Curt Doolittle

Theme: Institution

  • NEAR UNIVERSAL IGNORANCE OF THE IMPORTANCE OF OUR LEGAL SYSTEM Why Don’t You Kno

    NEAR UNIVERSAL IGNORANCE OF THE IMPORTANCE OF OUR LEGAL SYSTEM
    Why Don’t You Know About Commonality and Concurrency – and Why Don’t Our Lawyers, Legislators, and Judges?

    Law Is Taught As Carpentry Not Architecture
    Legal education often focuses on specific doctrines, case law, and statutory interpretation rather than overarching philosophical concepts unless in a constitutional law, jurisprudence or decidability. Worse most have no understanding of behavioral economics, macroeconomics, or political economy.

    Studying the Trees And Ignoring the Forest
    The concepts of “commonality” and” concurrency” are embedded in legal principles but not explicitly labeled as such. Terms like “precedent,” “equal protection,” “due process”, and “bicameralism”, are more commonly used.

    Basic Principles Missing In Legal Education
    In the law, particularly American law, if less so British, we require Concurrency of populations (house), states (senate), legislatures (electoral college) in voting and legislation (positiva) AND Commonality of decisions across classes and regions in dispute resolution in court (negativa) to produce legitimacy of the construction of law, AND Settled Law in the population – thus ending conflicts.

    It’s Just Science
    These are both empirical processes insure both sovereignty of the people by consent of the regions and classes in voting and legislation, and commonality in the resolution of disputes, which together protect the interests of the minority against the majority and where both are required under the common law, where the people are sovereign, because there is no alternative to that empiricism.

    The Opposite of Majority Democracy
    We do NOT live in a democracy. We live under the Natural Law of Sovereignty, Reciprocity and Duty, codified in a Constitution, forming a Republic, prohibiting violations of sovereignty reciprocity and duty, and by use of concurrent voting, across classes and regions, thus protecting the minority from the majority by insuring people agree (consent) to a statute, even if by proxy through elected representatives, before the enactment of legislation and regulation (statute law) where conflicts are resolved in the Court, by findings of the Court (‘judge discovered law, but not judge made law’), by adversarial competition before a judge and jury of their sovereign peers.

    Accumulated Ignorance Because of Lack of Recording in the Constitution
    In other words, we have lost the understanding of the fact that the constitution produced an empirical (scientific) method of governance. And it is the only one extant, despite the efforts of such petty theorists as Rez, Kelsen, Dworkin, Rawls and so many others so less competent and knowledgable than their ancestors.

    The Solution
    Of course, my life’s work seeks to correct this problem with a formal science of decidability applied to law, policy, and economy. But if it was easy someone would have done it before me – instead of inventing sophistry by which to empower elites to circumvent the people, even if the people are so frustrated by the process that they might wish it – at their peril.

    Affections
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2024-07-15 23:42:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812995875469189120

  • THE FED: “THE CREATURE FROM JEKYLL ISLAND” “The Creature from Jekyll Island: A S

    THE FED: “THE CREATURE FROM JEKYLL ISLAND”

    “The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve” is a book written by G. Edward Griffin. The book provides a critical examination of the Federal Reserve System and its role in the American economy. Here’s a summary of its main points:

    SUMMARY OF “THE CREATURE FROM JEKYLL ISLAND”

    Historical Background:
    The title refers to a secret meeting held in 1910 on Jekyll Island, Georgia, where powerful bankers and financial elites formulated plans that would lead to the creation of the Federal Reserve System in 1913.
    Griffin argues that this meeting was instrumental in setting up a central banking system designed to serve the interests of the banking elite rather than the general public.

    Creation of the Federal Reserve:
    The Federal Reserve was established ostensibly to stabilize the American banking system and prevent financial panics.
    Griffin contends that its real purpose was to create a banking cartel, allowing banks to control the money supply and manipulate the economy for their benefit.

    Critique of the Federal Reserve:
    Inflation and Debt: Griffin argues that the Federal Reserve’s monetary policies, particularly its ability to print money, lead to inflation and national debt, devaluing the currency and eroding savings.

    Economic Manipulation:
    The book claims that the Fed manipulates the economy through interest rates and money supply, often resulting in economic booms and busts that benefit the financial elite at the expense of ordinary citizens.

    Lack of Accountability:
    Griffin criticizes the Federal Reserve’s lack of transparency and accountability, suggesting that it operates independently of the government and public oversight.

    Banking and Money Creation:
    Griffin explains the process of money creation through fractional reserve banking, where banks only keep a fraction of their deposits on hand and lend out the rest, effectively creating new money.
    He argues that this system leads to an unstable economy prone to cycles of booms and busts.

    Monetary Reform Proposals:
    The book advocates for monetary reform, including the abolition of the Federal Reserve.
    Griffin suggests a return to a commodity-based currency, such as the gold standard, to ensure sound money and prevent inflation.

