Curt Doolittle

Theme: Governance

  • THERE ARE BUT THREE WAYS TO CONTROL A PEOPLE: 1) MORAL ARGUMENT i – Tools: Relig

    THERE ARE BUT THREE WAYS TO CONTROL A PEOPLE:

    1) MORAL ARGUMENT

    i – Tools: Religion. Shaming. Rallying. Deception. Obscurantism.

    ii – Threat:Inclusion and Exclusion from the benefit of group membership.

    iii – Our defense: Reason, Science, Propertarianism (the logic of cooperation)

    2) VIOLENCE

    i – Tools: War. Law. Police.

    ii – Threat: death, deprivation, takings.

    iii – Our defense: The Militia. Rule of law. Common Law. Constitution. Property Rights.

    3) REMUNERATION

    i – Tools : Fiat money. Fiat Credit. Taxation. (extraction)

    ii – Threat : deprivation. poverty.

    iii – Our Defense: Precious metals. private money. digital currency.

    A PEOPLE MUST POSSESS THESE DEFENSES TO PROTECT THEMSELVES FROM THE PREDATORY STATE.

    a) Reason. Science. Propertarianism.

    b) The Militia. Rule of Law. Common Law. Constitution. Property Rights.

    c) Natural Money. Private money. Digital Money.

    IT IS AFTER THE PEOPLE POSSESS THESE THINGS, AND ONLY AFTER, THAT IT IS SAFE TO USE THE STATE FOR MUTUAL INSURANCE AND CARE-TAKING.

    The government is a very dangerous thing. Like all dangerous things, it may have benefits. But only if the dangers are handled with the extreme caution that they deserve. Like all harmful things, the state will harm those who attempt to gain its benefits without paying the high cost of its careful handling.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-23 13:42:00 UTC

  • moral victory of the hard men of the Ukrainian opposition in Kiev in trampling o

    http://isteve.blogspot.com/2014/02/what-it-takes.html?spref=fb–“The moral victory of the hard men of the Ukrainian opposition in Kiev in trampling on the most recent European-negotiated compromise solution and successfully driving the elected President out of the capital comes not just from dying bravely, but from winning. “–

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-23 12:55:00 UTC

  • ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF “PARLIAMENTARY COMMON LAW” It’s not a practical time for bi

    ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF “PARLIAMENTARY COMMON LAW”

    It’s not a practical time for big political ideas, but in a country like Ukraine, that probably DOES need a parliament, it would be very helpful to use lottocracy to elect ‘citizen judges’, selected by lot, from each district, to approve any law voted on by the parliament. Say, 12 citizen jurors for each representative. This essentially places common law requirements on the legislature. Use standard jury selection processes. As a citizen judge you must only vote in favor of a law if you understand it, it does not violate the constitution and it is good for your country.

    That is the best protection OTHER than NO GOVERNMENT that we can come up with, Direct democracy is a good idea but it is also terribly open to corruption, whereas juries whose actions are taken in public are not as easily corrupted as you think.

    This makes each citizen have a personal stake in the law.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-23 09:45:00 UTC

  • LETTER TO THE BBC – TODAY – IN RESPONSE TO “REQUEST FOR COMMENTS FROM KIEV” (int

    LETTER TO THE BBC – TODAY – IN RESPONSE TO “REQUEST FOR COMMENTS FROM KIEV”

    (interesting insight) (class and diversity)

    –“I live in downtown Kiev. I have for a year and a half. And it might be interesting to relate how I have been affected, at least intellectually, by the protests.

    I think we could help both western journalists and the populace they serve (as well as various State departments) if they would understand one of the vast differences between Ukrainian (and Russian for that matter) cultures and our own.

    Somewhat like the Nordic countries, but very UNLIKE the germanic and anglo countries, Ukrainians do not really consider themselves as participants in a class war. While status signals are about all we seem to seek to collect in the west, here in Ukraine, status signals are something you collect personally, but not on behalf of a class.

    The near destruction of class warfare was perhaps the only benefit of the soviet system. It worked. Whereas, in the west, we are still trying, to create the ‘Aristocracy of Everybody’ that was the unstated promise of the enlightenment in its Anglo, Anglo-American, German and French versions.

