Curt Doolittle

Theme: Governance

  • Why Prigozhin Was “Exiled” To Belarus It’s a pragmatic decision. Putin (a) prese

    Why Prigozhin Was “Exiled” To Belarus

    It’s a pragmatic decision. Putin (a) preserves Wagner (b) separates warring factions (Wagner vs Ministry of Defense), (c) makes Lukashenko safer from internal revolt, (d) Reduces the need for RU military in Belarus, and (e) allows Putin to use Prigozhin to force the integration of belarus in to russia when needed, while at the same time, (f) providing a disincentive for UA to push north, while (g) tying up UA resources in the north, (h) reinforces Putin’s ability to blame failure on the corrupt military (which *IS* to blame).

    This is how grownups think. What’s depressing is how much chatter is on the news and social media showing that THEY CAN’T THINK LIKE GROWNUPS.

    I mean. Demonstrated evidence of incompetency worldwide.

    Reply addressees: @efodix @damianoram

    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-25 19:35:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1673052189978132480

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1673050213815144452

  • OCCAM’S RAZOR: GROWNUP ANALYSIS OF PRIGOZHIN EVENT Possible theory on what went

    OCCAM’S RAZOR: GROWNUP ANALYSIS OF PRIGOZHIN EVENT

    Possible theory on what went down.
    by damianoram @damianoram

    – Prigozin didn’t have any political ambitions.
    – He just wanted out, because Backmut was a useless meat grinder.
    – In Africa he had a much better business with… https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1672973405094572032

    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-25 14:51:07 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1672980746301046785

  • OCCAM’S RAZOR: GROWNUP ANALYSIS OF PRIGOZHIN EVENT Possible theory on what went

    OCCAM’S RAZOR: GROWNUP ANALYSIS OF PRIGOZHIN EVENT

    Possible theory on what went down.
    by damianoram @damianoram

    – Prigozin didn’t have any political ambitions.
    – He just wanted out, because Backmut was a useless meat grinder.
    – In Africa he had a much better business with much less risk.
    – The Russian Ministry of Defence would not let them go and strike at them if they tried.
    – The only way out for him was to get rid of Shoigu and make a show of strength.

    So…
    – He stockpiled ammunition pretending the MoD wasn’t sending any.
    – Did the most outrageous thing possible clarifying that he wasn’t against Putin but against Shoigu (giving Putin an out in the negotiation)

    And….
    – FSB and others in power potentially stand to gain by weakening Putin but not by having Prigozin as a new leader. – FSB didn’t oppose him during the “coup” because they knew that what he wanted was just to negotiate amnesty and exhile for himself and his people.
    – Some of business in Africa may be related to the same people who didn’t oppose him during the “coup”. This increases the odds that it may be in someone’s interest for him to get back to it. (This is speculation)

    Possible next steps:
    – The people who are ready to make a move on Putin are now waiting for the fallout from the “coup attempt” to see a real opening.
    – They need to re-open to the west for business to resume.
    – The narrative of the war being useless started by Prigozin will give them an excuse to retreat from Ukraine (this is me hoping)
    – They are (hopefully) looking to talk to security services in the west so they can establish trust, clarify their objectives and have legitimacy

    —
    CD: This is the most parsimonious pragmatic explanation that satisfies the incentives of all parties to act as they did. In other words, Occam’s Razor doesn’t get much sharper than this.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-25 14:51:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1672980746057789441

  • This was my assessment as well. There is too much want of drama among the media

    This was my assessment as well.
    There is too much want of drama among the media and the people. Too little understanding of russia’s culture of heroism. And too little understanding of gangster pragmatism.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-25 14:21:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1672973405094572032

    Reply addressees: @damianoram

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1672946830798200834

  • NOPE…. 1. You’re confusing trust in government vs high trust society, especial

    NOPE….
    1. You’re confusing trust in government vs high trust society, especially a truth before face society.

    2. Low-trust societies require authoritarian governments, and High-trust societies prevent authoritarian governments.

    3. The West is under assault by the left (neoMarxists) who are systematically undermining Western institutions of the cultural production of responsibility that makes possible high trust, that in turn makes possible rule of law participatory government. Western culture isn’t Western any longer it’s neoMarxist.

    4. The left are doing so to create an authoritarian government – but for what purpose? (below)

    5. The World Economic Forum (Davos) is aware of IQ decline, democratic collapse, deglobalization, economic decline, and so they are organizing the governments of the world so they can “Bureaucratically Manage Decline”. (Yes really)

    I’m an anti-conspiracy theory public intellectual but you just can’t make this nonsense up. It’s true. 🙁

    Reply addressees: @RecorriendoHK @QSusushi @ONUKA_ @Reuters

    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-25 00:17:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1672761004285997057

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1672751826066882561

  • What perpetuates racism is the lie that we don’t need different education system

    What perpetuates racism is the lie that we don’t need different education systems and often different polities to suit the needs of different demographic distributions given the rather substantive differences in racial distribution – when people always and everywhere demonstrate…

    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-24 19:55:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1672695031784779777

    Reply addressees: @coffeecatharine @FarajRashi93307 @_stilloriginal_

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1672692834376495105

  • ANSWERS TO SIX ARC (HARD) QUESTIONS (via: jordan peterson) ARC Questions 1-6 1.

    ANSWERS TO SIX ARC (HARD) QUESTIONS
    (via: jordan peterson)

    ARC Questions 1-6

    1. Can we find a unifying story that will guide us as we make our way forward?

    2. How do we facilitate the development of a responsible and educated citizenry?

    3. What is the proper role for the family, the community, and the nation in creating the conditions for prosperity?

    4. How do we govern our corporate, social and political organizations so that we promote free exchange and abundance while protecting ourselves against the ever-present danger of cronyism and corruption?

