Curt Doolittle

Theme: Governance

  • “Where do you stand on imperialism?”— I stand as always on empirical evidence

    —-“Where do you stand on imperialism?”—

    I stand as always on empirical evidence and operational possibility.

    Depends on what we define as imperial. The holy roman empire or the han chinese empire, or the roman empire or the middle eastern empires?

    DIMENSION ONE – HOMOGENEITY VS HETEROGENEITY

    The holy roman (german continental) was homogenous; the chinese made theirs homogenous through slow forcible integration; the roman empire failed when insufficiently homogenous; the greek empire never could consilidate becasue it was heterogeneous; and the middle eastern empires were pretty totalitarian and continuously in termoil because they existed to resist heterogeneity.

    Now what about an empire of rule of law over teh english speaking or germanic speaking peoples? Well that is just a federation with a judge of last resort between that resolves differences between the princes (monarchs) of different poliites.

    What about an empire of rule by degree over a forcibly integrated and relatively homogenous empire of limited mobility like china? Well, that is just a way to manage primitive people by bureaucratic corporatism and corporate accountability(via positiva) rather than european sovereignty and rule of law (via negativa).

    What about the roman empire under roman law? Well, that is a way of suppressing parasitism and facilitating trade so that the upper classes can profit and the lower classes live better than they would otherwise.

    What about the middle eastern empires? Well that is little more than preventing any of the other tribes from rising up and profiting at the expense of the suppressed tribes.

    DIMENSION TWO – RULE VS REPLACEMENT

    Now, let’s ask about conquest and rule (europe); vs conquest, colonization and rule (africa); vs conquest, colonization, and integration; vs conquest, colonization and replacement? (Americas).

    DIMENSION THREE – INCENTIVES

    And whether you’re doing so in defense or for assets or for taxation and plunder.

    ANSWER

    We can make a table of what works and does’t work.

    ………….Homogenous —–Limited—-> Heterogeneous

    Rule

    |…………….Yes…………………..No………………..No

    |…………….Yes…………………..Yes……………….No

    |…………….N/A…………………..Yes……………….Yes

    v

    Replacement

    And we can make a simple statement out of incentives.

    Defense : Yes regardless

    Markets : Yes and integrate

    Assets:….Yes and only if you Rule

    Plunder:…No … only to raid to conquer. malincentives build.

    So that is my answer on Imperialism.

    Homogeneous populations only.

    Rule only in exchange for returns.

    Exploit only to further replacement.

    Conquest and Genocide are the most consequential and successful entrepreneurial ventures in human history.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-02 10:49:00 UTC

  • YES, RACE IS NOT THE PROBLEM TO SOLVE – IT IS THE ASSET TO MANAGE. (important) i

    YES, RACE IS NOT THE PROBLEM TO SOLVE – IT IS THE ASSET TO MANAGE.

    (important)

    it is very unlikely that race can be overcome for anyone who must live in proximity to blacks and hispanics and sees the consequences. It is true that good people are in every group, and that our tribes (races) can work together to common ends if we do not force one another into continuing the demonstrated failure of integration – particularly in business, schools, and neighborhoods – and let people continue to naturally sort into communities. We have common commercial intersts. We have common defense intersts. But we do not have common social (normative) interests because of the harsh reality of our substantial differences in genetics, temperament, ability, culture, and history.

    Instead, while differences in demand for commons is the cause of our conflict – race is not the cause of our conflict but the political order in which races and mixed peoples cooperate.

    The current organization of the polity by winner takes all, and the possibility of obtaining political power to interfere in one another’s communities that is the problem.

    So, yes, the problem can be overcome. But it can only be overcome by grasping where we have common and uncommon interests.

    You cannot change sexual, social, economic, political, and military differences between the races and subraces, nor can you change the kinship advantage to association, residency, economic and political cooperation with people of those intersets.

    Our military and our markets don’t care about our color.

    every other aspect of life does.

    Hence my solution depriving us of possibility of power over one another – and the ability to determine our futures independent of what others think, by sorting into groups that are heterogeneous or homogenous.

    I want desperately to live in a northern european homogenous polity – and I want others of my people to do inherit that which I have inherited.

    I know what will happen to every other known political order and I am happy if they want to do so – that does not mean it is good or will end up as anything other than a small number of wealthy elites surrounded by urban rings of poverty, favellas and ghettos. It won’t.

    But these are our choices to make.

    They are not others’ choices to make.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-02 10:24:00 UTC

  • THE LEFT RIGHT DIVIDE IN SIMPLE TERMS I will not let Rome fall twice. ……….

    THE LEFT RIGHT DIVIDE IN SIMPLE TERMS

    I will not let Rome fall twice.

