Curt Doolittle

Theme: Governance

  • YOU SO. Mar 19, 2018, 1:29 PM

    http://www.wnd.com/2018/03/army-of-islam-would-be-worlds-biggest-military/TOLD YOU SO.

    http://www.wnd.com/2018/03/army-of-islam-would-be-worlds-biggest-military/Updated Mar 19, 2018, 1:29 PM

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-19 13:29:00 UTC

  • And so the conundrum is, that my formal work is in the interest of a class not n

    And so the conundrum is, that my formal work is in the interest of a class not necessarily able to access that work at a technical level, only DEMAND IT BE IMPLEMENTED. I cannot ‘dumb it down’ any more than we can dumb down calculus, programming, or strictly constructed law.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-19 13:23:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/975724507511099392

  • Russia And America

    (a) the USA (state dept) was profoundly stupid not to bring a weak russia into nato at any cost thereby uniting german technology and russian resources. That is one of the greatest policy errores in history ( which the USA seems to stumble into regularly.) (b) Putin’s only error (as a resident of Kiev myself) was in using deception of the little green men, insurrection, and propaganda rather than picking up the phone and just speaking the truth: —“We just can’t allow our Don Basin tech, and only warm water port out of our influence so we are going to step in, and ask for your support, and pay for this undesirable action with discounted gas to ukraine for 50 years. I will work to help world leaders understand why this was an unfortunate necessity for the preservation of the international balance of powers.”— (c) Postwar American policy is trivially simple, but stated morally instead of descriptively: “This can’t happen again. So: 1) we will work to force states to focus on modernization and joining the world economy, and prohibit territorial expansion, or opposition to that integration of trade. 2) We will work to support self determination to the extent that it does not violate #1 -borders and trade. This will assist in the development of economic integration and limit future wars. 3) BUT if you choose self determination and choose poorly in violation of #1 we will punish you regardless. it is this last “BUT” that Americans don’t state. There is nothing in that foreign policy that wasn’t stated by Burke, Smith and Hume. The USA has a long history of criticizing the “constant wars” of european countries. But the price of creating the international order is policing contradictions of it. And so the USA became what it despised. Because all empires have no other options. Rule by commerce, rule by violence, rule by deceit (religion).

  • RUSSIA AND AMERICA (a) the USA (state dept) was profoundly stupid not to bring a

    RUSSIA AND AMERICA

    (a) the USA (state dept) was profoundly stupid not to bring a weak russia into nato at any cost thereby uniting german technology and russian resources. That is one of the greatest policy errores in history ( which the USA seems to stumble into regularly.)

    (b) Putin’s only error (as a resident of Kiev myself) was in using deception of the little green men, insurrection, and propaganda rather than picking up the phone and just speaking the truth:

    —“We just can’t allow our Don Basin tech, and only warm water port out of our influence so we are going to step in, and ask for your support, and pay for this undesirable action with discounted gas to ukraine for 50 years. I will work to help world leaders understand why this was an unfortunate necessity for the preservation of the international balance of powers.”—

    (c) Postwar American policy is trivially simple, but stated morally instead of descriptively:

    “This can’t happen again. So:

    1) we will work to force states to focus on modernization and joining the world economy, and prohibit territorial expansion, or opposition to that integration of trade.

    2) We will work to support self determination to the extent that it does not violate #1 -borders and trade. This will assist in the development of economic integration and limit future wars.

    3) BUT if you choose self determination and choose poorly in violation of #1 we will punish you regardless. it is this last “BUT” that Americans don’t state.

    There is nothing in that foreign policy that wasn’t stated by Burke, Smith and Hume.

    The USA has a long history of criticizing the “constant wars” of european countries. But the price of creating the international order is policing contradictions of it.

    And so the USA became what it despised.

    Because all empires have no other options. Rule by commerce, rule by violence, rule by deceit (religion).

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-19 11:37:00 UTC

  • Russia And America

    (a) the USA (state dept) was profoundly stupid not to bring a weak russia into nato at any cost thereby uniting german technology and russian resources. That is one of the greatest policy errores in history ( which the USA seems to stumble into regularly.) (b) Putin’s only error (as a resident of Kiev myself) was in using deception of the little green men, insurrection, and propaganda rather than picking up the phone and just speaking the truth: —“We just can’t allow our Don Basin tech, and only warm water port out of our influence so we are going to step in, and ask for your support, and pay for this undesirable action with discounted gas to ukraine for 50 years. I will work to help world leaders understand why this was an unfortunate necessity for the preservation of the international balance of powers.”— (c) Postwar American policy is trivially simple, but stated morally instead of descriptively: “This can’t happen again. So: 1) we will work to force states to focus on modernization and joining the world economy, and prohibit territorial expansion, or opposition to that integration of trade. 2) We will work to support self determination to the extent that it does not violate #1 -borders and trade. This will assist in the development of economic integration and limit future wars. 3) BUT if you choose self determination and choose poorly in violation of #1 we will punish you regardless. it is this last “BUT” that Americans don’t state. There is nothing in that foreign policy that wasn’t stated by Burke, Smith and Hume. The USA has a long history of criticizing the “constant wars” of european countries. But the price of creating the international order is policing contradictions of it. And so the USA became what it despised. Because all empires have no other options. Rule by commerce, rule by violence, rule by deceit (religion).