    The Ukrainian society is, despite its fracture along geographic lines, language lines, religious lines, and political lines, NOT fractured along class lines.

    And without this constant class and status warfare by everyone, people don’t demonize each other. They aren’t frustrated with each other. And even as a low-trust society, they don’t necessarily mistrust each other. Instead, they think and act as an extended family.

    As such there just isn’t all that pent up anger and frustration that we have in anglo countries – since it’s IMPOSSIBLE to create an aristocracy of everybody – many people become frustrated at the conflict between the promise of upper middle class life, and the reality that western countries form normal distributions. That just doesn’t happen here.

    Ukraine is tribally heterogeneous, but not necessarily culturally heterogeneous. Certainly less different than Quebecois and Anglo Anglos in Canada. Even in Canada the conflict is more over the class differences between the French who were predominantly from the continental lower classes, and the english who were not. In america the conflict is increasingly between married protestants with two incomes that can maintain middle class status, and everyone else.

    The Ukrainian people reserve their anger and frustration for the corrupt government and do not display it toward one another. In fact, they are extremely civil and loving (despite absurd levels of alcohol consumption and zero prohibition on fist-to-cuffs). They have a nobility and pride that we have lost in our constant great game of class warfare.

    The uncomfortable truth we westerners (particularly in the Anglosphere) must learn to deal with is that homogenous small societies demonstrate tolerance for greater redistribution and intolerance for class warfare. And that diverse, large societies resist redistribution and encourage class and culture warfare. In small homogenous polities, the government is a vehicle for cooperation. In large heterogeneous polities the government is a vehicle for class and cultural competition.

    I am not sure we should be so proud of ourselves in the Anglo world. Ukrainians formed a militia in 90 days out of hand-made armor, surplus military gear, motorcycle and hockey gear, baseball bats, pipes, and a few weapons that they stole from the police and military.

    That little militia did more for their freedom than democracy ever had.

    I think that’s what I learned from watching Ukrainians revolt.”–

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-23 08:32:00 UTC

  • DEMOCRACIES ARE VOTE FARMS AND PARASITES ARE THE CHEAPEST PRODUCT TO RAISE

    DEMOCRACIES ARE VOTE FARMS AND PARASITES ARE THE CHEAPEST PRODUCT TO RAISE.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-23 07:15:00 UTC

  • FUTURE : RUSSIAN POWER AGAINST UKRAINE? (note: I am pro-russian and pro-ukrainia

    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/why-a-new-ukraine-is-the-kremlins-worst-nightmare-9146751.htmlTHE FUTURE : RUSSIAN POWER AGAINST UKRAINE?

    (note: I am pro-russian and pro-ukrainian both. My interest in this geopolitical rough and tumble is simple: I want a strong east that suppresses visible corruption so that people can economically prosper. )

    “Russia has talked a lot about its “soft power” in recent years. It isn’t particularly soft. The new Ukraine will pay more for gas, which will be regularly cut off for “technical reasons”. Russia’s crazy “food safety” agency will declare that everything that comes out of Ukraine is radioactive. Ukrainian migrant workers will be sent home now they have finished helping to rebuild Sochi.

    Worst of all, Russia will work hard to try to re-corrupt the political system. The Kremlin used to boast that it could exploit Ukraine’s old-style “democracy” – meaning that, just like Yanukovych, they could launch their own puppet parties and buy agents of influence in the honest ones. The Ukrainian Front, a bizarre alliance of hooligans and bikers with a vaguely pan-Slavist ideology that appeared in the eastern city of Kharkiv two weeks ago, was backed by the Russians. Skinheads and sportsmen with the money to spend on propaganda are not a natural combination. Similar groups may pop up in Crimea and elsewhere, where the last elements of the old regime may try and regroup.

    But Russia’s ultimate problem is the same as Yanukovych faced. The Kremlin simply can’t understand that protesters would be motivated by ideology rather than by money or foreign support. The Russians were good at manipulating the old system, but dealing with real revolutionaries is a different matter. Ukraine is starting a very bumpy ride.”

