Curt Doolittle

Theme: Governance

  • “Future so bright we gotta wear shades.”—Chris Mc “in the current phase of war

    —“Future so bright we gotta wear shades.”—Chris Mc

    “in the current phase of warfare, cities are no longer defensive anchors against armored thrusts ranging through the countryside. They have become the main targets of offensive action themselves. Just as the huge militaries of the early twentieth century were vulnerable to supply and communications disruption, cities are now so heavily dependent on a constant flow of services from various centralized systems that even the simplest attacks on those systems can cause massive disruption.”

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-31 19:02:00 UTC

  • “There is only nomocracy or kleptocracy, with kleptocracy using many names.”—B

    —“There is only nomocracy or kleptocracy, with kleptocracy using many names.”—Bill Joslin,Neil A. Bucklew

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-31 15:52:00 UTC

  • (repost suggested by Brandon Hayes) “[A]s far as I know, the only meaningful rea

    (repost suggested by Brandon Hayes)

    “[A]s far as I know, the only meaningful reason to study economics for use in ethics and politics, is to justify the rule of law (Nomocracy), under the single rule of property rights, where property rights is as defined under Propertarianism, as property-en-toto (demonstrated property). And where that body of law suppresses sufficient involuntary transfer of property-en-toto, that the formation of a Nomocratic polity is possible. And where the formation and perpetuation of that polity is possible, because transaction costs are sufficiently suppressed that a rational choice for Nomocracy is possible, over a rational choice for statism. And that the normative preference of nomocratic rule over statist rule is maintained by the constant exercise of that body of law in daily life, rather than a phillosophical-rational, religio-moral, pedagogically-instructional, or normatively-habituated means of persistence.”

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-31 12:30:00 UTC

  • Westphalia: An ‘irregularity’ of Western Civilization

    The idea that governments are uniquely able to start fight and finish wars is a product of the treaty of Westphalia. This ‘irregularity’ of western civilization survived long enough that the average idiot can’t imagine that the way ISIS conducts wars, or the drug cartels conduct wars, was the primary means wars were constructed in the past. Westphalia made states accountable. Communism, ISIS, Cartels made them unaccountable again. And the folly of heterogeneity and Cosmopolitanism created the incentives.

  • Westphalia: An ‘irregularity’ of Western Civilization

    The idea that governments are uniquely able to start fight and finish wars is a product of the treaty of Westphalia. This ‘irregularity’ of western civilization survived long enough that the average idiot can’t imagine that the way ISIS conducts wars, or the drug cartels conduct wars, was the primary means wars were constructed in the past. Westphalia made states accountable. Communism, ISIS, Cartels made them unaccountable again. And the folly of heterogeneity and Cosmopolitanism created the incentives.

  • God Was Enthusiastic with His Moron Wand

    (Modern Warfare Generations) The idea that governments are uniquely able to start fight and finish wars is a product of the treaty of Westphalia. This ‘irregularity’ of western civilization survived long enough that the average idiot can’t… https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle/posts/1015638886 —“This is a pretty gross misreading of history.”— Ed Rotski That’s not an argument. Make one. “Modern War begins after Westphalia.” “Westphalia Gave The State A Monopoly on War.” “Through all of history families, clans, cities, ethnic groups, religions, private companies (conquest of india) … fought wars.” “The Church lost it’s ability to conduct warfare in Europe” —“1. Treaty of Westphalia is hardly unique. 2. The whole arc of state building in the middle ages was to arrogate war making to the central government, that is, to abolish private war. That process was largely done by turn of the 16th century.”—- Ed Rotski —-“Whoever told you modern war starts with Westphalia is just wrong.”— Ed Rotski I will let you argue with William Lind, and every other military historian. Rather than waste my time with someone lacking basic knowledge of the generations of modern warfare and their beginnings in the 1640’s. —“Really? Talk to Delbruck, or Kauper, or Lynn, Potter, Wilson, Weigley, Dodge, Duffy, Chandler, Nosworthy, or even Comines. Your assertions are not just bad, they’re “the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor” bad. You are hideously ignorant.”—- 1) OK. Game on. It’ll be good education for the audience. Here is the Generations of Warfare definition I made use of. 2) Delbruck defines ‘modern’ as beginning with the italian renaissance. Kaeuper is a medievalist and I don’t know how he defines ‘modern’. … 3) As far as I know Lynn defines modern as 1650 – the end of ‘pillaging’. So he agrees. Potter doesn’t make a distinction that I know of and I don’t know why you’d include him. Same with Wilson unless you’re referring to someone other than the Tower collection historian. 4) Same for Nosworthy? Are you just spamming names? 5) And Why not Lind, Keegan, or Van Creveld? Why aren’t they in your list? 6) Just search for “Generations of Warfare”. 7) And how does any author you listed have anything to do with my OP and its argument? How does it have anything to do with 4/5gw and the return of non-state actors? What rock do you live under? 8) an endless stream of morons waste my time. —“Modern warfare doesn’t start until nation in arms and mass conscription, and the final adoption of the modern organizations, battalion, brigade, division, corps. That is so clear. And Lynn is wrong if he thinks people stopped pillaging in the 1650s.”— Ed Rotski OMFG. Look, do you know how many historical models and cycles have been proposed? You can make any distinction yuo want. However, the one that I referred to was the one that every theorist I know and every other think tank I know of, uses. So between your …. ‘opinion’. Your ‘straw men’ list, and the fact that the only person on your list who said anything close agrees with 1650, and that I pointed to a reference for an index of generations that gets 36M google hits, I”m gonna cast you as a basement dwelling loon. May 29, 2018 7:39pm

