban on cousin marriage the earliest, and that is one of the significant reasons for northern europe’s advantage.

    Why? Because while you need to reach the Pareto optimum of both 80% of resources in the control of your top 20%, AND your top 20% must have IQ’s above 106, this cannot be done by improving the intelligence of your best, but by by reducing the numbers of your worst, until your best are the top 20% of your population.

    This is counter-intuitive. But the point being that your lower classes are a tragic burden on your people.

    This is the dirty secret of the west’s success: we hung 1% of the population every year. Over twenty years, this has a profound effect. Over five hundred years it will raise a people out of ignorance and poverty.

    How can we do the same without hanging our troublemakers? We can do it by preventing their births.

    Otherwise there is no way to get to Denmark. And instead, under normative dysgenia we will decline just as the entire Arab world has declined under islam: through dysgenic reproduction, that depresses the reproduction of our best, and increases the reproduction of our worst.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Philosophy of Science and Uncomfortable Truth
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

    https://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-to-have-a-perfect-government-and-make-everyone-happy

  • Is It Possible To Have A Perfect Government And Make Everyone Happy?

    We had the perfect government: Monarchy, Multi-House Parliaments with one house per class, and the Common Law under Rule of law, under Nationalism (tribalism).

    The Monarch had only power of veto. The houses functioned as a market for trading commons between the different socio-economic classes. And an homogenous polity can act redistributively because everyone is a near relation (kin) and not a competitor.

    This is why the Nordic countries are as they are: small homogenous protestant nations that have practiced eugenic reproduction for more than a thousand years, and perhaps as long as 3500 years. They bypassed the empire phase during colonialism and so they did not develop state corporatism, and therefore the ability to commercially and militarily profit from heterogeneous polities.

    Nordic countries then produce the ideal because they are small homogenous eugenic nation states with common interests, little diversity, and lack the population, territorial, economic, and military scale needed to engage in conquest by immigration, territorial expansion, economic conquest, or military conquest.

    The dirty secret of the Human Genome project is that our tribes and races are vastly unequal, largely because some of our tribes and races have been better at suppressing the rates of reproduction of the lower classes (eugenics). And the reason is that the northern climates do not allow marginal individuals to survive under agrarianism. And that most northern peoples aggressively used hanging, delayed marriage and childbirth, regulated access to farmland to people of good character, and effectively engaged in active upward redistribution of reproduction.

    If you want a Denmark you need to fill it with Danes. The northeast of Europe developed “Bipartite Manorialism” earliest, and the church’s ban on cousin marriage the earliest, and that is one of the significant reasons for northern europe’s advantage.

    Why? Because while you need to reach the Pareto optimum of both 80% of resources in the control of your top 20%, AND your top 20% must have IQ’s above 106, this cannot be done by improving the intelligence of your best, but by by reducing the numbers of your worst, until your best are the top 20% of your population.

    This is counter-intuitive. But the point being that your lower classes are a tragic burden on your people.

    This is the dirty secret of the west’s success: we hung 1% of the population every year. Over twenty years, this has a profound effect. Over five hundred years it will raise a people out of ignorance and poverty.

    How can we do the same without hanging our troublemakers? We can do it by preventing their births.

    Otherwise there is no way to get to Denmark. And instead, under normative dysgenia we will decline just as the entire Arab world has declined under islam: through dysgenic reproduction, that depresses the reproduction of our best, and increases the reproduction of our worst.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Philosophy of Science and Uncomfortable Truth
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

    https://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-to-have-a-perfect-government-and-make-everyone-happy

  • you falling into a conflation of terms? Aren’t science and the common law the we

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/yes-lets-call-philosophy-what-it-really-is/article/2002458Aren’t you falling into a conflation of terms?

    Aren’t science and the common law the west’s system of thought? Isn’t the west’s philosophy empiricism?

    Isn’t analytic philosophy a failed attempt at using the logic of sets, rather than operations (science)?

    Aren’t the various forms of rational philosophy attempts at excuse-making? Deceit? Obscurantism?

    Isn’t literary philosophy merely an attempt at forming a secular religion? And where it isn’t, it’s an appeal for political power by middle and lower middle classes?

    Isn’t religious philosophy excuse making for authoritarianism?

    Isn’t mysticism excuse making for ignorance and our uncontrollable pre-rational fears?

    It’s not that we should be teaching other philosophies.

    Its that we should stop teaching all the bad ones – including ours.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-19 16:10:00 UTC

  • Working on Law this week. Mostly origins and evolution of common law. The depend

    Working on Law this week. Mostly origins and evolution of common law. The dependence upon Precedent because of the inability to determine first causes (involuntary transfer of property in toto) and to rely on strict construction in the construction of arguments.