    ……………Right….Left

    …..evidentiary…..experiential

    …..capitalizing….consumptive

    inter-temporal…..temporal

    …….reciprocal…..proportional

    ….meritocratic….equalitarian

    falsificationary…..justificationary

    ………..eugenic….dysgenic

    ……………truth…..approval

    …………….male….female

    ……………trade….seduction

    …..deprivation…..ostracization

    ……………force…..undermining

    …………….pack….herd

    ………..Markets….Monopolies

    …..Nationalism….Globalism

    Cognitively left dysgenic female herd vs cognitively right eugenic male pack. We have no agency. We we are gene machines pursuing our reproductive strategies adapting them only to our class (status).

    And all speech and most importantly, all political speech is either truthful, reciprocal, meritocratic (hierarchical male right) or untruthful, irreciprocal, proportional (equalitarian female left). Right trade and truth and Left Seduction disapproval.

    And all consciousness of the self is just to facilitate the problem of balancing our incentives with the incentives of others.

    The only solutions to the present conflict are :

    1. Markets for Commons,

    2. Separation and Specialization

    3. Civil War and Winner Take All

    I prefer the latter, I will morally compromise on either of the former.

    I will not let Rome fall twice.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-02 08:44:00 UTC

  • AN ARTICULATE PROGRESSIVE SO AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ARTICULATE COMPARISONS —“Progr

    AN ARTICULATE PROGRESSIVE SO AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ARTICULATE COMPARISONS

    —“Progresiveness errs on the side of openness in face of the uncertainty. Conservativeness errs on the side of “known good or reasonable” arrangements. … None are in principle superior in all cases. … We must use a third axis, rationality, to bridge our differences constructively.”—@flancian

    Progressives (consumptives) err on the side of consumption in the face of uncertainty. Conservatives(capitalizers) err on the side of saving in the face of uncertainty.

    The female consumptive herd (her children) the male capitalizing pack (their tribe).

    We must use TRADE to bridge our differences.

    (Are you starting to see yet?)

    I’m using male concrete (scientific) terms.

    You’re using female seductive (deceptive) terms.

    Once you see it you can’t un-see it. The question is adaptation possible?

    No. Hence institutions of trade.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-02 08:24:00 UTC

  • THE ONLY POLITICAL ARGUMENT —“Leftists care more about an assertion being offe

    THE ONLY POLITICAL ARGUMENT

    —“Leftists care more about an assertion being offensive than it being true.”— Χρόνος @HliosX

    Yes.

    —“Hi! I am a leftist, yet I don’t think this assertion applies to me. Would you like to discuss/debate?”—Flancia @flancian

    Sure. 😉

    Assertion: all differences are reducible to right evidentiary capitalizing, inter-temporal, reciprocal, falsificationary eugenic vs left experiential, consumptive, temporal, proportional, justificationary, dysgenic – and as such, decidable. As such all left propositions will be reducible to approval/disapproval, and right truth/falsehood.

    Cognitively left dysgenic female herd vs cognitively right eugenic male pack. We have no agency. We we are gene machines pursuing our reproductive strategies adapting them only to our class (status).

    And all speech and most importantly, all political speech is either truthful, reciprocal, meritocratic (hierarchical male right) or untruthful, irreciprocal, proportional (equalitarian female left). Right trade and truth and Left Seduction disapproval.

    The only solution is exchange. The condensation of the three classes of monarchy(judge of last resort), nobility(lords, senate), and family-business(house of commons), into a single parliamentary council, instead of adding a house of labor and a house for women eliminated the traditional european market between the classes, thereby creating a race to the majoritarian bottom, political conflict, and the incentive to immigrate vast underclasses to circumvent the western civilizational strategy of sovereignty.

    If we had added houses women (who are the only defectors driving leftward movement) would have learned how to use their access to political power in exchange, rather than using the traditional female method of undermining.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-02 07:45:00 UTC

  • In 1992, starting with I think it was Foreign Affairs, the promise of democracy

    In 1992, starting with I think it was Foreign Affairs, the promise of democracy died.Since then it devolved to a european particularity. And due to demographic invasion since 90’s, and then Obama it looks like it is coming to an end – unless separation or conquest changes things.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-02 03:38:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1223812841750323201

    Reply addressees: @MercuryFeetBC @AdielleAS @GettyImagesNews @woolstonphoto

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1223812052877107200

    IN REPLY TO:

    @MercuryFeetBC

    @curtdoolittle @AdielleAS @GettyImagesNews @woolstonphoto Happy to oblige. I’m an optimist Curt. There are people & you know them as well as I do, that are much more brilliant and influential than I am, that will never let democracy die.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1223812052877107200

  • So we can’t let you take the rest of us down with us. It’s over. The century of

    So we can’t let you take the rest of us down with us.
    It’s over. The century of false promise is over. You killed democracy. And it will die with your names on it for eternity.

