Theme: Governance

  • RT @curtdoolittle: @FreeTheGoyimNOW @AutistocratMS Fascism is not incompatible w

    RT @curtdoolittle: @FreeTheGoyimNOW @AutistocratMS Fascism is not incompatible with natural law, if like rome, a polity vacillates from the…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-12-16 18:22:31 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1868723396177203496

  • Fascism is not incompatible with natural law, if like rome, a polity vacillates

    Fascism is not incompatible with natural law, if like rome, a polity vacillates from the political organization for war, and the political organization for growth. This means governments and economies and even morals are dependent upon the context in which the polity exists and…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-12-16 18:22:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1868723376359194819

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1868720126755062220

  • Q: CURT: –“do you think the presupposition and assumptions of the liberal world

    Q: CURT: –“do you think the presupposition and assumptions of the liberal world order that are crumbling before our very eyes will give way to a return to an older view of the world”–

    Older? Not so much. Maybe instead, that those properties of the prior (agrarian) order that were non-false, and beneficial will be restored, and with that understanding and confidence those old properties mixed with new properties will emerge as they always do. In other words all knowledge, especially scientific and empirical knowledge, casts aside ideas that are false, and retains and adds to the true, as societies evolve just as organisms do.

    However, I am having as much difficulty as other intellectuals are in predicting what that future of ‘the good’ would be. As such ,I am, and our organization is, trying to provide a framework in which those old and new truths and goods can blossom without needing to specify them ourselves. If we know what falsehoods and harms to eliminate then we are free to discover the truths and goods instead.

    This is because I understand that one does not plan a war so much as develop a strategy and then predict and seize futures and opportunities to advance the beneficial once and delay the harmful ones as we move along through space and time.

    Unfortunately this requires a populace with enough trust in one another and their leadership to persist in the ambition to discover the good despite the collective uncertainty about what that good might eventually consist of.

    This is rather profound if you understand it.

    CD

    Reply addressees: @PlayerJuan11


    Source date (UTC): 2024-12-16 18:20:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1868722815454842880

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1868713559708066240

  • RT @MarioNawfal: 🚨🇵🇱POLAND PREPARES SCHOOLCHILDREN FOR WAR Poland has become the

    RT @MarioNawfal: 🚨🇵🇱POLAND PREPARES SCHOOLCHILDREN FOR WAR

    Poland has become the first EU country to introduce mandatory shooting classes…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-12-16 08:34:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1868575532121731248

  • RT @LukeWeinhagen: Acquiring control over levers of power only protects you from

    RT @LukeWeinhagen: Acquiring control over levers of power only protects you from power those levers control.

    As such:
    – Trust only protect…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-12-16 02:19:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1868481028404457955

  • Because laws apply to individuals which in turn change the behavior of individua

    Because laws apply to individuals which in turn change the behavior of individuals, which in turn change the behavior of populations. The challenge is producing laws that advanced individual positive behaviors while minimizing negative behaviors.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-12-15 21:10:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1868403310782484987

    Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS @ArcologyTech

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1868394220027056467

  • Incremental from 1870 but most importantly not seeking neutrality with germany d

    Incremental from 1870 but most importantly not seeking neutrality with germany during the world wars because of that rational but wrong british desire for political and economic stability. The result was the end of empires altogether and the emergence of nation states, with Iran, Russia, and China the three remaining attempts to preserve empires despite the forces of nature that result from the prosperity due to trade under the anglo alliances.

    Reply addressees: @DwightExMachina @AutistocratMS @ArcologyTech


    Source date (UTC): 2024-12-15 21:08:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1868402743804891136

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1868394149537292725

  • Morality as decidability or moral utility in a polity or moral preference for an

    Morality as decidability or moral utility in a polity or moral preference for an individual in a polity? You like to conflate them. Have you been taking lessons from the left? 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2024-12-15 19:41:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1868380921667399988

    Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1868378793288864144

  • Q: “@curtdoolittle Would you explain again how a politician lying is a crime?”–

    –Q: “@curtdoolittle Would you explain again how a politician lying is a crime?”–

    tl/dr: classical economists: physical capital, hayek: formal and informal capital, doolittle: informational, knowledge and genetic capital. In other words we are all dependent upon information the same way we are dependent upon institutions, water, power, and land. Polluting, harming, or destroying the commons is a crime.

