Curt Doolittle

Theme: Deception

  • The Purpose of the Technologies of Truth and Falsehood.

    [T]he purpose of that technology that we call ‘Truth’ is largely one of persuasion. The purpose of that technology we call ‘falsehood’ is largely the prevention of persuasion by imaginary, erroneous, biased, wishful, or deceitful means. In any scale beyond the directly perceivable – meaning beyond no more than 150 people – we cannot rely upon persuasion but instead must rely upon falsification: reason not to do something.

    There are few known goods. There are some known good processes. At any scale assent is the default. Falsification by the imposition of costs not assent by majority rule. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.

  • The Purpose of the Technologies of Truth and Falsehood.

    [T]he purpose of that technology that we call ‘Truth’ is largely one of persuasion. The purpose of that technology we call ‘falsehood’ is largely the prevention of persuasion by imaginary, erroneous, biased, wishful, or deceitful means. In any scale beyond the directly perceivable – meaning beyond no more than 150 people – we cannot rely upon persuasion but instead must rely upon falsification: reason not to do something.

    There are few known goods. There are some known good processes. At any scale assent is the default. Falsification by the imposition of costs not assent by majority rule. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.

  • The Battle We Face Today: Non-Parasitic Production of Commons

    (important piece) [I] know I’m not the first person to say this, but it’s pretty clear that Russia is not only the ultimate expression of postmodernism (lying), but that it evolved to this state by reforming jewish strategy, philosophy, and law: destroy the trust of the outsiders in order to create demand for authority and group cohesion, thereby creating opportunity for predation. While the founders of Russia were disproportionately jewish, and while their secret service was disproportionately jewish, what is more important is that the jewish strategy was useful for the Mongolian/Tatar/Islamic authoritarianism that is the source of Russian political culture. Russia combines ‘white’ people, Steppe totalitarianism, and jewish deceit (propaganda) as the complete economic, social, political and martial expression of the jewish strategy: destroy the higher trust societies and create demand for authority, and create opportunity for predation. If we go back through history and see the success of lying created through zoroastrian monotheism: jewish, it’s revolutionary reformation: christianity, and it’s counter-revolutionary authoritarianism: Islamism, then it’s modern branches in Marxism, Western Postmodernism, Russian secular judaism, and anglo progressive pseudoscience and outright lying, then We can not only cure ourselves, but we can disarm the world: TRUTH IS ENOUGH. The Truthful and Trusting society may not be the end of history, but social democracy is certainly not. There are three means of production of commons: – Truthful and Trustful (libertarian: rule of law, civic society) – Pragmatic and Utilitarian (social democracy) – Deceitful and Parasitic (authoritarianism) We have focused our efforts too long on the economy. Consumer capitalism has won the battle for the production of goods and services. We no longer fight that battle. And focusing our efforts on it is a waste of energy. We won not by arguments but by resisting the state long enough so that the logically obvious could result in the empirically demonstrable: the voluntary organization of production is the only successful technology for the production of consumer goods and services. Instead of the battle for a voluntary economy, the battle we face today is the suppression of parasitism in central bureaucracy and the expansion of trust and thereby increase of economic velocity. We must create the non-parasitic voluntary production of commons just as we created the non-parasitic voluntary production of goods and services. At present there is only one way we know of by which to destroy all parasitism, increase trust, increase economic velocity, increase prosperity, ad therefore increase choices. That is universal standing under the common law, the legal prohibition of parasitism, by mutual insurance: the exchange of guarantee of defense and restitution of property-en-toto. But we must also provide for the construction of commons by voluntary means, by changing what is currently a monopoly constructed by majority ascent into a market wherein any non-parasitic exchange between the classes, or objective of the classes can be constructed. We succeeded in transforming humanity into the voluntary organization of production of goods and services we call consumer capitalism. Our next mission – purely out of self defense – is to transform our government into a voluntary organization of commons. This project is eminently possible. It will forever render the corporeal state to the dustbin of antiquity, categorically relegated to another attempt at pseudoscience for the purpose of pure power accumulation and nothing more. We have a very simple mission then. To reform every possible constitution such that the judiciary shall prohibit all parasitism without exception. And that the provision of commons be one of adjudication of differences, not of ascent. And that the defense of the realm be the province of every man, under universal standing under the common law. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Battle We Face Today: Non-Parasitic Production of Commons

