Curt Doolittle

Theme: Cooperation

  • THE SCOPE OF MY WORK ON PROPERTARIANISM: Propertarianism’s Natural Law includes:

    THE SCOPE OF MY WORK ON PROPERTARIANISM:

    Propertarianism’s Natural Law includes: Transcendence, Agency, Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Decidability, Markets for Association, Cooperation, Production, reproduction, production of commons, production of polities, production of group evolutionary strategies at all levels.

    Let’s look at that again as a hierarchy:

    1) Transcendence (of man to human then to gods.)

    2) Agency, (by the production of agency)

    3) Sovereignty, (by the demand for sovereignty)

    4) Reciprocity, (limiting us to reciprocity)

    5) Decidability, (providing us with decidability)

    6) Markets: (limiting us to voluntary markets)

    … Association,

    … Cooperation,

    … Production,

    … Reproduction,

    … Production of commons,

    … Production of polities,

    … Production of group evolutionary strategies at all levels. (and in the end producing eugenic evolution without intentional design)

    7) Property (property in toto. The method of commensurability of changes in state via reciprocity.)

    8) The Logic, Grammar and Syntax of Cooperation.

    9) Testimonialism: the means of warranty of due diligence against error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism and deceit.

    Western civilization has disproportionately raised mankind out of superstition, ignorance, poverty, tyranny, and disease in short order in both the ancient and modern eras. We achieved this through the use of soverignty, deflationary truth and deflationary organizations, producing competition as the means of testing all possible ideas, information, services, and products. Because we rely on constantly changing markets we can respond to changes in markets, and our institutions must respond to changes in markets for violence, gossip, and remuneration. And we are able to do this because for most of our history we have incrementally expanded natural law – markets into all walks of life, ensuring that we can adapt faster than other civilizations to change – even if that means we have generation long wars in order to change between eras: but at least we change while others stagnate.

    So while some of us desire the experiential consumption made possible by the west’s civilization, and others desire ‘not to be defeated by evil’, others desire sovereignty, others desire clan, tribal, national, or racial persistence – others desire the transcendence of man. And all of these desires can be fulfilled under natural law as long as we are willing to prevent those who are unwilling and unable to participate in that effort from reproduction. The opposite view is simply the opposite desires across the same spectrum: current consumption, and persistence of one’s genes despite the evidence that they force costs on mankind for eternity.

    Natural Law completes the sciences up to sentience. We cannot solve sentience with the information currently at our disposal, although it appears that it is on the horizon of our abilities.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-21 12:37:00 UTC

  • Reciprocity just makes it preferable to cooperate rather than engage in predation.

    t’s not that Reciprocity is good for all of us – even though it is. It’s just that it’s the only condition under which it’s not more profitable, preferable, logical to kill you, take you things, and enslave your women and children. Personally, I kind of prefer the whole kill, take, and enslave thing, but for the good of the women among my kin, I realize they will be happier in a complex, prosperous, cooperative society.

  • Reciprocity just makes it preferable to cooperate rather than engage in predation.

    t’s not that Reciprocity is good for all of us – even though it is. It’s just that it’s the only condition under which it’s not more profitable, preferable, logical to kill you, take you things, and enslave your women and children. Personally, I kind of prefer the whole kill, take, and enslave thing, but for the good of the women among my kin, I realize they will be happier in a complex, prosperous, cooperative society.

  • Because I Don’t Trust You

    THINK ABOUT THIS SERIES OF POLITICAL QUESTIONS 1) Why don’t I fight with you? 2) Why don’t I steal from you? 3) Why don’t I trade with you? 4) Why don’t I finance with you? 5) Why don’t I (exchange-or-create norms) with you? 6) Why don’t I create laws (government) with you? 7) Why don’t I cohabitate with you? 8) Why don’t I reproduce with you?

  • Because I Don’t Trust You

    THINK ABOUT THIS SERIES OF POLITICAL QUESTIONS 1) Why don’t I fight with you? 2) Why don’t I steal from you? 3) Why don’t I trade with you? 4) Why don’t I finance with you? 5) Why don’t I (exchange-or-create norms) with you? 6) Why don’t I create laws (government) with you? 7) Why don’t I cohabitate with you? 8) Why don’t I reproduce with you?

  • Racialism?