    ASK THE AI
    How would I, curt doolittle, in my work, explain how a politician lying is a crime?

    ChatGPT said:
    To frame a politician lying as a crime within your work, you would operationalize it through the lens of reciprocity, demonstrated interests, and natural law.

    Specifically, you would evaluate the act of lying by a politician in terms of its violation of sovereignty, reciprocity, and the duty to prevent harm through truthful, warranted speech.

    Here is a step-by-step explanation consistent with your framework:

    1. Definition of Crime in Terms of Natural Law
    A crime is the imposition of costs on others without reciprocal compensation. It violates the principle of reciprocity, which underpins cooperative behavior and ensures no harm is inflicted without restitution.
    In the political context, crimes are evaluated not just by their physical or material consequences but also by their informational consequences—such as the harm caused by deceit or the breach of public trust.

    2. The Role of Politicians as Public Trustees
    Politicians hold office under an implicit contract of sovereignty with the polity. This contract obligates them to act in accordance with demonstrated interests of the population they serve, respecting the reciprocal exchange of trust for governance.
    The position of a politician includes a duty of care in their speech and actions, particularly given the outsized impact of their decisions and public statements.

    3. Lying as a Violation of Reciprocity
    A lie by a politician is an act of informational fraud because it:
    – Misrepresents reality to the detriment of others (those they govern).
    – Obscures the cost-benefit trade-offs of decisions, thereby undermining informed consent.
    – Causes harm by inducing individuals to act against their own demonstrated interests or the common good, based on false premises.
    This deceit violates reciprocity because the polity relies on truthful information to engage in cooperative decision-making, while the politician exploits their trust for personal or factional gain.

    4. Lying as a Breach of Sovereignty
    Sovereignty in demonstrated interests depends on truthful testimony. A lie by a politician deprives citizens of their sovereignty by:Corrupting their ability to make decisions in their own interests.
    Undermining the legitimacy of governance by eroding the truth necessary for reciprocal cooperation.
    A lie reduces the polity’s ability to insure sovereignty and reciprocity at scale, making it a systemic harm.

    5. Duty of Restitution for Harm Caused
    A politician’s lie imposes costs on the polity, such as:Misdirection of resources.
    Confusion, conflict, or division within the population.
    Loss of trust, which is a form of capital critical for governance.
    Like all other crimes under natural law, lying requires restitution to repair these costs. Without restitution, the harm remains unaddressed, perpetuating further violations of reciprocity.

    6. Political Lying as a High Crime
    The harm caused by a politician lying is exponential, given their influence and responsibility. It amounts to a crime of asymmetry, where the costs are distributed widely, and the benefits are concentrated narrowly (e.g., personal gain, factional advantage).
    The scale of harm elevates lying to a high crime, as it threatens the foundational trust and cooperation necessary for a polity to function.

    7. Remedy Through Law
    You would propose a legal framework that categorizes political lying as a breach of fiduciary duty and enforces accountability through:Mandated restitution for costs caused by lies.
    Disqualification from office for violating the trust inherent in governance.
    Criminal penalties proportionate to the scale of harm caused by the lie.

    8. Conclusion: Truth as a Public Good
    In your framework, truth is not merely a moral good but a public utility necessary for cooperation. Politicians, as stewards of public trust, are uniquely obligated to uphold this utility.

    When they lie, they not only commit an ethical breach but also a legal crime under natural law, by violating the reciprocity and sovereignty that underpin civilizational cooperation.

    This explanation operationalizes lying by a politician as a crime using the principles of natural law, demonstrated interests, and reciprocity, tying it directly to your broader framework of preventing systemic harms and ensuring accountability.

    Reply addressees: @ScalyWaggington @MarioNawfal


    Source date (UTC): 2024-12-14 20:14:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1868026915975835648

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1867988052322500934

  • zzzz voting isnt the same thing as social media ranting

    zzzz voting isnt the same thing as social media ranting.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-12-13 21:27:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1867682898884931929

    Reply addressees: @pundasdad @partymember55 @Brad_der_Volk @whatifalthist

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1867682446768328964