    Conspiracy Theories:
    Griffin delves into various conspiracy theories, suggesting that the Federal Reserve is part of a larger plot by international bankers to control the global economy.
    He links the Federal Reserve to other historical events and organizations, claiming that its creation was part of a broader agenda for economic and political control.

    Themes and Perspectives

    Skepticism of Central Banking:
    Griffin presents a skeptical view of central banking, arguing that it serves the interests of a financial elite rather than the public.
    He challenges the conventional wisdom that the Federal Reserve is necessary for economic stability.

    Libertarian Economic Views:
    The book aligns with libertarian economic principles, advocating for limited government intervention in the economy and a return to sound money principles.

    Conspiratorial Tone:
    Griffin’s narrative includes elements of conspiracy theory, suggesting that the Federal Reserve is part of a deliberate effort to control the economy and consolidate power.

    CONCLUSION

    “The Creature from Jekyll Island” is a controversial and provocative book that critiques the Federal Reserve and its impact on the American economy. Griffin argues that the Fed was created to serve the interests of a financial elite, leading to economic instability and inflation. While the book has been influential among critics of central banking and proponents of monetary reform, it has also been criticized for its conspiratorial tone and lack of rigorous economic analysis.

    Further Reading
    For those interested in a more conventional analysis of the Federal Reserve, consider reading:”The Federal Reserve and the Financial Crisis” by Ben S. Bernanke
    “Lords of Finance: The Bankers Who Broke the World” by Liaquat Ahamed

    These works provide different perspectives on the role and impact of central banking in the global economy.

    (From Elsewhere)

    Source date (UTC): 2024-07-15 22:17:31 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812974802476670978

  • I have worked with or for dod, intel, and justice. The fact that a document is l

    I have worked with or for dod, intel, and justice. The fact that a document is labeled classified is the equivalent of a confidential corporate memo in the private sector – it’s applied to almost everything.

    Trump had no idea what was actually in the boxes (repeatedly stated both in documents, testimony, and interviews) and merely wanted to go through the boxes and separate his personal from political content. The reason being, quite understandably, was that he didn’t trust the requestors with his personal information, given their behavior from the Dossier nonsense to his exit.

    Just why this was the case is due to the rather stressful and contentious rush created by the turnover between Trump and Biden staffs.

    So basically what I’m saying is that you’re playing the role of ‘useful idiot’ for the propagandists.

    Reply addressees: @MopMop85 @leigh_loeb @tribelaw

    Source date (UTC): 2024-07-15 19:06:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812926693234860032

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812911498039095733

  • THE COURTS ARE A MARKET FOR GRADUAL PRODUCTION OF SETTLED LAW BY FILTERING UNSET

    THE COURTS ARE A MARKET FOR GRADUAL PRODUCTION OF SETTLED LAW BY FILTERING UNSETTLED AND UNSETTLEABLE LAW
    The court will, if possible, allow the public and the legislature to work through these issues, and then the courts themselves will conduct debates if necessary. The reason being that the court was not mandated to, and wishes not to, be used to bypass the people and the legislature and therefore bypass tests of ‘concurrency’ that will result in ‘settled law’, and instead prefers to only clarify any dissonance or confusion between the BODY of law and the individual CASE or class of cases before the court.

    This is what’s called ‘common law’ or ‘the empirical method of legal discovery’ – in other words, we use science: adversarial competition using evidence and reason to create a market for the discovery of ‘settled law’ within the limits of ‘natural law’ which is the basis of our constitution.

    Reply addressees: @angelbeech59 @tribelaw

    Source date (UTC): 2024-07-15 16:12:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812882828754894848

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812878786930905402

  • BISMARCK’S SAMO BURJA CRUSHES OPTIMISM ABOUT APPLE’S FUTURE (“Ouch”) TL/DR; Appl

    BISMARCK’S SAMO BURJA CRUSHES OPTIMISM ABOUT APPLE’S FUTURE
    (“Ouch”)
    TL/DR; Apple cannot end dependency on China, its domestic investments are trivial and posturing, it’s not innovating, only increasing margins, and more, experiments with products have gone nowhere, and partly because Cooke is an insufficient leader for the past, present, of of course, future. All said with Burja’s usual neutrality.
    https://t.co/xoFUXYGdJx

    (Comments:
    – We went through the same issue with the Gates / Ballmer transition.
    – I agree with the vision for apple as a samsung of the continent but I do not see any possibility for that occurring without stressors on the company
    – I use exclusively apple products for the past decade, and I do consider the Apple Silicon (M) chips a dramatic advance it has not resulted in advantages for the company or users.
    – I will stand by my long standing prediction that when iphone sales fall they will have to go after the business user. I still do not understand why they dropped that market.)