    5. How do we provide the energy and other resources upon which all economies depend in a manner that is inexpensive, reliable, safe and efficient, including in the developing world?

    6. How should we take the responsibility of environmental stewardship seriously?

    My Answers
    https://t.co/pFBxDlcVhn

    Peterson’s Video
    https://t.co/VEnDDzZmIe

    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-24 19:06:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1672682652464234498

  • LEARNING FROM THE RUSSIAN CASE STUDY (revolutions) It’s very difficult to envisi

    LEARNING FROM THE RUSSIAN CASE STUDY
    (revolutions)
    It’s very difficult to envision this ‘mutiny’ succeeding, but we can still learn a few lessons if it doesn’t.
    We have repeatedly organized more than 25,000 men, the same number as Prigozhin, and that’s less than the 11-15,000 by Isis during their rapid capture and raids.
    Revolutions are very easy to start, and very difficult to stop.
    In Anglo tradition, revolutions require changing the law – and the courts, the people, and Congress do the rest. We don’t need to chop off heads, because we operate by rule of law, not rule by man.
    The USA is not any more complex than any other government in its vulnerability to large numbers of revolutionaries.
    Because of our geography and fragility, we are more vulnerable to revolution than other countries.
    To avoid all bloodshed, only 2M men are needed to issue demands for moral reforms for the benefit of the people.
    Because action against those numbers is impossible without justifying the revolutionaries.
    I’ve done a relatively peaceful revolution.
    America is heading for an unpeaceful one.
    Unless cooler heads organize a peaceful one.
    So lessons are worth learning.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-24 18:39:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1672675862976528387

  • LEARNING FROM THE RUSSIAN CASE STUDY (revolutions) It’s very difficult to envisi

    LEARNING FROM THE RUSSIAN CASE STUDY (revolutions)
    It’s very difficult to envision this ‘mutiny’ succeeding, but we can still learn a few lessons if it doesn’t.
    We have repeatedly organized more than 25,000 men, the same number as Prigozhin, and that’s less than the 11-15,000 by Isis during their rapid capture and raids.
    Revolutions are very easy to start, and very difficult to stop.
    In Anglo tradition, revolutions require changing the law – and the courts, the people, and Congress do the rest. We don’t need to chop off heads, because we operate by rule of law, not rule by man.
    The USA is not any more complex than any other government in its vulnerability to large numbers of revolutionaries.
    Because of our geography and fragility, we are more vulnerable to revolution than other countries.
    To avoid all bloodshed, only 2M men are needed to issue demands for moral reforms for the benefit of the people.
    Because action against those numbers is impossible without justifying the revolutionaries.
    I’ve done a relatively peaceful revolution.
    America is heading for an unpeaceful one.
    Unless cooler heads organize a peaceful one.
    So lessons are worth learning.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-24 18:39:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1672668386633842689

  • “Curt: Can you explain a bit more about concurrency and commonality, and how thi

    –“Curt: Can you explain a bit more about concurrency and commonality, and how this works at the federal level?”–

    Smart Question.

    And I’ll try to do it by explaining the historical relation between our present system and the one we had in England as England invented the modern rule of law state.

    1. The President (Monarchy): Electoral College by State (=Aristocracy)
    (Unfortunately, Of the four systems (a) monarchy and cabinet, (b) monarchy, prime minister, and cabinet (c) prime minister and cabinet, (d) president and cabinet, it turns out we have the worst model. With the optimum being (b)a monarchy prime minister and cabinet.)
    2. The Senate: Governor Substitute by State (=Nobility)
    The senate was necessary because of travel time and distance. The senators were substitutes for the state governments, producing a federation. Which we broke by direct election, thereby empowering the federal government instead of maintaining the federation of states. This was a tragedy as great as not preserving the monarchy.
    3. The (Upper) House: Population by State (=Business(Property owners))
    And we are missing ….
    4. The Lower House: Families, Dependents (=Church)
    … and we’re missing the lower house because we expanded the house rather than adding a lower house, which is how we got into this problem in the first place, making class conflict outside of government possible, instead of using government as a means of alleviating class conflict by trades.

    So,
    1. We must agree by the concurrency of states on the election of the president.
    2. We must agree by the concurrency of states to pass the Senate.
    3. We must agree by the concurrency of the population to pass the house.
    4. Localities must agree by concurrency of the population to elect representatives.
    5. And we must agree between the classes and regions by concurrency between the house, senate, and president.
    6. The courts must demonstrate commonality in agreement in the resolution of disputes by the findings of the courts under the common law of tort (trespass), before we can codify prohibitions (laws) via legislation, which again must be determined by concurrency between the house, senate, and president.

    So, in general, our class disputes take place in public and in the media, and in the house and senate between parties instead of in the house by the production of trades between classes – where such trades largely consist of demands for responsibility from the lower (unproductive) classes in exchange for redistribution from the upper (productive) classes – because that is the difference between classes: the capacity to bear productive responsibility on behalf of others.

    As such our principle problem originated in the release of the requirement for property (running a farm or business) for participation in the house, instead of creating a lower house and maintaining the function of the church by continuing the use of the legislature as a market for the production of desirable commons between the classes.

    Now try to learn that in civics. You won’t.
    The Cult of Lies.

    Cheers

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute
    The Science of Cooperation

    Reply addressees: @TabbyTeamster @evansrc717 @SteveSchmidtSES @IHeartUkraine

    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-24 17:25:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1672657286081179649

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1672635304887439360