    (important piece) [I] know I’m not the first person to say this, but it’s pretty clear that Russia is not only the ultimate expression of postmodernism (lying), but that it evolved to this state by reforming jewish strategy, philosophy, and law: destroy the trust of the outsiders in order to create demand for authority and group cohesion, thereby creating opportunity for predation. While the founders of Russia were disproportionately jewish, and while their secret service was disproportionately jewish, what is more important is that the jewish strategy was useful for the Mongolian/Tatar/Islamic authoritarianism that is the source of Russian political culture. Russia combines ‘white’ people, Steppe totalitarianism, and jewish deceit (propaganda) as the complete economic, social, political and martial expression of the jewish strategy: destroy the higher trust societies and create demand for authority, and create opportunity for predation. If we go back through history and see the success of lying created through zoroastrian monotheism: jewish, it’s revolutionary reformation: christianity, and it’s counter-revolutionary authoritarianism: Islamism, then it’s modern branches in Marxism, Western Postmodernism, Russian secular judaism, and anglo progressive pseudoscience and outright lying, then We can not only cure ourselves, but we can disarm the world: TRUTH IS ENOUGH. The Truthful and Trusting society may not be the end of history, but social democracy is certainly not. There are three means of production of commons: – Truthful and Trustful (libertarian: rule of law, civic society) – Pragmatic and Utilitarian (social democracy) – Deceitful and Parasitic (authoritarianism) We have focused our efforts too long on the economy. Consumer capitalism has won the battle for the production of goods and services. We no longer fight that battle. And focusing our efforts on it is a waste of energy. We won not by arguments but by resisting the state long enough so that the logically obvious could result in the empirically demonstrable: the voluntary organization of production is the only successful technology for the production of consumer goods and services. Instead of the battle for a voluntary economy, the battle we face today is the suppression of parasitism in central bureaucracy and the expansion of trust and thereby increase of economic velocity. We must create the non-parasitic voluntary production of commons just as we created the non-parasitic voluntary production of goods and services. At present there is only one way we know of by which to destroy all parasitism, increase trust, increase economic velocity, increase prosperity, ad therefore increase choices. That is universal standing under the common law, the legal prohibition of parasitism, by mutual insurance: the exchange of guarantee of defense and restitution of property-en-toto. But we must also provide for the construction of commons by voluntary means, by changing what is currently a monopoly constructed by majority ascent into a market wherein any non-parasitic exchange between the classes, or objective of the classes can be constructed. We succeeded in transforming humanity into the voluntary organization of production of goods and services we call consumer capitalism. Our next mission – purely out of self defense – is to transform our government into a voluntary organization of commons. This project is eminently possible. It will forever render the corporeal state to the dustbin of antiquity, categorically relegated to another attempt at pseudoscience for the purpose of pure power accumulation and nothing more. We have a very simple mission then. To reform every possible constitution such that the judiciary shall prohibit all parasitism without exception. And that the provision of commons be one of adjudication of differences, not of ascent. And that the defense of the realm be the province of every man, under universal standing under the common law. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Limits of Intelligence and the Challenge of Error

    (life’s wisdom)

    [A]t some point, it seems that greater intelligence is less influential than lack of wishful thinking, lack of accumulated error, accumulating knowledge, the time you invest in problem-solving, and choosing a narrow field of inquiry.

    We believe true things, but largely we believe partly true things, some what true things and false things. Every time we USE one of these not-entirely-true beliefs to make a judgement, we produce, remember and habituate errors. We create a frame: “pattern of decision making”, worldview, and metaphysics, unconsciously.

    One can be quite bright, but never express one’s intellectual potential for no other reason than accumulated error.

    We all believe in unicorns.

    The trick isn’t so much believing anything in particular, as it is not believing so much that is false.

    Most smart people I meet suffer from wishful thinking and accumulated error.

  • The Limits of Intelligence and the Challenge of Error

    (life’s wisdom)

    [A]t some point, it seems that greater intelligence is less influential than lack of wishful thinking, lack of accumulated error, accumulating knowledge, the time you invest in problem-solving, and choosing a narrow field of inquiry.

    We believe true things, but largely we believe partly true things, some what true things and false things. Every time we USE one of these not-entirely-true beliefs to make a judgement, we produce, remember and habituate errors. We create a frame: “pattern of decision making”, worldview, and metaphysics, unconsciously.

    One can be quite bright, but never express one’s intellectual potential for no other reason than accumulated error.

    We all believe in unicorns.

    The trick isn’t so much believing anything in particular, as it is not believing so much that is false.

    Most smart people I meet suffer from wishful thinking and accumulated error.

  • Racism, Loading and Framing

    [G]ad,
    I was going to point out that it is possible to conduct racist statements through loading and framing for the purpose of rallying or shaming.

    The problem is that the kind of people who make empirical statements (us), tend not to make morally loaded and framed statements. Since those of our political persuasion do not, and we tend not to be influenced by them, we forget that most argument (if we call it that) is not empirical, even if it is, its correlative and subject to selection bias. Humans are moral creatures. Humans seeks status more so than anything but life.

