Theme: Decidability

-“Q: WHAT IS THE INSTITUTE’S AGENDA?”-
(Our agenda is to produce a universally commensurable value-neutral science and logic of decidability, applied to the spectrum of human cooperation from ethics to economics to politics, producing a constitution of ‘menu items’ that allows groups to produce governments that will function in their interests by suiting their needs, but prevents the government, public intellectuals, the academy, a priesthood and all those others with political interests from lying about the possibilities, costs, and benefits. So in most reductive form our agenda is a science of law that that mandates “No More Lies” in public policy.)

RULE OF LAW CONSTITUTIONALISM (REPUBLIC) WITH ADAPTIVE ECONOMICS
There is a tendency to interpret the institute as pursuing a specific political agenda – usually, one that is favored by whichever one of the Institute Fellows that you follow. And while our work gravitates to the classical liberal – meaning modern, rule-of-law constitutional republic – that’s not the only solution we provide. It’s just the one that we give the most attention to because we’re operating in an anglosphere country. And our political activism is directed to use of the courts to bring about change in anglosphere and continental european countries, beginning with the USA.

OUR JOB
We have a job, that job is the science, the resulting logic, and the constitution of that science and logic. This allows us to defeat lying in government and those who would undermine governments as well. But that means we have to satisfy everyone’s need for a polity that suits their interests.

In other words. We work to create a constitutional template with a set of menu choices. Because as I explain often, demographic composition determines agency, and agency determines demand for institutions and resulting economies.

RESTORING GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY
Why? Enlightenment and Marxist ideology – as revolts against the anglo innovation of classical liberal empiricsm – has permeated education with the false promise of equality other than under the law, leading many to fail, while the government, using this false claim of equality, can escape responsibility and accountability for the success of citizens due to this lie. Where instead, a responsible and accountable government and it’s employees and contractors and all those under its regulatory domain, can, should, and must (if legitimate) bear responsibility and accountability for success of individual citizens within the limites of their ability and will. This is the best possible outcome because it works to assist each person in maximizing his or her potential in life – but in the context of everyone else also doing so – producing a distribution and a hierarchy of competency that is in everyone’s interest.

In fact, our democratic governments when not limited by constitutions of empirical, formal, natural law, are LESS accountable for success of the polity while claiming democratic voting makes them accountable. And its evidently not true.

OUR POLICY
So the “institute” policy is ‘let a thousand nations bloom’. It isn’t ‘do this or that’.

If you ask me (us) what’s the ‘best’, the answer is ‘for whom?’. If you mean for Europeans, we can state that. If it’s for non Europeans, that set of menu choices might be different – and the group will pay the cost for those differences. That’s all we say.

But, we also present a solution for the united states: to return it to a federation as originally constituted, and as was Europe was under the church and holy roman empire – instead of the empires of Centralized DC or France(pretending Belgium). And that solution would restore all choices to the states and restore state control and state boundaries etc. This lets a thousand nations bloom domestically, ending the conflict between the nine or eleven or how many nations that make up the USA, because of the ethnic and cultural differences that settled and conquered the USA.

Now if you ask, ‘Well, Curt, all that aside, what’s the optimum?’

I’ll say the truth, that a small ethnically homogenous nation-state is the optimum for a demographic group, or all demographic groups. If you were to say ‘How do we even improve on that?” I would say you have to create another Monaco and give the super competent a place to retreat to because they need the least government and need pay the least taxes because they have the least ‘dependents’.

Now, if you come and ask me “Well, Curt, what’s the opposite? for the poor and least competent demographic?”

I would say it’s still a rule of law under a natural law constitution, but you’d organize the economy as if it were a military with assigned duties, but give people access to courts to sue for corruption that will absolutely positively emerge under that hierarchical system of governance.

That said, most people DO prefer to be serfs. And most people will be better off as serfs. And what does that mean? The state (or manor or however you break it up) assigns you work (as did unions) and you do that work in exchange for basic shelter, food, medical care, etc. And then you earn money for entertainment and ‘joy’ from market participation in your off time.

This eradicates the stress, at the cost of market efficiency, high risk of corruption, and the tendency of the political system to degrade into clientelism or gangster corruption, supplemented by black markets and people doing the minimum work possible for their subsidies.

Cheers
Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
The Science of Cooperation

-“Q: WHAT IS THE INSTITUTE’S AGENDA? IDEOLOGY?”-
(a universally commensurable value-neutral science and logic of decidability, applied to human cooperation including economics and politics, producing a constitution of ‘menu items’ that prevents lying but allows groups to produce governments that will function in their interests by suiting their needs.’)

There is a tendency to interpret the institute as pursuing a specific political agenda – usually, one that is favored by whichever one of the Institute Fellows that you follow. And while our work gravitates to the classical liberal, meaning modern, rule-of-law constitutional republic, that’s not the only solution we provide. It’s just the one that we give the most attention to because we’re operating in an anglosphere country in the northern European tradition in the European civilization’s tradition: the USA, UK, CA, AUS, NZ. And our political action is directed to use of the courts to bring about change in those countries, beginning with the USA.

OUR JOB
We have a job, that job is the science, the resulting logic, and the constitution of that science and logic. This means we produce a science of cooperation through economics and politics. This allows us to defeat lying in government and those who would undermine governments as well.

But that means we have to satisfy everyone’s need for a polity that suits their interests. In other words. We have to create a constitution with a set of menu choices. Because as I explain often, demographic composition determines agency, and agency determines demand for institutions and resulting economies.

OUR POLICY
So the “institute” policy is ‘let a thousand nations bloom’. It isn’t ‘do this or that’.

If you ask me (us) what’s the ‘best’, the answer is ‘for whom?’. If you mean for Europeans, we can state that. If it’s for non Europeans, that set of menu choices might be different – and the group will pay the cost for those differences. That’s all we say.

But, we also present a solution for the united states: to return it to a federation as originally constituted, and as was Europe was under the church and holy roman empire – instead of the empires of Centralized DC or France(pretending Belgium). And that solution would restore all choices to the states and restore state control and state boundaries etc.

This lets a thousand nations bloom domestically, ending the conflict between the nine or eleven or how many nations that make up the USA, because of the ethnic and cultural differences that settled and conquered the USA.

Now if you ask, ‘Well, Curt, all that aside, what’s the optimum?’

I’ll say the truth is a small ethnically homogenous nation-state is the optimum for a demographic group, or all demographic groups. If you were to say ‘How do we even improve on that?” I would say you have to create another Monaco and give the super competent a place to retreat to because they need the least government and need pay the least taxes because they have the least ‘dependents’.

Now, if you come and ask me “Well, Curt, what’s the opposite? for the poor and least competent demographic?”

I would say it’s still a rule of law under a natural law constitution, but you’d organize the economy as if it were a military with assigned duties, but give people access to courts to sue for corruption that will absolutely positively emerge under that hierarchical system of governance.

That said, most people DO prefer to be serfs. And most people will be better off as serfs. And what does that mean? The state (or manor or however you break it up) assigns you work (as did unions) and you do that work in exchange for basic shelter, food, medical care, etc. And then you earn money for entertainment and ‘joy’ from market participation in your off time.

This eradicates the stress, at the cost of market efficiency, high risk of corruption, and the tendency of the political system to degrade into clientelism or gangster corruption, supplemented by black markets and people doing the minimum work possible for their subsidies.

Cheers

Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
The Science of Cooperation