Curt Doolittle

Theme: Governance

  • SOVEREIGNTY, LIBERTY, FREEDOM: IT STARTS WITH THE MILITIA **Rule of Law, by Natu

    SOVEREIGNTY, LIBERTY, FREEDOM: IT STARTS WITH THE MILITIA

    **Rule of Law, by Natural Law, with Universal Standing, and Universal Applicability: A contractual corporation consisting of a distributed dictatorship of sovereign militia (men). **

    A constitution of natural law creating a distributed private government, each member with one share ownership, purchasable by reciprocal insurance of all other members.

    With an independent judiciary, and and a hereditary monarchy providing a judge of last resort.

    Under such a corporation, under such a form of management, under such a contract, we have only productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange, free of negative externality, in markets for association, cooperation, reproduction, production private of goods, services, and information, commons of goods, services, and information, and the production of polities themselves, ad the means by which to cooperate.

    Government without discretion. Rule of Law between men, not over men.

    ( I have to substitute ‘militia’ for men, or the entire chain of reasoning is lost. )

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-16 08:49:00 UTC

  • WE GETTING CLOSE TO AN OPPORTUNITY IN BERKELEY? Who organizes this? Can we creat

    http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-berkeley-trump-rally-20170415-story.htmlARE WE GETTING CLOSE TO AN OPPORTUNITY IN BERKELEY?

    Who organizes this? Can we create a Push?

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-15 18:14:00 UTC

  • The only reason you have a sh-t government is because you haven’t killed enough

    The only reason you have a sh-t government is because you haven’t killed enough of them yet.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-15 17:34:00 UTC

  • THERE IS ONLY ONE MORAL FORM OF GOVERNMENT. The rest are either necessary, usefu

    THERE IS ONLY ONE MORAL FORM OF GOVERNMENT.

    The rest are either necessary, useful, or possible.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-15 17:27:00 UTC

  • UP – WE **WANT** WARLORD RULE – THE MILITIA Warlords MUST take over. That’s the

    https://mises.org/library/wouldnt-warlords-take-overGROW UP – WE **WANT** WARLORD RULE – THE MILITIA

    https://mises.org/library/wouldnt-warlords-take-over

    Warlords MUST take over. That’s the whole point. The question is only their number. A militia of warlords constitutes a distributed dictatorship under which only markets governed by natural law are possible.

    Anarchism? A lot of optimistic bullshit. Go live in Ukraine. in Belarus. In Russia (at least outside of moscow or st Petersburg.) Ukraine (the borderland) is where Jewish separatism of Rothbard was envisioned, under the protection of lithuanian, or polish, or russian empires, allowed financial and commercial gangsterism, while prohibiting physical retaliation. It was a system of organized predation upon the people just as today’s financialism consists of organized predation upon the people while preventing juridical defense from it, and physical retaliation against it.

    And that’s Ukraine today. The pretense of order. But 40+ Gangsters (warlords) we call Oligarchs (Private Property Rulership) with enough money and arms to (a) stack and buy the courts, (b) stack and buy the government, who have their own militaries, and who cannot be displaced, because they can too easily turn the rest of ukraine into a civil war zone like the east, leaving the only option Russian invasion and enforced order – which was exactly the plan all along.

    The reason ukraine is weak, is that it has no militia. Period.

    Rothbardianism consists of nothing but optimistic juvenile platitudes sold to reproductively, socially, economically uncompetitive males, as a wishful separatist movement, so that they might beg not to contribute to a commons that makes the market order possible, and instead, may parasitically exploit it without contribution. ie: separatism. Rothbardian ghetto ethics of intersubjectively verifiable property

    There is only one source of liberty: the organized use of violence to obtain, hold, and advance territory, resources, population, institutions, and capital – by a militia of sufficient scale that they cannot be opposed by any cost effective means, or by any concentration of power. How is that possible: only under genetic, cultural, and institutional homogeneity.

    PERIOD.

    How do you create liberty (permission)? As a byproduct of creating sovereignty in fact. How do you create sovereignty in fact? By organizing a corporation (franchise) of warriors – all of whom obtain a share (dividend) from the market produced by their distributed dictatorship of individual rule.

    But those warriors must be kin or to prevent organization by other than kin selection. A genetically and culturally homogenous population in the ruling class – the militia – must exist for liberty to exist.

    Sorry. Thats western history in a nutshell.

    Rothbard was just a commons marxist (Free Rider) just like Marx was a private property free rider. Just as the Neocons are a political market free riders.