    There will be no second fall of the Roman Empire – this time by pseudoscience instead of theology.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-02 02:05:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1223789582887636992

    Reply addressees: @MercuryFeetBC @AdielleAS @GettyImagesNews @woolstonphoto

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1223789225084104705

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @MercuryFeetBC @AdielleAS @GettyImagesNews @woolstonphoto And since evidence has falsified marxism, socialism, and science has falsified feminism, postmodernism, and denial of our substantial differences in gender, class, and race, other than invasive immigration the west would have survived the 20th century of social pseudoscience.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1223789225084104705

    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @MercuryFeetBC @AdielleAS @GettyImagesNews @woolstonphoto And since evidence has falsified marxism, socialism, and science has falsified feminism, postmodernism, and denial of our substantial differences in gender, class, and race, other than invasive immigration the west would have survived the 20th century of social pseudoscience.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1223789225084104705

  • It’s true. White people, in military gear, with weapons are reliable and trustwo

    It’s true. White people, in military gear, with weapons are reliable and trustworthy, largely working and middle class members of the polity with military, law enforcement, hunting experience, and centuries of responsibility.

    It’s hoodrats that chimp out.
    White people conquer.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-01 23:41:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1223753281605898245

    Reply addressees: @AdielleAS @GettyImagesNews @woolstonphoto

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1223363329974030336

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1223363329974030336

  • THE ANGLO PEOPLES NEED WRITTEN CONSTITUTIONS OF INVIOLABLE NATURAL LAW REQUIRING

    THE ANGLO PEOPLES NEED WRITTEN CONSTITUTIONS OF INVIOLABLE NATURAL LAW REQUIRING TRANSACTIONAL CHANGES, AND THE PEOPLE NEED JURIDICAL DEFENSE AND THE LEGISLATURE NEEDS JURIDICAL ACCOUNTABILITY

    by Reece Haynes

    5 years in British politics (observing, theorizing, debating, practicing), proves everything you’ve said. The supremacy of Parliament is for nought when that Parliament is filled with the wrong people.

    And our unwritten constitution, plus the common law, is routinely disobeyed – with no sanctions applied by the judiciary.

    Not codifying the constitution, not maintaining the Empire, and not preserving the Aristotelian mixed model (hereditary monarchy and nobility, plus limited democracy) were all big mistakes.

    And then there’s the historical geopolitical mistakes which you also mention.

    —

    CD:

    The judicial novelties I’ve found are:

    1. The hereditary monarchy as a judge of last resort in defense against the fashions of the people, the malice of a minority, and the failure of the political process, is indispensable.

    2. The commonwealth model is to be embraced by any future american political order, with the monarchy representing the english speaking peoples.

    3. The British parliamentary and debate model is superior to the american.

    4. The British two (or more) Tiered legal system is superior to the american.

    5. The German Proportional Party System is superior to the British and american — allowing superior policy and superior adaptation.

    6. The requirement for strict construction from the first principle of reciprocity, specific statement of the scope(limit), and reference of any prior legislation , legislation, or finding of the court, upon which it depends.

    7. the requirement that the judiciary return the undecidable to the legislature thereby preventing legislation from the bench – and the mechanism for judiciary to require the legislature settle the matter in reasonable time

    8. The liability of legislators, regulators, and judges to warranty (hold involuntary liability) for their actions in so much that they do not violate the constitution of natural law.

    9. The vulnerability of legislators, regulators, judges and their agents to judicial prosecution for violations of the constitution.

    10. The vulnerability of the public to prosecution for advocation in public to the public in matters public, of violation of the constitution.

    11. The addition of involuntary warranty and therefor liability, for the entire scope of baiting into hazard upon which the 20th century deceits were constructed.

    12. The reversal of borrower beware to lender beware.

    13. Universal standing in matters of the commons

    14. Restoration of every man (citizen) a sheriff (deputy), defense of self, property and commons, restoration of extrajudicial punishment; the judicially sanctioned duel; and the sovereignty of men and as such their requirement to bear arms.

    15. The jewish-french cosmopolitan sponsored invasion of western civlization has destroyed our experiment in democracy – and universal democracy must and will end and we have proposed a set of options for polities to choose from, the easiest of which is multiple houses to maintain numbers, or fewer voters by much higher criteria, or lastly, kinship(ethnic) voters only.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-01 19:06:00 UTC

  • GOVERNMENTS DO HAVE CURRENCY IF NOT MONEY —“Governments don’t have money, citi

    GOVERNMENTS DO HAVE CURRENCY IF NOT MONEY

    —“Governments don’t have money, citizens do. Will the state fund [whatever] through mandatory force derived taxes or will state funding be purely voluntary on the part of interested citizens (non mandatory tithing).”—

    Hmmm… that’s not entirely true. Just as a thought experiment, assume a government over a territory that is fully autarkic and has no need of foreign currency or trade.

    This government can issue a currency (each unit a tradable share in the economy), demand it as legal tender for all debts private and public, and it can equidistribute X amount of this currency to every citizen every day, week, month, quarter, year or whatever directly to a bank account.

    It can then collect some percentage of that in taxes and repeat the process.

    This is what governments already do. They just put the banks in the middle requiring us to borrow it and giving the banks interest, thereby having the banks inflate 9x times the amount.

    We are not fully autarkic so the process limits the state’s powers of monetary distribution.

    Modern monetary theory won’t work, but this will, it will just require collecting and measuring better information than we do now

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-01 17:40:00 UTC