Curt Doolittle

Theme: Governance

  • Jay Malick is Correct on Trump’s Strategy (Push back against Ian Bremmer) From:

    Jay Malick is Correct on Trump’s Strategy (Push back against Ian Bremmer)

    From: Jay Malick
    To Ian Bremmer
    Managing Director & Executive from Bank of America Merrill | Personal Finance Author | Asset & Wealth Management Leader | Former Chair of Alternative Investments Committee

    We voted to bring key and strategic manufacturing back to the U.S.. Having 90% of pharmaceuticals, 90%+ of computers and cell phones, chips, ships and steel manufacturing and the refining of key minerals (e.g., lithium among many others) and petroleum all done overseas and by potential military adversaries is a recipe for disaster (and to use your words “incredibly stupid”). It’s a national security risk.

    Some of what you say Ian Bremmer – I wonder if you’re trying to elicit a response or you’re possibly not thinking though the entirety of the implications and in this case – of not being able to produce/manufacture anything.

    Trade based on comparative advantage is only smart to a point. Should we outsource our military and military hardware/software production too because military personnel labor and production cost is cheaper overseas? Of course not!

    If you watch this lecture by Dr. Art Laffer late last year, he makes it clear that Trump and his advisors have alterier motives for tariffs (including getting foreign countries to the negotiating table and creating a healthier / more fair and free trade world order). Globalization is free and fair trade for all [not we tariff you (the world) and you (U.S.) don’t tariff us).

    From: Curt Doolittle
    To: Jay Malick;

    Correct. I have an increasingly difficult time comprehending the tendency of what purport to be intellectuals treating international strategic, economic, and political relations as friendships rather than infrastructure. It’s amateurish. And it has exposed that the postwar entrenchment of fantasy in the ‘deep state’ institutions is just as entrenched in the pseudo-intellectual academy, think tanks and media. So it’s not just that science progresses with tombstones, it’s that the entire talking class is not only stuck but revanchist. (And I really don’t expect this behavior from Bremmer’s group unless it’s a practical necessity of retaining accumulated relationships and eyeballs – at which point source and audience capture are a malincentive against change.

    Look. We can’t afford the world order we produced in order to defeat the communists. Because it’s become a system of rent seeking. Seriously. That’s it. It’s not complicated. It’s over because it’s no longer economically possible for it NOT to be over.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-05 18:18:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1908585002662846465

  • Can you please explain, because the MAGA movement against the emergence of an ov

    Can you please explain, because the MAGA movement against the emergence of an oversupply of pseudo-elites, the world reorganization going on due to economic and strategic rebalancing, the Trump strategy to force the rest of the developed world to share the burden of it by strategy and trade, and the desperate center left and left attempt to preserve that impossible postwar order and the vast networks of corruption it entails, are all logical behaviors by all parties involved.

    Reply addressees: @SoC4l @crazyclipsonly

    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-04 03:26:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1907998114851729410

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1907993382766653671

  • Of course. But I covered it in an earlier post: 1) Trump’s Domestic Objective: E

    Of course. But I covered it in an earlier post:

    1) Trump’s Domestic Objective: End international dependency, by increase domestic autarchy, and providing employment to many, as the world trade system collapses, causing capital flight to the USA, funding our insulation from the collapse and war, leaving the USA standing as we did post WWII. In effect what I understand is that we are finally in the phase of completing what we failed to in 1945: ending the age of agrarian empires and fully transforming to the industrial age of federations of nation states.

    Reply addressees: @NoahRevoy @sqpatrick77

    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-03 21:33:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1907909391606755330

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1907908346256175491

  • I assume that ‘ending the remains of empires’ (Russia, China, Iran) either econo

    I assume that ‘ending the remains of empires’ (Russia, China, Iran) either economically or militarily is going to be a costly necessity of our survival. I don’t see how it’s avoidable at all. Even if we are (as trump is trying to) redistribute the world order to those who benefit from it (most), then either way, the restructuring is going to take 30yrs. I think most historians of ‘change’ would hold about the same opinion. The world will be as different in thirty years as it was between 1850 and 1900, or between 1920 and 1950.
    The pax americana of the 20th was only possible because most of the world committed suicide in the ending of agrarian empires and the transformation to industrial states – with some empires trying to survive because they were so backward (russia, china, middle east).
    So like I said leading up to 2016, when the ball really started moving, I had some predictive ability up through 2020, but after that – well you know – timing is impossible, and outcomes are only vaguely imaginable.
    My hope is that the current wave of innovation made possible by AI produces such ‘goods’ that we have something positive to focus on in this world. Otherwise, I can easily see the collapse of trade and the generation of conflict – particularly by starvation and energy warfare – such that we enter a cyclical decline on the scale of the roman empire. Would it last as long as the cancer cuased by the rise of christianity and islam? Probably not. But it would still be ‘bad’.

