Curt Doolittle

Theme: Institution

  • An Articulate Progressive so An Opportunity for Articulate Comparisons

    Feb 2, 2020, 8:24 AM

    —“Progresiveness errs on the side of openness in face of the uncertainty. Conservativeness errs on the side of “known good or reasonable” arrangements. … None are in principle superior in all cases. … We must use a third axis, rationality, to bridge our differences constructively.”—@flancian

    Progressives (consumptives) err on the side of consumption in the face of uncertainty. Conservatives(capitalizers) err on the side of saving in the face of uncertainty. The female consumptive herd (her children) the male capitalizing pack (their tribe). We must use TRADE to bridge our differences. (Are you starting to see yet?) I’m using male concrete (scientific) terms. You’re using female seductive (deceptive) terms. Once you see it you can’t un-see it. The question is adaptation possible? No. Hence institutions of trade.

  • The University System Is Organized for Unsustainable Growth

    Feb 2, 2020, 9:02 AM

    —“unpromising future for economics phd’s”—

    This is correct of course. It’s one of Eric Weinstein’s complaints: the university system is organized for unsustainable growth, false-promising careers to researchers that can’t exist, in order to obtain cheap research labor (and cheap immigrant research labor) rather than paying researchers and doing less and better research. This problem is exacerbated by the withdrawal of the military as the primary originator of basic research funds given that military epistemology is competitive, and our failure or inability to direct research funds without military priorities, to competitive advantage. I expect this will be corrected rather shortly (and painfully) one way or the other.

  • The University System Is Organized for Unsustainable Growth

    Feb 2, 2020, 9:02 AM

    —“unpromising future for economics phd’s”—

    This is correct of course. It’s one of Eric Weinstein’s complaints: the university system is organized for unsustainable growth, false-promising careers to researchers that can’t exist, in order to obtain cheap research labor (and cheap immigrant research labor) rather than paying researchers and doing less and better research. This problem is exacerbated by the withdrawal of the military as the primary originator of basic research funds given that military epistemology is competitive, and our failure or inability to direct research funds without military priorities, to competitive advantage. I expect this will be corrected rather shortly (and painfully) one way or the other.

  • Curt Why Do You Use “North Sea People”

    Feb 2, 2020, 11:07 PM

    Meaning: Above the Hajnal line. Where rule of law matured. And in parallel, I tend to separate eras into water areas: the mediterranean, north sea, and Atlantic instead of land areas.

  • The restoration of aristotelian thought, northern and atlantic trade, the contra

    The restoration of aristotelian thought, northern and atlantic trade, the contractualism that trade demanded, the printing and literacy that resulted, re-harmonized our scholarly thought with our social, commercial, legal, and military thought restored european civilization.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-24 13:26:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264548323328999424

    Reply addressees: @HanielAzzi @DegenRolf

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264546522231865344

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @HanielAzzi @DegenRolf This set of values functioned as the operating principle for western civilization that produced the fastest innovation and adaptation possible by man, and dragged mankind out of ignorance, superstition, hard labor, poverty, starvation, disease, suffering and early death.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1264546522231865344

  • WESTERN INSTITUTIONS AROSE OUT OF DISTRIBUTED POWER

    Feb 5, 2020, 11:44 AM

    —“all these [european] institutions arose out of the progressive rationalization of fear and terror — the true bases of the liberalistic *reciprocol state (which actually has no right of resistance, as herr Schmitt knew well)”— (((Gamhard McCoy)))

    THE INSTITUTIONS: Sovereignty, Duel, Court, Government, Monarchy.

    1. Constrain one another’s words with the duel.
    2. Constrain one another’s action with the court, having failed to constrain them with threat of the duel.
    3. Constrain a group, or industry with the court of commons for having failed to constrain one another with the court.
    4. Constrain a government with an election for having failed to constrain individuals, groups, or industries.
    5. Constrain a monarchy with a revolution for having failed to constrain the government.

    They did? Conquerors thought in terms of fear and terror when their gods and mythos put them equal to gods, and they conquered everything from Spain to the edge of china? Those institutions arose out of the necessity of a small number of professional warriors dependent upon expensive technology (horse, bronze, chariot) that could not pay for a standing army and were dependent upon raising voluntary militia due to the inability of western peoples (horses, cattle, grasslands) to concentrate capital as was possible in the flood river valley civilizations (grains) and pastoralist early neolithic farmers (sheep, grain). I don’t make errors. Because I don’t read literature (lies). I study Archaeology, Technology, Economics, Military and Legal records are evidence – literature is fiction and deceit. 😉 You can’t do that because it would falsify your entire mythology, network of lies, and method of excuses making by lies. I know. It’s OK. You can’t help it. It’s genetic. ON SCHMITT(GERMANY) IN CONTEXT Schimtt btw was following the natural human bias expressed in intellectual tradition of trying to solve the problem of a stable state in a period of necessity of rapid adaptation, when the deliberative (adversarial) model of political (middle class) compromise was insufficiently responsive, and required extraordinary impositions on the investments of stakeholders. As is usual for continentals, who cannot manage to escape the dependence upon obedience as a means of avoiding interpersonal conflict, competition, and compromise, it never occurred to Schmidt that the anglo-saxon pre-napoleonic method of political decidability, or it’s roman and it’s greek predecessors, nor its proto-germanic predecessors, nor its western indo-european predecessors placed decisions with the family, the jury/thang, the warriors/nobles, or the chieftain/king depending upon the category of the question at hand. In times of war we give unto generals (dictators), in times of peace we give over to the middle class (republics) in times of windfall we give over to the people (democracy). So that the problem is that the pursuit of power by people, middle, nobility, and monarchy were unable to discover (as had the anglos) the means of transferring power dependent upon the condition – and that as warfare transitioned from purely territorial agrarian to trade and industrial economic and ideological warfare, that having failed to articulate their customs as formal law prohibited them from discovering rules for the distribution and concentration of power as context required. Schmidtt like all continentals since the french revolution, was another idiot trying to restore the hierarchy of church(political judiciary), judiciary(material judiciary), monarchy(military) burgher(middle class) and labor, without realizing that they were still trying to escape the church and restore traditional rule – but instead were still stuck on countering anglo empiricism and its continuous competition and trying to recreate secular theological harmony. The continent is a catastrophe with the french trying to recreate latin church authoritarianism, the germans lost in trying to work away guilt that they should not have for resisting russian jews and french authority with wishful thinking instead of monarchical and traditional restoration, with the slavs understanding completely, and the Russians waiting for revenge.

  • WESTERN INSTITUTIONS AROSE OUT OF DISTRIBUTED POWER

    Feb 5, 2020, 11:44 AM

    —“all these [european] institutions arose out of the progressive rationalization of fear and terror — the true bases of the liberalistic *reciprocol state (which actually has no right of resistance, as herr Schmitt knew well)”— (((Gamhard McCoy)))

    THE INSTITUTIONS: Sovereignty, Duel, Court, Government, Monarchy.

    1. Constrain one another’s words with the duel.
    2. Constrain one another’s action with the court, having failed to constrain them with threat of the duel.
    3. Constrain a group, or industry with the court of commons for having failed to constrain one another with the court.
    4. Constrain a government with an election for having failed to constrain individuals, groups, or industries.
    5. