Curt Doolittle

Theme: Governance

  • “What’s Your Vision for Post Majoritarian America, Europe, Western Civilization?”

    Feb 11, 2020, 8:06 AM

    —“Do you wish to implement a caste system in America? And, if so what would it be regarding: racial based or social status based?”—Amit Patel

    Are parties castes? No. Are tribes castes? no. Are classes castes? Close but no – a class is alterable by demonstrated behavior, but a caste isn’t. The reason for european success in the ancient and modern world is sovereignty, and sovereignty requires markets in every aspect of life, and markets produce continuous adaptation and evolution without political consensus and intervention. I want to create markets in everything, where we may not seek to circumvent those markets in display word or deed without severe consequences. In politics i want to recreate the market between the classes for the production of commons – using houses of the classes in the traditional British european model. And a market for polities that produce those commons suitable to the needs of different people, in the traditional european model – particularly the hundreds of princedom’s in the german holy roman empire. For some of us we will prefer the English, Prussian, Germanic, orderly, clean, aesthetic, homogenous, redistributive, civil society where most of our investments are in the commons. For others they will prefer the ‘latin, catholic, leisurely, communal life of the family with state (feudal) responsibility for the commons. For others the individual they prefer the cosmopolitan (jewish) urban, high stimulation, high consumption, high opportunity, low responsibility, low investment in the commons. For others they will prefer the close membership and mutual insurance of the semitic hyper familial tribe, at the high cost of the many externalities, including demand for authoritarian religion and state.

  • “What’s Your Vision for Post Majoritarian America, Europe, Western Civilization?”

    Feb 11, 2020, 8:06 AM

    —“Do you wish to implement a caste system in America? And, if so what would it be regarding: racial based or social status based?”—Amit Patel

    Are parties castes? No. Are tribes castes? no. Are classes castes? Close but no – a class is alterable by demonstrated behavior, but a caste isn’t. The reason for european success in the ancient and modern world is sovereignty, and sovereignty requires markets in every aspect of life, and markets produce continuous adaptation and evolution without political consensus and intervention. I want to create markets in everything, where we may not seek to circumvent those markets in display word or deed without severe consequences. In politics i want to recreate the market between the classes for the production of commons – using houses of the classes in the traditional British european model. And a market for polities that produce those commons suitable to the needs of different people, in the traditional european model – particularly the hundreds of princedom’s in the german holy roman empire. For some of us we will prefer the English, Prussian, Germanic, orderly, clean, aesthetic, homogenous, redistributive, civil society where most of our investments are in the commons. For others they will prefer the ‘latin, catholic, leisurely, communal life of the family with state (feudal) responsibility for the commons. For others the individual they prefer the cosmopolitan (jewish) urban, high stimulation, high consumption, high opportunity, low responsibility, low investment in the commons. For others they will prefer the close membership and mutual insurance of the semitic hyper familial tribe, at the high cost of the many externalities, including demand for authoritarian religion and state.

  • “What Is Your Ideology?”

    Feb 11, 2020, 8:35 AM

    —“So, what is your political ideology? I mean I know you’re right wing. But, what are you? A Nationalist-Socialist or Libertarian Civic Nationalist?”— Amit Patel

    I am none of those things – all of which i consider excuses for obtaining power under democracy to circumvent markets. I am ‘right wing’ only in the sense that I am intolerant of violations of the laws of nature and the natural law of reciprocity. I am an Aryan(european branch of indo-europeans): transcendence of man into gods through competitive heroism, demonstrated excellence, speaking truth, and creating beauty. I am a European Sovereigntarian: Markets in everything: Let A Thousand Nations Bloom. I am an Aristotelian: Realism, Naturalism, Operationalism, I am a Jeffersonian libertarian: a written constitution of natural law, with transactional procedural modifications. I am a Constitutional Monarchist favoring multi-house governments as markets for the classes. I am a Manorialist: natural eugenics – home before children, family as the central unit of society, bring capital to people not people to capital. I am a Conservative: Bear your own costs, externalize no cost, purely empirical government, change by evidence not by hypothesis. I am a National(kinship) Socialist: direct the maximum proceeds to the production of capitalizing (not consumptive) commons. I am a Kinship Christian: humility in ones never ending pursuit of virtue, exhaust all opportunities for forgiveness before abandoning it, and demonstrate personal acts of charity at personal cost. I am a Kinship Pagan: we owe a debt to nature, our ancestors known and named, and known as heroes, and known only as archetypes (gods), and are responsible to them for preserving their investments in making us, just as those that follow us are responsible for preserving our investments in them. I am a universalist: any people that wishes european civilization’s benefits can adopt them if they try – or not if they choose not to. The Laws of Nature The Natural Law Self Determination Our Transcendence into gods Sovereignty to do so A Universal Militia The Oath of Reciprocal Insurance A constitution of the natural law Markets in association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, polities. A Judicial Priesthood A monarchy as a judge of last resort A Cabinet Houses for the classes (three or four) … Territory … Industry … Family … (Dependents) Local Priority in Legislation, regulation, norm. Professionalized (Privatized) Education

  • “What Is Your Ideology?”

    Feb 11, 2020, 8:35 AM

    —“So, what is your political ideology? I mean I know you’re right wing. But, what are you? A Nationalist-Socialist or Libertarian Civic Nationalist?”— Amit Patel

    I am none of those things – all of which i consider excuses for obtaining power under democracy to circumvent markets. I am ‘right wing’ only in the sense that I am intolerant of violations of the laws of nature and the natural law of reciprocity. I am an Aryan(european branch of indo-europeans): transcendence of man into gods through competitive heroism, demonstrated excellence, speaking truth, and creating beauty. I am a European Sovereigntarian: Markets in everything: Let A Thousand Nations Bloom. I am an Aristotelian: Realism, Naturalism, Operationalism, I am a Jeffersonian libertarian: a written constitution of natural law, with transactional procedural modifications. I am a Constitutional Monarchist favoring multi-house governments as markets for the classes. I am a Manorialist: natural eugenics – home before children, family as the central unit of society, bring capital to people not people to capital. I am a Conservative: Bear your own costs, externalize no cost, purely empirical government, change by evidence not by hypothesis. I am a National(kinship) Socialist: direct the maximum proceeds to the production of capitalizing (not consumptive) commons. I am a Kinship Christian: humility in ones never ending pursuit of virtue, exhaust all opportunities for forgiveness before abandoning it, and demonstrate personal acts of charity at personal cost. I am a Kinship Pagan: we owe a debt to nature, our ancestors known and named, and known as heroes, and known only as archetypes (gods), and are responsible to them for preserving their investments in making us, just as those that follow us are responsible for preserving our investments in them. I am a universalist: any people that wishes european civilization’s benefits can adopt them if they try – or not if they choose not to. The Laws of Nature The Natural Law Self Determination Our Transcendence into gods Sovereignty to do so A Universal Militia The Oath of Reciprocal Insurance A constitution of the natural law Markets in association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, polities. A Judicial Priesthood A monarchy as a judge of last resort A Cabinet Houses for the classes (three or four) … Territory … Industry … Family … (Dependents) Local Priority in Legislation, regulation, norm. Professionalized (Privatized) Education

  • Voting

    Feb 12, 2020, 9:50 AM

    —“Universal suffrage was a mistake…and practically everyone knew it would have a great cost, but did it anyway because it’s “right”…the cost was exactly what they predicted it would be: the quality of civilization itself.”—Mike Harvey

    From Alexander Hamilton:

    —“It is also, undeniably, certain, that no Englishman, who can be deemed a free agent in a political view, can be bound by laws, to which he has not consented, either in person, or by his representative. Or, in other words, every Englishman (exclusive of the mercantile and trading part of the nation) who possesses a freehold, to the value of forty shillings per annum, has a right to a share in the legislature, which he exercises, by giving his vote in the election of some person, he approves of, as his representative. “The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own. If these persons had votes, they would be tempted to dispose of them, under some undue influence, or other. This would give a great, an artful, or a wealthy man, a larger share in elections, than is consistent with general liberty. If it were probable, that every man would give his vote, freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of Liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote, in electing those delegates, to whose charge is committed the disposal of his property, his liberty and life. But since that can hardly be expected, in persons of indigent fortunes, or such as are under the immediate dominion of others, all popular states have been obliged to establish certain qualifications, whereby, some who are suspected to have no will of their own, are excluded from voting; in order, to set other individuals, whose wills may be supposed independent, more thoroughly upon a level with each other.” Hence it appears, that such “of the people as have no vote in the choice of representatives, and therefore, are govern’d, by laws, to which they have not consented, either by themselves or by their representatives, are only those persons, who are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.” Every free agent, every free man, possessing a freehold of forty shillings per annum, is, by the British constitution, intitled to a vote, in the election of those who are invested with the disposal of his life, his liberty and property.”—

    Source: Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted, or A more impartial and comprehensive View of the Dispute between Great-Britain and the Colonies. . . . (New York, 1775), in Harold C. Syrett, ed., The Papers of Alexander Hamilton (New York: Columbia University Press, 1961-1979), 1:81-165.

  • Voting

    Feb 12, 2020, 9:50 AM

    —“Universal suffrage was a mistake…and practically everyone knew it would have a great cost, but did it anyway because it’s “right”…the cost was exactly what they predicted it would be: the quality of civilization itself.”—Mike Harvey

    From Alexander Hamilton:

    —“It is also, undeniably, certain, that no Englishman, who can be deemed a free agent in a political view, can be bound by laws, to which he has not consented, either in person, or by his representative. Or, in other words, every Englishman (exclusive of the mercantile and trading part of the nation) who possesses a freehold, to the value of forty shillings per annum, has a right to a share in the legislature, which he exercises, by giving his vote in the election of some person, he approves of, as his representative. “The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own. If these persons had votes, they would be tempted to dispose of them, under some undue influence, or other. This would give a great, an artful, or a wealthy man, a larger share in elections, than is consistent with general liberty. If it were probable, that every man would give his vote, freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of Liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote, in electing those delegates, to whose charge is committed the disposal of his property, his liberty and life. But since that can hardly be expected, in persons of indigent fortunes, or such as are under the immediate dominion of others, all popular states have been obliged to establish certain qualifications, whereby, some who are suspected to have no will of their own, are excluded from voting; in order, to set other individuals, whose wills may be supposed independent, more thoroughly upon a level with each other.” Hence it appears, that such “of the people as have no vote in the choice of representatives, and therefore, are govern’d, by laws, to which they have not consented, either by themselves or by their representatives, are only those persons, who are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.” Every free agent, every free man, possessing a freehold of forty shillings per annum, is, by the British constitution, intitled to a vote, in the election of those who are invested with the disposal of his life, his liberty and property.”—

    Source: Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted, or A more impartial and comprehensive View of the Dispute between Great-Britain and the Colonies. . . . (New York, 1775), in Harold C. Syrett, ed., The Papers of Alexander Hamilton (New York: Columbia University Press, 1961-1979), 1:81-165.

  • We Need a New Order

    Feb 24, 2020, 7:38 PM

    —“So by the end of this century, as little as 1/5 of the population of the presently-industrialized world could be responsible for perhaps (my number) 85% of productivity, living in physical comfort but shunted into an ever-tighter technical labor market requiring career dedication to stay ahead in (hence out of the underclass), while also keeping its boot on the neck of the other Westerners that (literally) couldn’t learn to code, and an eye on the roiling Third World population at the same time?”—Stan De Santis

    Correct. The consumption led capitalist order cannot persist. The redistributive socialist order cannot persist. We need a new order. That’s what I’m suggesting. Shifting from single to multiple economies.

  • We Need a New Order

    Feb 24, 2020, 7:38 PM

    —“So by the end of this century, as little as 1/5 of the population of the presently-industrialized world could be responsible for perhaps (my number) 85% of productivity, living in physical comfort but shunted into an ever-tighter technical labor market requiring career dedication to stay ahead in (hence out of the underclass), while also keeping its boot on the neck of the other Westerners that (literally) couldn’t learn to code, and an eye on the roiling Third World population at the same time?”—Stan De Santis

    Correct. The consumption led capitalist order cannot persist. The redistributive socialist order cannot persist. We need a new order. That’s what I’m suggesting. Shifting from single to multiple economies.