  • God Was Enthusiastic with His Moron Wand

    (Modern Warfare Generations) The idea that governments are uniquely able to start fight and finish wars is a product of the treaty of Westphalia. This ‘irregularity’ of western civilization survived long enough that the average idiot can’t… https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle/posts/1015638886 —“This is a pretty gross misreading of history.”— Ed Rotski That’s not an argument. Make one. “Modern War begins after Westphalia.” “Westphalia Gave The State A Monopoly on War.” “Through all of history families, clans, cities, ethnic groups, religions, private companies (conquest of india) … fought wars.” “The Church lost it’s ability to conduct warfare in Europe” —“1. Treaty of Westphalia is hardly unique. 2. The whole arc of state building in the middle ages was to arrogate war making to the central government, that is, to abolish private war. That process was largely done by turn of the 16th century.”—- Ed Rotski —-“Whoever told you modern war starts with Westphalia is just wrong.”— Ed Rotski I will let you argue with William Lind, and every other military historian. Rather than waste my time with someone lacking basic knowledge of the generations of modern warfare and their beginnings in the 1640’s. —“Really? Talk to Delbruck, or Kauper, or Lynn, Potter, Wilson, Weigley, Dodge, Duffy, Chandler, Nosworthy, or even Comines. Your assertions are not just bad, they’re “the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor” bad. You are hideously ignorant.”—- 1) OK. Game on. It’ll be good education for the audience. Here is the Generations of Warfare definition I made use of. 2) Delbruck defines ‘modern’ as beginning with the italian renaissance. Kaeuper is a medievalist and I don’t know how he defines ‘modern’. … 3) As far as I know Lynn defines modern as 1650 – the end of ‘pillaging’. So he agrees. Potter doesn’t make a distinction that I know of and I don’t know why you’d include him. Same with Wilson unless you’re referring to someone other than the Tower collection historian. 4) Same for Nosworthy? Are you just spamming names? 5) And Why not Lind, Keegan, or Van Creveld? Why aren’t they in your list? 6) Just search for “Generations of Warfare”. 7) And how does any author you listed have anything to do with my OP and its argument? How does it have anything to do with 4/5gw and the return of non-state actors? What rock do you live under? 8) an endless stream of morons waste my time. —“Modern warfare doesn’t start until nation in arms and mass conscription, and the final adoption of the modern organizations, battalion, brigade, division, corps. That is so clear. And Lynn is wrong if he thinks people stopped pillaging in the 1650s.”— Ed Rotski OMFG. Look, do you know how many historical models and cycles have been proposed? You can make any distinction yuo want. However, the one that I referred to was the one that every theorist I know and every other think tank I know of, uses. So between your …. ‘opinion’. Your ‘straw men’ list, and the fact that the only person on your list who said anything close agrees with 1650, and that I pointed to a reference for an index of generations that gets 36M google hits, I”m gonna cast you as a basement dwelling loon. May 29, 2018 7:39pm

  • Our Incremental Destruction

    OUR INCREMENTAL DESTRUCTION The Rebellion Against Evolution 1 – Christianity was bad enough. 2 – Adding women to the voting pool worse 3 – Replacing the Militia and Conscription with Voluntary Service worse. 4 – Allowing (((Aliens))) to engage in propaganda, parasitism, and deceit the worst. 5 – Adding women to the military a final catastrophe. THE PROPAGANDA OF INCREMENTAL DESTRUCTION The organized destruction of the militia that is the origin of the uniqueness of western civilization. 1 – Effeminate Religion, 2 – Marxism, 3 – Cosmopolitanism, 4 – Feminism, 5 – Postmodernism, Devolution by the Feminine. THE UNIQUENESS OF THE WEST: The order of the militia: the distributed dictatorship of sovereign men. 1 – Sovereignty, Reciprocity, 2 – Truth, Duty, 3 – Rule of Law, Markets in Everything. Evolution by the Masculine.

  • Our Incremental Destruction

    OUR INCREMENTAL DESTRUCTION The Rebellion Against Evolution 1 – Christianity was bad enough. 2 – Adding women to the voting pool worse 3 – Replacing the Militia and Conscription with Voluntary Service worse. 4 – Allowing (((Aliens))) to engage in propaganda, parasitism, and deceit the worst. 5 – Adding women to the military a final catastrophe. THE PROPAGANDA OF INCREMENTAL DESTRUCTION The organized destruction of the militia that is the origin of the uniqueness of western civilization. 1 – Effeminate Religion, 2 – Marxism, 3 – Cosmopolitanism, 4 – Feminism, 5 – Postmodernism, Devolution by the Feminine. THE UNIQUENESS OF THE WEST: The order of the militia: the distributed dictatorship of sovereign men. 1 – Sovereignty, Reciprocity, 2 – Truth, Duty, 3 – Rule of Law, Markets in Everything. Evolution by the Masculine.

  • Just read Kai Murros’ book on revolutions (it’s short) and it’s just maoist nons

    Just read Kai Murros’ book on revolutions (it’s short) and it’s just maoist nonsense revisited. There are a few rather obvious points in there (the middle class) but it’s nothing more than another monopoly attempt at the seizure of power so that the past errors can be repeated.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-30 17:49:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1001883330537811969