  • Igor Markov’s answer: Russia wants the US to give it free reign in what Russia c

    Igor Markov’s answer: Russia wants the US to give it free reign in what Russia considers its sphere of influence — ex-USSR countries, plus Serbia, plus Syria, plus Libya, Cuba, Venezuela, etc. Russia also wants to expand its influence in Europe, suppress competition in several energy markets (nat….

  • Igor Markov’s answer: Russia wants the US to give it free reign in what Russia c

    Igor Markov’s answer: Russia wants the US to give it free reign in what Russia considers its sphere of influence — ex-USSR countries, plus Serbia, plus Syria, plus Libya, Cuba, Venezuela, etc. Russia also wants to expand its influence in Europe, suppress competition in several energy markets (nat….

  • Libertarian Pretense Of Paying The High Cost Of Order

    —“libertarians aren’t against violence…”— Empty words, because they are untestable words. Which is why libertarian words are, like religion, a comforting deception. 1. The question is not whether one is against aggression, but which cases of aggression. 2. The question is not whether one is against violence buth which cases of violence. 3. The question is not whether one will use violence, but under what cases they will use violence. Libertarians have not and cannot answer these questions because if they do the answer becomes obvious: “I want other people to pay the cost of the commons I benefit from.” Libertarianism is simply marxism for the commons instead of marxism for private property. There is only one method by which we create the class conditions of Sovereignty, Liberty, Freedom, and Subsidy, and that is the continuous organized application of violence to deny one and all the alternatives, by the universal militia of able men, and the costly production of the normative, economic, judicial, political, military and traditional commons necessary for preservation of their power to do so against all opposition. That is what libertarian means. Rothbardians did not favor liberty (ownership) but separatist anarchy (parasitism upon others commons). Period. End of Argument. I ended libertarianism forever like others ended marxism before it, and we ware currently in the process of ending neo-conservatism. When that is done, and we return to rule of law, the pseudoscientific century will have ended.

  • Libertarian Pretense Of Paying The High Cost Of Order

    —“libertarians aren’t against violence…”— Empty words, because they are untestable words. Which is why libertarian words are, like religion, a comforting deception. 1. The question is not whether one is against aggression, but which cases of aggression. 2. The question is not whether one is against violence buth which cases of violence. 3. The question is not whether one will use violence, but under what cases they will use violence. Libertarians have not and cannot answer these questions because if they do the answer becomes obvious: “I want other people to pay the cost of the commons I benefit from.” Libertarianism is simply marxism for the commons instead of marxism for private property. There is only one method by which we create the class conditions of Sovereignty, Liberty, Freedom, and Subsidy, and that is the continuous organized application of violence to deny one and all the alternatives, by the universal militia of able men, and the costly production of the normative, economic, judicial, political, military and traditional commons necessary for preservation of their power to do so against all opposition. That is what libertarian means. Rothbardians did not favor liberty (ownership) but separatist anarchy (parasitism upon others commons). Period. End of Argument. I ended libertarianism forever like others ended marxism before it, and we ware currently in the process of ending neo-conservatism. When that is done, and we return to rule of law, the pseudoscientific century will have ended.

  • LIBERTARIAN PRETENSE OF PAYING THE HIGH COST OF ORDER —“libertarians aren’t ag

    LIBERTARIAN PRETENSE OF PAYING THE HIGH COST OF ORDER

    —“libertarians aren’t against violence…”—

    Empty words, because they are untestable words. Which is why libertarian words are, like religion, a comforting deception.

    1. The question is not whether one is against aggression, but which cases of aggression.

    2. The question is not whether one is against violence buth which cases of violence.

    3. The question is not whether one will use violence, but under what cases they will use violence.

    Libertarians have not and cannot answer these questions because if they do the answer becomes obvious: “I want other people to pay the cost of the commons I benefit from.”

    Libertarianism is simply marxism for the commons instead of marxism for private property.

    There is only one method by which we create the class conditions of Sovereignty, Liberty, Freedom, and Subsidy, and that is the continuous organized application of violence to deny one and all the alternatives, by the universal militia of able men, and the costly production of the normative, economic, judicial, political, military and traditional commons necessary for preservation of their power to do so against all opposition.

    That is what libertarian means. Rothbardians did not favor liberty (ownership) but separatist anarchy (parasitism upon others commons).

    Period. End of Argument.

    I ended libertarianism forever like others ended marxism before it, and we ware currently in the process of ending neo-conservatism. When that is done, and we return to rule of law, the pseudoscientific century will have ended.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-19 08:26:00 UTC