  • Lessons Learned from This Month’s Crisis

    Mar 26, 2020, 12:57 PM There is nothing brilliant to be learned from the virus other than the fact that the government and bureaucracy failed again, by regulating during a stable market such that they created fragility (as always) during a panic market – thereby eliminating the european advantage (OODA LOOP) of dynamic adaptation to catastrophes crises, shocks, and changes. (see p on the european group strategy of markets in everything) We learned that the FDA and CDC followed the Department of Education into a failure of their core mission – because all bureaucracies expand work to fill available time, and expand rent seeking and privilege to the point of fragility. We will likely fail again to learn the lesson that regulation without clauses for crisis variation is less effective than threat of punishment. (see p on adaptive government) We learned that high corporate taxes, regulations, and unions drove production of strategic industries overseas so that they cannot be mobilized for non-market use in a crisis. (see p on full accounting by rule of law rather than free trade) We learned that once mobilized the private sector can adapt more rapidly than the public sector because it is NOT hierarchical. (see p on multiple economies rather than monolithic economy) We learned that the democratic party will do anything for power, just as the republican party will do anything to deny the left power – and we learned as we did in the impeachment that the democratic elites are underclass, jewish or female and the republican elites are middle class european or male. (see p on individual accountability of legislators) We learned that almost no one (other than the president business leaders, financial leadership) grasps that if the USA falls into depression that the whole world will collapse like a stone, and that we are fulfilling the cyclical predication that it will result in world scale warfare as states seize opportunities in duress that they could not seize in a period of stability and wealth creation. We learned that the press remains the enemy of the american people and that this crisis will possibly be their last gasp. (see p on accountability of the press in public speech) We learned that the Chinese as always practice face regardless of costs and we pay for it. (see p on foreign accountability for public speech in matters of the commons) We learned that globalization is over. (see p on universal nationalism) We learned that this disease will most likely be with us like the seasonal flu until there is a vaccine, but that unlike the seasonal flu, if we survive it, we are scarred by it. We learned that we will be in some sort of crisis through August just in time for the hate-meter to break the scales in the fall election cycle. And we learned that the Overton window is in a whirlpool that none of us can predict. (See p constitution for a western renaissance)

  • Lessons Learned from This Month’s Crisis

    Mar 26, 2020, 12:57 PM There is nothing brilliant to be learned from the virus other than the fact that the government and bureaucracy failed again, by regulating during a stable market such that they created fragility (as always) during a panic market – thereby eliminating the european advantage (OODA LOOP) of dynamic adaptation to catastrophes crises, shocks, and changes. (see p on the european group strategy of markets in everything) We learned that the FDA and CDC followed the Department of Education into a failure of their core mission – because all bureaucracies expand work to fill available time, and expand rent seeking and privilege to the point of fragility. We will likely fail again to learn the lesson that regulation without clauses for crisis variation is less effective than threat of punishment. (see p on adaptive government) We learned that high corporate taxes, regulations, and unions drove production of strategic industries overseas so that they cannot be mobilized for non-market use in a crisis. (see p on full accounting by rule of law rather than free trade) We learned that once mobilized the private sector can adapt more rapidly than the public sector because it is NOT hierarchical. (see p on multiple economies rather than monolithic economy) We learned that the democratic party will do anything for power, just as the republican party will do anything to deny the left power – and we learned as we did in the impeachment that the democratic elites are underclass, jewish or female and the republican elites are middle class european or male. (see p on individual accountability of legislators) We learned that almost no one (other than the president business leaders, financial leadership) grasps that if the USA falls into depression that the whole world will collapse like a stone, and that we are fulfilling the cyclical predication that it will result in world scale warfare as states seize opportunities in duress that they could not seize in a period of stability and wealth creation. We learned that the press remains the enemy of the american people and that this crisis will possibly be their last gasp. (see p on accountability of the press in public speech) We learned that the Chinese as always practice face regardless of costs and we pay for it. (see p on foreign accountability for public speech in matters of the commons) We learned that globalization is over. (see p on universal nationalism) We learned that this disease will most likely be with us like the seasonal flu until there is a vaccine, but that unlike the seasonal flu, if we survive it, we are scarred by it. We learned that we will be in some sort of crisis through August just in time for the hate-meter to break the scales in the fall election cycle. And we learned that the Overton window is in a whirlpool that none of us can predict. (See p constitution for a western renaissance)