    THEY ARE NOT MOTIVATED BY IDEOLOGY BUT ECONOMIC SUFFERING AND FREEDOM FROM SYSTEMIC CORRUPTION.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-22 23:15:00 UTC

  • LEARN FROM UKRAINE. UKRAINE IS A TUTORIAL. Overthrow a corrupt state

    LEARN FROM UKRAINE. UKRAINE IS A TUTORIAL.

    Overthrow a corrupt state.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-22 08:39:00 UTC

  • UKRAINE’S PRESIDENT RESIGNS. USA SHOULD BE NEXT. This is how it is done America.

    UKRAINE’S PRESIDENT RESIGNS. USA SHOULD BE NEXT.

    This is how it is done America. Not with press. Not with speeches. Not with threats. Not with begging and pleading. But with a dedicated few, willing to die to prove the illegitimacy of the government.

    Why does the right care? BECAUSE THEY DO THE FIGHTING.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-22 08:15:00 UTC

  • WESTERN (ANGLO) POLICY IN FOUR RULES 1) Secular Christianity (“Human Rights Wors

    WESTERN (ANGLO) POLICY IN FOUR RULES

    1) Secular Christianity (“Human Rights Worship”)

    Individuals have property rights including to the self, that states may not violate. (This is ‘rule of law’ or ‘natural law’ that constrains the state – any state and all states.) Property rights, (human rights), science and Reason therefore determine the validity of any discourse, and no other values ever, take precedence over them.

    2) Commercial Prosperity (“mutually beneficial voluntary exchange”)

    Principle: Adam Smith. The wealthier we are the more choices we have, the better lives that we have. (This actually appears to have limits.)

    3) Good Commercial World Citizenship (“”)

    You have the obligation to conduct your competition through trade, and that is the only competition that you may conduct – because it is mutually beneficial. If you conduct any other kind of competition then we will also engage in that competition to protect the pattern of trade.

    4) Self Determination – You may choose your own government. However, you and your government will be held responsible for 1,2 and 3 above. You will be allowed to select any self determination that does not violate 1,2 and 3.

    UNFORTUNATELY THE WEST ONLY TALKS ABOUT SELF DETERMINATION. WHICH CONFUSES THE “DEVELOPING” WORLD.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-22 06:41:00 UTC

  • UNDERSTANDING WESTERN POLICY AS RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE (reposted)(expanded) You gott

    UNDERSTANDING WESTERN POLICY AS RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE

    (reposted)(expanded)

    You gotta understand this. And this is hard for some people to grasp:

    The entire IDENTITY of the west is predicated on their superiority in human rights. Their claim of legitimacy is predicated upon it. Their identity, self worth, system of status signals, political mythology, and moral authority is based upon it. The US’s argument in favor of its use of POWER is predicated upon it.

    So, when you take a bunch of peaceful white folk, and shoot them, this is not so much a question of Ukraine. It’s a question of ‘religious devotion’ on the part of westerners.

    I have spent a long time trying to demonstrate the connection between economics and morality – that they’re the same. But that while humans are universally acquisitive, they are MORE universally MORAL than acquisitive. And that is an evolutionary necessity.

    Just as Coase worked to add the theory of the firm to macro Economics. I want to add morality into macro economics. And the logic of cooperation into Philosophy. (I don’t know if I can at this point, because i’m in my 50’s already. But i’m going to keep at it.) But if I succeed, then at that point, economics will be, THE social science. Both internally consistent (logic of cooperation) and eternally correspondent (macro economics).

    So, for the RELIGION of the secular christian west, shooting protesters is the far more serious an offense to the secular christianity that we call democratic socialism, than drawing comics of Muhammed as a goat-f_cker.

    I am not a ‘christian’ in this sense. I am an aristocratic egalitarian. Christianity as we practice it incorporates some aristocratic egalitarian values and virtues. That we worship one particular philosopher (Jesus/Peter/Paul) rather than all philosophers, generals, and statesmen and is a catastrophe of the christianization of Europe.

    My religion, if I have one, is “sovereignty”. Which translates to property rights in libertarian language. However, the difference in aristocratic egalitarianism, is that you EARN those property rights by paying for them with your constant diligence. You are’t born with them. And logically – you just can’t be anyway.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-22 06:04:00 UTC