    @SamoBurja

    Source date (UTC): 2024-07-14 23:11:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812625901433294848

  • Q: “Please convince Rudyard (@whatifalthist) to do this debate.”– Rudyard is hi

    –Q: “Please convince Rudyard (@whatifalthist) to do this debate.”–

    Rudyard is his own man with his own strategy that is informed by a deep understanding of social media markets and his market within it, and his staff’s leadership is equally so.
    In the case of the feminine-abrahamic method of suggestion, deception, and coercion as a means of warfare we must remember that Rudyard’s empathy and compassion for the mind and spirit of ordinary people in the face of life’s uncertainty and stress is the source of his ability to correctly interpret history through the lens of all populations across the world in all eras of recorded history.
    Additionally Rudyard’s core interest is the middle ages which were not the age of the origin of religions but the age of their greatest impact on newly emergent social, economic, and political scales.
    For this reason his interpretation of religious and philosophical prose, scripture, thought, and ideation favors the minds of the citizenry even if it imposes a long term cost upon them. He favors that trade off. And as such he is forgiving of religious differences and group differences resulting from their religions.
    Also, as an intellectuals, and not populists, his job, my job, and any honest intellectual’s job, must not (as I’m sure most people do) ignore the opposite side of the coin, the ignorance of people of their own strategy and means of persuasion argument competition and warfare, and in our case our failure to defend ourselves agains the feminine, jewish, abrahamic-sequence, and marxist-sequence means of warfare by seduction into false promise by suggestion, deception, and coercion.
    So whereas in my work prohibiting that warfare is a central proposition, directly stated, with legal enforcement, Rudyard less directly educates but with empathy for all parties – which is his trademark skill in historical analysis. He’s not ideological. He’s empirical and empathic. So whereas I explain controversial topics with judicial and scientific neutrality and more abstractly than the ‘outrage class’ can grasp – which is why I can survive on social media, Rudyard explains controversial topics with reciprocal empathy for all parties, and communicates controversial ideas by suggestion – leaving conclusions to the audience. Again, which is why he can survive on social media. With the difference being he can find a large audience and my technical work will generally appeal to a very analytic minority, even if I suspect our organizations constitutional, legal, economic, social, and education reforms will eventually be accessible to more of the population than my technical work.
    One of the reasons I find such close intellectual kinship with Rudyard, is that he functions as an intellectual and positive priesthood covering one point of the political triangle, and I work largely in the negative of law and politics, covering the other two points of the triangle. I can’t do what he does. And if he did what I did we’d lose the insight he brings.
    Which is precious. And it’s why I consider him our most emerging and important synthetic anthropologist, historian and budding philosopher.
    Affections
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Reply addressees: @SankohaProjekt @OGRolandRat @AutistocratMS

    Source date (UTC): 2024-07-13 14:59:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812139921530093568

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812129910250512714

  • Great question. Yes. But historically we build institutions and techniques and t

    Great question. Yes. But historically we build institutions and techniques and technologies to help us scale anyway. Right now we have a problem of adding the cognitively feminine to economy and polity and the result is collapse which always ends with puritanism.

    Source date (UTC): 2024-07-11 19:10:03 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1811478074653049257

    Reply addressees: @PeterTobias8

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1811457238810103986

  • It’s funny. Why do are so many people afraid of being associated with our organi

    It’s funny. Why do are so many people afraid of being associated with our organization because of fear of canceling? I mean, I understand that our ‘painful truths’ are offensive, but our solutions in constitutions, laws, policies, economics, family, education, faith and fitness are about as awesome as anyone who isn’t obsessively antisocial or dark triad evil would agree to if they didn’t know these solutions came from the same people who explain taboos and painful truths as the cause of our crisis of the age.

    Source date (UTC): 2024-07-11 17:25:38 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1811451798219112448

  • We knew it was happening. But I had no idea it was 90% of ad dollars. That’s a c

    We knew it was happening. But I had no idea it was 90% of ad dollars. That’s a cartel. That’s going to have legs.

    Source date (UTC): 2024-07-10 17:15:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1811086852218093987

    Reply addressees: @whatifalthist @benshapiro @Jim_Jordan @realDailyWire @realDonaldTrump @joerogan @elonmusk @FoxNews @BreitbartNews

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1811086535351042225

  • FYI. FBI “Agents” (domestic) vs CIA “Officers” (foreign). Not sure why this conf

    FYI. FBI “Agents” (domestic) vs CIA “Officers” (foreign). Not sure why this confusion still persists. People like me are either consultants or contractors. I have been a Justice Department “Employee”.

    We need to end job protections, unions, and pensions for federal workers. It will raise short term salaries improve employee quality and but reduce long term costs.

    Federal employees must ‘serve at the pleasure of the president’.

    Source date (UTC): 2024-07-10 17:12:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1811086128977440768