Curt Doolittle

Theme: Cooperation

  • Long History of The Study of Dual Ethics

    We take for granted our monological ethics. But while MOST groups practice CAST ethics, almost no other people practiced MONOLOGICAL ethics. The difference being that progressive restitution required (higher classes required higher restitution). But the law was the same for all. This is what we mean by “Rule of Law”: no discretion, same law for all, no law applied in retrospect. —“…the Jews must be mentioned. Their conduct is regulated by a ‘dual code‘; their conduct towards their fellows is based on one code (amity), and that towards all who are outside their circle on another (enmity). The use of the dual code, as we have seen, is a mark of an evolving race. My deliberate opinion is that racial characters are more strongly developed in the Jews than in any other race.”— —Sir Arthur Keith, A New Theory of Human Evolution, (London: Watts & Co., 1948), 390.

  • “Do lions and hyenas think of love, markets or hate? no. but that does not stop

    —“Do lions and hyenas think of love, markets or hate? no. but that does not stop them from competing for and defending territory.”— Neil A. Bucklew

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-06 19:38:00 UTC

  • ORGANIC EUGENICS NOT INDUSTRIAL You cannot force evolution on a people. you can

    ORGANIC EUGENICS NOT INDUSTRIAL

    You cannot force evolution on a people. you can merely build it into the incentives, and let it occur naturally. This requires only the gradual limiting of the underclass rates of reproduction until the middle class is large enough to carry the body of the polity, and the upper classes able to lead the polity without reliance upon corruption. We must GROW our people. They are not machines.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-06 12:21:00 UTC

  • LONG HISTORY OF THE STUDY OF DUAL ETHICS We take for granted our monological eth

    LONG HISTORY OF THE STUDY OF DUAL ETHICS

    We take for granted our monological ethics. But while MOST groups practice CAST ethics, almost no other people practiced MONOLOGICAL ethics. The difference being that progressive restitution required (higher classes required higher restitution). But the law was the same for all. This is what we mean by “Rule of Law”: no discretion, same law for all, no law applied in retrospect.

    —“…the Jews must be mentioned. Their conduct is regulated by a ‘dual code‘; their conduct towards their fellows is based on one code (amity), and that towards all who are outside their circle on another (enmity). The use of the dual code, as we have seen, is a mark of an evolving race. My deliberate opinion is that racial characters are more strongly developed in the Jews than in any other race.”—

    —Sir Arthur Keith, A New Theory of Human Evolution, (London: Watts & Co., 1948), 390.

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

  • My wife Allora and I were together almost twenty years, during which we had two

    My wife Allora and I were together almost twenty years, during which we had two fights. And she said that if she’d understood what I was saying one of them wouldn’t have happened. And I am sure the other was my fault for the same reason. I hate fights.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-04 13:07:00 UTC

  • VOLUNTARY DISASSOCIATION – TRADE VS MARKET Voluntary Association and Disassociat

    VOLUNTARY DISASSOCIATION – TRADE VS MARKET

    Voluntary Association and Disassociation Must be Restored (its loss was a product of the unconstitutional 14th amendment).

    It is one thing to deny human beings commodities, water, and air. It is another thing altogether to force someone to engage in craftsmanship of any kind whatsoever.

    Ergo, if you package flour for distribution that’s one thing. If you make custom cakes thats something else.

    That is what separates a MARKET (production), from TRADE (craft).

    Unfortunately that is not (currently) recognized in the constitution, because it’s ASSUMED by the authors of it. The idea that we would be compelled to serve people against our will would have been an anathema.

    Secondly, it is one thing to fail to serve someone needs regardless of their biology, and another to choose not to serve someone for their beliefs, preferences, or choices, or behaviors due to that biology.

    Gasoline is a commodity produced for a market.

    Wheat is a commodity produced for a market.

    A box of corn flakes is a commodity produced for a market.

    All Markets are Produced by Commons.

    Cooking you a meal is a personal service. (trade)

    Making you a cake is a personal service (trade).

    Driving you from point a to point b is a service (trade).

    Direct and personal, vs indirect and impersonal.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-04 12:45:00 UTC

  • OUR INEQUALITY REQUIRES JURIDICAL EQUALITY We are unequal by every possible meas

    OUR INEQUALITY REQUIRES JURIDICAL EQUALITY

    We are unequal by every possible measure, but to preserve the incentive to, and benefits of, cooperation, the law must adjudicate our interests equally. For this reason the law must always and everywhere treat our interests as equal and our abilities and value to one another unequally.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-03 10:44:00 UTC

  • 7) So in this sense my approach is broader than Coase, and where Coase incorrect

    7) So in this sense my approach is broader than Coase, and where Coase incorrectly suggests cooperation reinforces seeking equilibrium, instead cooperation seeks convergence, competition seeks efficiency, and opportunity seeks disequilibrium, with shocks as discovery of limits.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-01 16:17:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1002585052159627264

    Reply addressees: @MartialSociety

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1002367912512970752

    IN REPLY TO:

    @MartialSociety

    @curtdoolittle I searched your site & didn’t find anything related. Most discussions of externalities are at least tangentially prefaced with a description of the Coase theorem & its limitations. I’m interested in how you (or another propertarian) would approach the problem.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1002367912512970752

  • 6) Competition at every increasing scales causes convergence on indifference in

    6) Competition at every increasing scales causes convergence on indifference in all ‘grammars’ (Methods) of cooperation from the conceptual to the verbal, to the material. (offset by war, group strateg etc.)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-01 16:16:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1002584625296891906

    Reply addressees: @MartialSociety

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1002367912512970752

    IN REPLY TO:

    @MartialSociety

    @curtdoolittle I searched your site & didn’t find anything related. Most discussions of externalities are at least tangentially prefaced with a description of the Coase theorem & its limitations. I’m interested in how you (or another propertarian) would approach the problem.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1002367912512970752

  • 4) So Coase expresses at the inter-polity scale, what I express at the intra-pol

    4) So Coase expresses at the inter-polity scale, what I express at the intra-polity scale. But the phenomenon is the same: increasing the radius of cooperation will suppress rents(assymetries) through competition, whether internal or external. ….

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-01 16:13:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1002584003608809472

    Reply addressees: @MartialSociety

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1002367912512970752

    IN REPLY TO:

    @MartialSociety

    @curtdoolittle I searched your site & didn’t find anything related. Most discussions of externalities are at least tangentially prefaced with a description of the Coase theorem & its limitations. I’m interested in how you (or another propertarian) would approach the problem.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1002367912512970752