    Monarchy and nobility (aristocracy) didn’t oppress. They domesticated the animal man. And clearly failed to domesticate the borderlands – where parasitic separatists allied with the state to prey upon the people, while preventing their retaliation against them.

    So grow up. Libertarianism is for boys. Men fight. they take. They rule. They profit from rule. They profit from rule by the incremental suppression of every means of profit possible other than productive, fully informed warrantied, voluntary exchange, free of negative externality in the markets for association, cooperation, reproduction, production of goods, services, and information, and production of commons, institutions, and political orders.

    Men fight. Boys beg from mommy and daddy authority of whatever scale they must.

    Men are sovereign in fact. Boys have a little pretense of liberty by permission.

    THUS ENDETH THE LESSON

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-15 17:02:00 UTC

  • ROTHBARDIANISM? BUILD A MODEL. GO AHEAD. THINK IT THRU. Build a model. Go ahead.

    ROTHBARDIANISM? BUILD A MODEL. GO AHEAD. THINK IT THRU.

    Build a model. Go ahead. Try it. You have an opinion. Prove that you’re not a fucking idiot.

    What will occur if you could manage to put 1000 rothbadians in a small city on a trade route, tomorrow, what would happen? model it out.

    1) it’s easy to find 1000 people to claim they are rothbardians.

    2) it’s IMPOSSIBLE to find 1000 people who DEMONSTRATE they are rothbardians.

    3) but lets assume for a minute that you can, by luck, get given some land along, say, the new silk road. And you want to set up a rothbardian society. How will you do that?

    Here is how your conversation will start: “if some rich person (please mommy or daddy), or some nation (please king, or government) will fund (pay me to play around) a libertarian order (a place where I can keep my meagre earnings outside of a major market) I will (I fantasize) move there (away from all the creature comforts of an empire and a mixed economy) to a place only other losers like me will go to, and feel good until we fail and blame it on other people who don’t come for not having our fortitude (subsidy).

    So, why do people come? What will they do? Why will they choose it over the alternatives? how will you create private defense, private, courts, private property, and how will your courts determine what private property, and what contract terms, they will rule in disputes over, and what not?

    How will you prevent a nearby city, state, or empire from boycotting you via trade barriers? how will you stop organized crime? How will you stop an influx of people who prey upon nearby cities, states, empires by violence, fraud, conversion, immigration, or fiancialization, or some other scheme?

    Why will WOMEN want to move there? or live there?

    If you can’t get 100 libertarianis to agree to the scope of non aggression, or the definition of private property, despite 50 years of trying, how will you get them to take real life and property and commercial risks together?

    In other words, how can you OPERATIONALIZE rothbardianism? How can you bring it into existence in the real world instead of the fantasy world of silly teenagers and immature young males?

    I mean, if you can’t operationalize your ideas, you (anyone) is just saying that youre stupid ignorant and fantasizing over hot girs on porn sites, right? I mean what’s the difference between envisioning yourself with some hot chick, envisioning yourself as some athlete, envisioning yourself as some warrior, envisioning yourself as economicallly successful, envisioning yourself as a leader of men, envisioning yourself as a politician, a king, a despot?

    I mean, if you can’t OPERATIONALIZE some objective and demonstrate that it’s at least POSSIBLE then you’re just masturbating to political porn the way young men masturbate to car porn, gun porn, chick porn. RIght?

    “I’m a libertarian” is, like “I’m a Marxist” just signaling that you masturbate to political porn unless you can state some strategy for operationally constructing what it is that you desire.

    I’m pretty smart and I CANNOT OPERATIONALLY CONSTRUCT A LIBERTARIAN ORDER. I CANNOT locate a candidate geographically, discover any incentives that would produce membership, discover sufficient means of organization to produce the minimum commons (rule of law, defense) discover a means of constructing sufficient comparative advantage that it is possible to attract and maintain population (particularly women). Or discover a means of preventing such a territory from being populated by raiders of nearby or remote markets who then seize power until the external markets prey upon them.

    I can’t do it. Tell me how it can be done. Show me people will do so. Show me rational incentives to do so. And the answer is, that you can’t. All yo ucan do is say “i would prefer to wok on the borderland where I exchange limited regulation and taxation for much lower standard of living and much higher opportunity costs – so high that I can only survive by parasitic remote subsistence on remote markets. Why? subsistence farming by an individual is fucking hard and libertarians aren’t exactly the hardest working folk you know.

