Theme: Governance

  • American Policy Is Not Morally Good – Just Pragmatic Pursuit of Market Prosperity

    Let me put something into perspective. America advocates markets and meritocracy and fixed borders. This sounds very ‘moral’ but it is just profitable for an advanced country to advocate meritocracy. For the same reason it is sensible for a less advanced country to advocate authoritarianism. We all pursue self intersets. It is just that sometimes, self interest is in everyone’s interest. And America’s self interest is most often in everyone’s interest. It’s not because americans are good or smart. it’s because it is more profitable.

  • Retweeted John Robb (@johnrobb): “World War III is a guerrilla information war w

    Retweeted John Robb (@johnrobb):

    “World War III is a guerrilla information war with no division between military and civilian participation.”

    Marshall McLuhan (1970)


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-28 22:40:00 UTC

  • Evidence that the left is top down organized by narrative-producers, is the shoc

    Evidence that the left is top down organized by narrative-producers, is the shock and silence today just like the few days after the election, while they talk with one another trying to find some narrative.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-28 18:02:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1012395832937799682

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. Evidence that the left is top down organized

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    Evidence that the left is top down organized by narrative-producers, is the shock and silence today just like the few days after the election, while they talk with one another trying to find some narrative.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-28 18:02:18 UTC

  • Evidence that the left is top down organized by narrative-producers, is the shoc

    Evidence that the left is top down organized by narrative-producers, is the shock and silence today just like the few days after the election, while they talk with one another trying to find some narrative.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-28 14:02:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. —“Curt does your book include a new constit

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    —“Curt does your book include a new constitution, or is that a separate project? (With recent political events, leftists intensifying harassment, etc, I’m thinking we might need one sooner rather than later.)”—John Mark

    Last summer I had to break the book apart because it was too big. And so I have two books, one shorter that is targeted to reforming libertarianism, and one much much longer targeted to revolution and constitution.

    The first and shorter book is more technical, and the longer book more explanatory.

    The other reason being that I had to burn a long time on the Grammars and I felt that I could now get the shorter book out ‘shortly’ and then take the technical component and move it into the larger book.

    This means that the two books have similar technical content, but the larger book ignores ‘temporal’ issues (liberty, freedom, libertarianism), and contains entirely the new law.

    What I *can* say is that I have definitely gotten to the point where I can explain everything to a freshman college student. Which I never thought would happen. Whether the book is as understandable as I can manage in a class environment I’m not sure.

    And there is a certain virtue to timing. The Overton window for revolution has to be open to get maximum effect. Although we are certainly getting there as I expected…

    The clock ticks,
    the world turns,
    the window opens,
    anger burns.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-28 13:56:23 UTC

  • “Curt does your book include a new constitution, or is that a separate project?

    —“Curt does your book include a new constitution, or is that a separate project? (With recent political events, leftists intensifying harassment, etc, I’m thinking we might need one sooner rather than later.)”—John Mark

    Last summer I had to break the book apart because it was too big. And so I have two books, one shorter that is targeted to reforming libertarianism, and one much much longer targeted to revolution and constitution.

    The first and shorter book is more technical, and the longer book more explanatory.

    The other reason being that I had to burn a long time on the Grammars and I felt that I could now get the shorter book out ‘shortly’ and then take the technical component and move it into the larger book.

    This means that the two books have similar technical content, but the larger book ignores ‘temporal’ issues (liberty, freedom, libertarianism), and contains entirely the new law.

    What I *can* say is that I have definitely gotten to the point where I can explain everything to a freshman college student. Which I never thought would happen. Whether the book is as understandable as I can manage in a class environment I’m not sure.

    And there is a certain virtue to timing. The Overton window for revolution has to be open to get maximum effect. Although we are certainly getting there as I expected…

    The clock ticks,

    the world turns,

    the window opens,

    anger burns.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-28 09:56:00 UTC

  • The court will not reverse itself for the simple reason that marriage difference

    The court will not reverse itself for the simple reason that marriage differences would inhibit mobility between states, and this is something that the court will never do. They cannot reverse it.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-28 01:51:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1012151422685728769

    Reply addressees: @RedwoodGirl

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1012150922481360897


    IN REPLY TO:

    @RedwoodGirl

    @curtdoolittle If the court rules that same-sex marriage is illegal, that circumvents the state legislatures that have passed same-sex marriage laws.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1012150922481360897

  • The court has said that the ONLY reason roe v wade was a mistake is that it shou

    The court has said that the ONLY reason roe v wade was a mistake is that it should have been left to the states. But (a) they will not reverse it, (b) even if they did, they would only return it to the states. They will not COMPOUND what they consider their greatest mistake.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-28 01:50:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1012151245849726976

    Reply addressees: @RedwoodGirl

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1012150784283144192


    IN REPLY TO:

    @RedwoodGirl

    @curtdoolittle How do you figure? If the court rules that fetuses have due process rights and abortion denies them those rights, abortion becomes illegal everywhere. That will circumvent the state legislatures that have passed abortion rights laws.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1012150784283144192

  • What’s changing is either side’s ability to legislate from the bench, rather tha

    What’s changing is either side’s ability to legislate from the bench, rather than the state and federal legislatures and the amendment process. We gain the Restoration of Rule of Law. The left cannot tolerate rule of law.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-28 01:34:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1012147076816359424

    Reply addressees: @DailyCaller

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1012140526613815296


    IN REPLY TO:

    @DailyCaller

    Chris Matthews: Kennedy Retirement ‘Time For Vengeance’ https://t.co/ipqytfksI1 https://t.co/uRpENjeSfW

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1012140526613815296