    My next issue is what we call risk (uncertainty) in testimony.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-19 14:50:00 UTC

  • Strangely enough, while the USA started out with Rule of Law, and the Rights of

    Strangely enough, while the USA started out with Rule of Law, and the Rights of Englishmen, and developed myths instead. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-19 12:44:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/733277166427901952

    Reply addressees: @CatoInstitute

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/733271815481610240


    IN REPLY TO:

    @CatoInstitute

    Many countries have a founding myth that inspires and sustains a national culture. https://t.co/a0zU9P4tFI

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/733271815481610240

  • Many countries have a founding myth that inspires and sustains a national cultur

    —Many countries have a founding myth that inspires and sustains a national culture.—@CatoInstitute

    Strangely enough, while the USA started out with Rule of Law, and the Rights of Englishmen, and developed myths instead. 😉

    We did it backwards I guess. 🙂


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-19 08:45:00 UTC

  • Authoritarianism = Discretion. We don’t need it. We just need Rule of Law prohib

    Authoritarianism = Discretion. We don’t need it. We just need Rule of Law prohibiting Deceit and Parasitism and that’s enough.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-18 14:39:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/732943798511210497

    Reply addressees: @Wasian_NRx

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/732938517261758466


    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/732938517261758466

  • Well it’s not like the SCOTUS has been a defender of Truthful Speech. The opposi

    Well it’s not like the SCOTUS has been a defender of Truthful Speech. The opposite: make excuses.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-15 20:09:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/731939562235297792

    Reply addressees: @Anti_Gnostic @realDonaldTrump @nytimes

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/731938760666009600


    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/731938760666009600

  • human rights a cultural thing that simply does not apply to cultures that do not

    https://t.co/btpPWny4F2—“Are human rights a cultural thing that simply does not apply to cultures that do not support them? Why or why not?”— https://t.co/btpPWny4F2

    HUMAN RIGHTS ARE LOGICALLY AND EMPIRICALLY NECESSARY FOR VOLUNTARY COOPERATION. YET VOLUNTARY COOPERATION IS NOT POSSIBLE IN ALL CULTURES.

    (trigger warning: uncomfortable truths)

    (a) We tend to conflate consumer capitalism and democracy but they have nothing to do with one another other than that they require extraordinary restraint in the behavior of the population. So when we say consumer capitalism we mean ‘the voluntary organization of production distribution trade and consumption’, and when we say socialism we mean ‘the involuntary organization of production distribution trade and consumption’. But we rarely say how difficult it is to produce a voluntary organization of any kind. A voluntary order requires individual property rights, money, prices, and a judicial system they can trust to adjudicate contracts in a consistent manner. Yet it is this judicial system (uncorrupted) that is so difficult for groups to evolve.

    (b) We tend to confuse human (property) rights with political rights. They have nothing to do with one another. There is absolutely no reason that an absolute monarch, denying political power to any and all, while applying universal rule of law and universal standing, under natural law (human rights), could not guaranty those rights (except for the last few which were required by the communists and are impossible).

    (c) There is no reason to expect that free speech, which includes false speech, or malicious speech, must be a human right – in fact, just the opposite: we can expect free true and truthful speech as a necessary human right, but not free speech without the constraint of truthfulness.

    (d) The question whether very primitive people can make use of human rights without significant forcible, financial, and moral coercion is still open. Certainly in countries like india (little trust), Russia (low trust), countries like china (no-trust), and most of islam (tribal antagonism), then these rights might be almost impossible to preserve while at the same time preserving order.

    (e) Human rights are a luxury good produced over generations by the incremental suppression of criminal, unethical, immoral, corrupt, religious, financial, and military behavior, using rule of law, while at the same time suppressing the reproduction of the lower classes such that nearly all remaining people in the population are of the genetic middle class (in IQ/impulsivity/aggression) through reproductive constraint.

    (f) Islam (the Cairo Declaration) cannot tolerate the western human rights for the simple reason that Islam requires conformity to both the Pillars and Sharia, and as such men must be given respect even if not earned, treated as equals even if they are not, and systemically prevented from enlightenment. This difference between western eugenic and islamic dysgenic law has produced the significant difference in the behaviors of the civilizations, as well as the median IQ, the opposite levels of literacy, the opposite distributions of impulsivity and emotional expression, and the opposite levels of achievement in all fields. Ergo. Be careful what you consider ‘good’, and a ‘right’ for it may not produce a good, and may not be so much a right, but a permanent curse.

    (g) China cannot also tolerate it (and perhaps should not) because the “Mythos” of the Chinese cannot tolerate scrutiny any more than the mythos of the Russians can tolerate scrutiny. China has a very difficult problem preserving the empire and perhaps should not try so hard, but given that she wants to reclaim her ‘status’ in the world (perhaps impossible, perhaps not), and given that the factionalization and civil wars in china have been a problem for so many centuries, and that the consequence for a power struggle would be so great for at least the Han, then it is somewhat understandable. The primary problem for the Chinese remains the inability to tolerate the truth in public discourse, in order to preserve ‘harmony’, while at the same time suppressing any desire for democracy (which has proven a unique western cultural luxury and not in fact a political good).

    My recommendation for both China and Russia has been to just outlaw democracy and communism both as children of the same evil western minds, and focus instead on the empirical improvement of people’s lives, and the empirical reduction of corruption, and to ask the population and reporters to assist in the suppression of corruption, deceit, fraud, and crime.

    But in countries where people either save face to lie (asia) or lie for tactical advantage (russia), it’s nearly impossible to fight corruption because it is the people themselves that are the problem. A government is just people.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-15 14:51:00 UTC