    ROTHBARDIANISM IS NOTHING MORE JEWISH SEPARATIST PARASITISM sold to young ignorant men who have a touch of intelligence, but are of little associative, reproductive, commercial, military, and strategic value, precisely because there is something WRONG (undesirable) about them.

    it’s just that this parasitic argument, like marxism before it and christianty before it promises the impossible to people not smart enough to falsify that vast overloading and framing that the propaganda is constructed from.

    It sucks to admit you were played. That you’re not that smart. But libertarianism played a pretty good sized group of people. Not enough to make a political movement. But enough to make a cult for misfit boys.

    Grow the fuck up.

    Men fight. They kill. They destroy. They take. They rule. They profit from their rule. They decrease the cost of profiting from their rule. They profit more so.

    If’ you’re a free riding effeminate loser unwilling to fight, kill, destroy, take, rule, profit from taht rule, and build a civilization that constantly decreases the cost of profiting from that rule then you are just a fucking whinny little bitch.

    Lift. Run. Explosively Sprint. Read about war. get a weapon. And when the time comes be the first guy to sprint to an opportunity to fight, kill, destroy, take, and rule.

    Otherwise youre just a child. Not a man.

    Thus Endeth The Lesson.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-15 14:41:00 UTC

  • SEE? FRAGILE. —-DARPA’s focus is on thwarting a cyber attack, but Pry and Wool

    SEE? FRAGILE.

    —-DARPA’s focus is on thwarting a cyber attack, but Pry and Woolsey have also warned that North Korea or Iran could attack the grid with an atmospheric nuclear explosion over the East Coast that will disable the grid and that could end up leading to the death of 90 percent of those in the East.—

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-14 18:00:00 UTC

  • FASCISM ***In the agrarian age of physical warfare, rome handed dictatorial powe

    FASCISM

    ***In the agrarian age of physical warfare, rome handed dictatorial power to generals for the duration of the conflict. In the industrial age of economic warfare, nations handed dictatorial power to generals for the duration of the conflict.***

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-14 17:48:00 UTC

  • Definition: Law

    DEFINITION: LAW (‘inescapable’). 1 – Law: a statement of perpetual continuity (determinism), insured by the forces (organizations) of nature or man(polity, or government). 2 – Law (physical): a statement of perpetual continuity (determinism), discovered by a process of testing(prosecuting) an hypothesis against reality, 3 – Law (Natural): a statement of perpetual continuity (reciprocity) insured by the forces of nature (natural law) 4 – Law (Common): a discovery (finding) of a violation of reciprocity, argued by a plaintiff, defendant, or prosecutor (hypothesis) of the findings of an inquiry by a judge (theory), that survives refutation from other judges (law), insured by a third party insurer of last resort (polity, government). 5 – “Law” (Command) A command issued by the insurer of last resort, insured (enforced) by that insurer of last resort. 6 – “Law” (Legislation): A contract on terms between members of ruling organization, issued by that organization, in its capacity of an insurer of last resort (self insurance). 7 – “Law” (Treaty): An agreement between insurers of last resort, under reciprocal promise of adherence and insurance. Of these seven, command and legislation are not laws, but enforced as if they were laws. Treaties are uninsurable, because compliance is voluntary, unenforcible, and such agreements are, and always have been regularly violated – unless insure

  • Definition: Law

    DEFINITION: LAW (‘inescapable’). 1 – Law: a statement of perpetual continuity (determinism), insured by the forces (organizations) of nature or man(polity, or government). 2 – Law (physical): a statement of perpetual continuity (determinism), discovered by a process of testing(prosecuting) an hypothesis against reality, 3 – Law (Natural): a statement of perpetual continuity (reciprocity) insured by the forces of nature (natural law) 4 – Law (Common): a discovery (finding) of a violation of reciprocity, argued by a plaintiff, defendant, or prosecutor (hypothesis) of the findings of an inquiry by a judge (theory), that survives refutation from other judges (law), insured by a third party insurer of last resort (polity, government). 5 – “Law” (Command) A command issued by the insurer of last resort, insured (enforced) by that insurer of last resort. 6 – “Law” (Legislation): A contract on terms between members of ruling organization, issued by that organization, in its capacity of an insurer of last resort (self insurance). 7 – “Law” (Treaty): An agreement between insurers of last resort, under reciprocal promise of adherence and insurance. Of these seven, command and legislation are not laws, but enforced as if they were laws. Treaties are uninsurable, because compliance is voluntary, unenforcible, and such agreements are, and always have been regularly violated – unless insure