    —“CURT: DO YOU BELIEVE IN/SUPPORT RACIALISM?— (choice quotes here) (I view this, and all racial questions, as stupid but here is my answer.) I don’t know what that means. I advocate truth is more competitively advantageous than falsehood. In the case of race, people everywhere at all times demonstrate kin selection (except at the margins). In polities, under monarchy, this was not a problem, since one group possessed political power and the state could not be used as a proxy for warfare. Democracy and diversity restored levantine and semitic tribal conflict to european high trust homogenous societies. In creating a high trust competitive polity with a high standard of living, it appears that constructing a kinship order rather than a corporate order, is superior during the majority of history. It appears that corporate orders are means of merely extracting accumulated capital from homogenous peoples, and the emergence of a corporate order is evidence of predation or parasitism within or from without. So as far as I know, it is not possible to survive a test of full accounting under a corporate order, and it is only possible to survive at test of full accounting under a kinship order. Now as far as differences between the Races, Subraces, Tribes, Clans, Families. And As to differences between the Classes, and between the Generations, and as to differences between the Genders, all of these differences exist, and they exist because we demonstrate both attempts to cooperate and attempts to complete or engage in conflict. at every level from gender, to generation, to class, to tribe, to subrace, to race. And while at small interpersonal scale we can reconcile these differnces in the absence of political orders, when we act as groups in family, clan, tribe, nation, subrace, and race, in norms, laws, institutions, traditions, and myths, we ally with our kin – our group. Those who do not (Antifa) are those who are outcast by their own group, and seek other groups. So what we see is two axis of organization and resistance: the classes vs the races, and corporatism vs tribalism. And we see the middle classes and working and laboring classes seeking homogeneity, the underclasses seeking whatever is to their advantage at the time, and the upper classes siezing power by whichever faction is able to exert the most pressure in the political model at hand. The disenfranchised seek the opposite of whatever order is in play.

  • Racialism?

    —“CURT: DO YOU BELIEVE IN/SUPPORT RACIALISM?— (choice quotes here) (I view this, and all racial questions, as stupid but here is my answer.) I don’t know what that means. I advocate truth is more competitively advantageous than falsehood. In the case of race, people everywhere at all times demonstrate kin selection (except at the margins). In polities, under monarchy, this was not a problem, since one group possessed political power and the state could not be used as a proxy for warfare. Democracy and diversity restored levantine and semitic tribal conflict to european high trust homogenous societies. In creating a high trust competitive polity with a high standard of living, it appears that constructing a kinship order rather than a corporate order, is superior during the majority of history. It appears that corporate orders are means of merely extracting accumulated capital from homogenous peoples, and the emergence of a corporate order is evidence of predation or parasitism within or from without. So as far as I know, it is not possible to survive a test of full accounting under a corporate order, and it is only possible to survive at test of full accounting under a kinship order. Now as far as differences between the Races, Subraces, Tribes, Clans, Families. And As to differences between the Classes, and between the Generations, and as to differences between the Genders, all of these differences exist, and they exist because we demonstrate both attempts to cooperate and attempts to complete or engage in conflict. at every level from gender, to generation, to class, to tribe, to subrace, to race. And while at small interpersonal scale we can reconcile these differnces in the absence of political orders, when we act as groups in family, clan, tribe, nation, subrace, and race, in norms, laws, institutions, traditions, and myths, we ally with our kin – our group. Those who do not (Antifa) are those who are outcast by their own group, and seek other groups. So what we see is two axis of organization and resistance: the classes vs the races, and corporatism vs tribalism. And we see the middle classes and working and laboring classes seeking homogeneity, the underclasses seeking whatever is to their advantage at the time, and the upper classes siezing power by whichever faction is able to exert the most pressure in the political model at hand. The disenfranchised seek the opposite of whatever order is in play.

  • 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?

  • 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?

  • It’s not that Reciprocity is good for all of us – even though it is. It’s just t

    It’s not that Reciprocity is good for all of us – even though it is. It’s just that it’s the only condition under which it’s not more profitable, preferable, logical to kill you, take you things, and enslave your women and children.

    Personally, I kind of prefer the whole kill, take, and enslave thing, but for the good of the women among my kin, I realize they will be happier in a complex, prosperous, cooperative society.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-17 07:16:00 UTC