    Reply addressees: @sqpatrick77

    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-03 21:22:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1907906693339725824

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1907886185432719528

  • EXPLAINING TRUMP’S WORLD RESTRUCTURING BY SHOCK Trump is reorganizing world secu

    EXPLAINING TRUMP’S WORLD RESTRUCTURING BY SHOCK

    Trump is reorganizing world security and trade. He is doing it quickly and unpleasantly (to get it over with) using security and tariffs – because asking and negotiating didn’t work. To create the world order we have had three phases:
    1 – Bretton Woods Order: Subsidizing the world recovery, and limiting authoritarian communism. (Cost: burning our industrial advantage)
    2 – Neoliberal Order: Subsidizing world finance and ending the authoritarian communism. (Cost: burning our middle and working classes.)
    3 – Trump’s Restoration of Traditional Order: Ending the subsidies, redistributing the cost of world order, whether defense or transport and trade. (Cost: disruption of alliances, economy, and ‘deep state’ – all of which were creations of the Anglo-USA remains of the British empire at the end of WWII.)
    Retrospectively the world wars were the necessary end of agrarian land empires and the emergence of federations of industrial nation states. The generals were correct in their criticism claiming we ended World War II early. We assumed islam was defeated, and we failed to defeat the communists in China and the authoritarians in Russia. While islam will be readily defeated with little effort if exported from our lands, and while russia will shrink dramatically by depopulation. The chinese only slightly less so.
    The end of ’empires’ and the conversion to alliances of Nation States – likely by race and civilization, will continue only after the remaining empires are defeated. The USA assumes they will outlive the ability of these empires as we did the communists. But chinese fascism (not communism) has been so successful at massive industrialization and trade capture that the outcome of the ‘debate’ may still be in question.
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-03 19:49:43 UTC

    Original post: https://x.com/i/articles/1907883229627166930

  • Trump is reorganizing world security and trade. He is doing it quickly and unple

    Trump is reorganizing world security and trade. He is doing it quickly and unpleasantly (to get it over with) using security and tariffs – because asking and negotiating didn’t work. To create the world order we have had three phases:

    1 – Bretton Woods Order: Subsidizing the world recovery, and limiting authoritarian communism. (Cost: burning our industrial advantage)

    2 – Neoliberal Order: Subsidizing world finance and ending the authoritarian communism. (Cost: burning our middle and working classes.)

    3 – Trump’s Restoration of Traditional Order: Ending the subsidies, redistributing the cost of world order, whether defense or transport and trade. (Cost: disruption of alliances, economy, and ‘deep state’ – all of which were creations of the Anglo-USA remains of the British empire at the end of WWII.)

    Retrospectively the world wars were the necessary end of agrarian land empires and the emergence of federations of industrial nation states. The generals were correct in their criticism claiming we ended World War II early. We assumed islam was defeated, and we failed to defeat the communists in China and the authoritarians in Russia. While islam will be readily defeated with little effort if exported from our lands, and while russia will shrink dramatically by depopulation. The chinese only slightly less so.

    The end of ’empires’ and the conversion to alliances of Nation States – likely by race and civilization, will continue only after the remaining empires are defeated. The USA assumes they will outlive the ability of these empires as we did the communists. But chinese fascism (not communism) has been so successful at massive industrialization and trade capture that the outcome of the ‘debate’ may still be in question.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-03 19:47:31 UTC

    Original post: https://x.com/i/articles/1907882677702995968

  • EXPLAINING TRUMPIAN WORLD RESTRUCTURING Trump is reorganizing world security and

    EXPLAINING TRUMPIAN WORLD RESTRUCTURING
    Trump is reorganizing world security and trade. He is doing it quickly and unpleasantly (to get it over with) using security and tariffs – because asking and negotiating didn’t work.

    To create the world order we have had three phases:
    1 – Bretton Woods Order: Subsidizing the world recovery, and limiting authoritarian communism. (Cost: burning our industrial advantage)
    2 – Neoliberal Order: Subsidizing world finance and ending the authoritarian communism. (Cost: burning our middle and working classes.)
    3 – Trump’s Restoration of Traditional Order: Ending the subsidies, redistributing the cost of world order, whether defense or transport and trade. (Cost: disruption of alliances, economy, and ‘deep state’ – all of which were creations of the Anglo-USA remains of the British empire at the end of WWII.)

    Retrospectively the world wars were the necessary end of agrarian land empires and the emergence of federations of industrial nation states. The generals were correct and we ended World War II early. We assumed islam was defeated, and we failed to defeat the communists in China and the authoritarians in Russia. While islam will be readily defeated with little effort if exported from our lands, and while russia will shrink dramatically by depopulation. The chinese only slightly less so. The end of ’empires’ and the conversion to alliances of Nation States – likely by race and civilization, will continue only after the remaining empires are defeated.

    The USA assumes they will outlive the ability of these empires. But chinese fascism (not communism) has been so successful at massive industrialization and trade capture that the outcome of the ‘debate’ may still be in question.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Reply addressees: @CharlieShrem

    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-03 19:36:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1907879976986447872

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1907785903877087578

  • RT @jwmares: Singapore created the world’s most efficient healthcare system from

    RT @jwmares: Singapore created the world’s most efficient healthcare system from scratch in one generation.

    They spend $4,000 per person o…

    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-01 22:54:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1907204902633513275

  • Dunno. Putin tends to wait out expenditures (political will) in democratic count

    Dunno. Putin tends to wait out expenditures (political will) in democratic countries, just as the USA waits out authoritarian or ideological economies and the Chinese authoritarians wait out by delay and deceive.

    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-01 22:49:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1907203791042334891

    Reply addressees: @AmericaFirstCon

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1907189129164829152

  • Empty threat. Putin has no intention of negotiating a settlement

    Empty threat. Putin has no intention of negotiating a settlement.

    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-01 21:46:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1907187964922544147

    Reply addressees: @AmericaFirstCon

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1907187432942149708