    Racism + Morality *vs* Truth + Empiricism

    Whether an argument is moral or not is a reflection of the individual’s reproductive strategy. So in a sense, any moral argument that consists of rallying and shaming is in fact a truthful expression of one’s reproductive strategy. The problem is that our reproductive strategies differ. And moral arguments are incommensurable. As such moral arguments are meaningless. And they only necessary under political monopoly.

    Yet if we conduct exchanges rather than monopoly, and we force no costs upon others in the process, then we are acting cooperatively (morally) with those we disagree with (reproductively) but not sacrificing for them, and we cooperate with those we agree with (reproductively) and may choose whether or not to sacrifice for them.

    SO the problem we face is that while we have used monopoly government to construct a market for goods and services, we have not also used that monopoly to create a market for commons – leaving the only monopoly the rule of law.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

    (PS: when someone fights an empirical statement I usually just ask them why they’re liars. How can liars and lying be a moral action? How can they say they do good by lying? Is lying good then? etc, etc… But every response has to return to the central question: why are you a liar? )

    FWIW: I don’t do racism. try to fix our civilization, not blame others for pursuing their interests by taking advantage of our failures.

  • Racism, Loading and Framing

    [G]ad,
    I was going to point out that it is possible to conduct racist statements through loading and framing for the purpose of rallying or shaming.

    The problem is that the kind of people who make empirical statements (us), tend not to make morally loaded and framed statements. Since those of our political persuasion do not, and we tend not to be influenced by them, we forget that most argument (if we call it that) is not empirical, even if it is, its correlative and subject to selection bias. Humans are moral creatures. Humans seeks status more so than anything but life.

    Racism + Morality *vs* Truth + Empiricism

    Whether an argument is moral or not is a reflection of the individual’s reproductive strategy. So in a sense, any moral argument that consists of rallying and shaming is in fact a truthful expression of one’s reproductive strategy. The problem is that our reproductive strategies differ. And moral arguments are incommensurable. As such moral arguments are meaningless. And they only necessary under political monopoly.

    Yet if we conduct exchanges rather than monopoly, and we force no costs upon others in the process, then we are acting cooperatively (morally) with those we disagree with (reproductively) but not sacrificing for them, and we cooperate with those we agree with (reproductively) and may choose whether or not to sacrifice for them.

    SO the problem we face is that while we have used monopoly government to construct a market for goods and services, we have not also used that monopoly to create a market for commons – leaving the only monopoly the rule of law.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

    (PS: when someone fights an empirical statement I usually just ask them why they’re liars. How can liars and lying be a moral action? How can they say they do good by lying? Is lying good then? etc, etc… But every response has to return to the central question: why are you a liar? )

    FWIW: I don’t do racism. try to fix our civilization, not blame others for pursuing their interests by taking advantage of our failures.

  • The Media as Drug Dealer

    [I]t doesn’t make financial sense to operate a newspaper. The FT generates 35M of profit per year on over 500M in revenues. That’s what, 7%? The reason to own a newspaper is influence: gossip. Now the financial times is, like the Journal, a financial rather than political newspaper. So by definition it’s an empirical and heroic medium rather than one of complaining, for the purpose of rallying shaming, and power accumulation.

    I went through five daily issues of Canada’s main newspaper a few years ago, circling correspondent articles (what I consider truthful) and you could find about three small articles a day. The rest were entertainment, created by appealing to the anglosphere’s erroneous sense of moral superiority. In other words, the newspaper business sells advertising to marketers, and then consumers buy signaling: a form of conspicuous consumption, that carries signals. And quite the opposite of what we expected: people are not able to insulate themselves from the most influential drug after sex: signals of moral fitness. If we look at the evolutionary reasons why this all works, it’s obvious: moral fitness makes us generous, and moral violation makes us punish. But we should look at the non-financial media as what they are: drug dealers. They’re causing suicide through addiction.

  • The Media as Drug Dealer

    [I]t doesn’t make financial sense to operate a newspaper. The FT generates 35M of profit per year on over 500M in revenues. That’s what, 7%? The reason to own a newspaper is influence: gossip. Now the financial times is, like the Journal, a financial rather than political newspaper. So by definition it’s an empirical and heroic medium rather than one of complaining, for the purpose of rallying shaming, and power accumulation.

    I went through five daily issues of Canada’s main newspaper a few years ago, circling correspondent articles (what I consider truthful) and you could find about three small articles a day. The rest were entertainment, created by appealing to the anglosphere’s erroneous sense of moral superiority. In other words, the newspaper business sells advertising to marketers, and then consumers buy signaling: a form of conspicuous consumption, that carries signals. And quite the opposite of what we expected: people are not able to insulate themselves from the most influential drug after sex: signals of moral fitness. If we look at the evolutionary reasons why this all works, it’s obvious: moral fitness makes us generous, and moral violation makes us punish. But we should look at the non-financial media as what they are: drug dealers. They’re causing suicide through addiction.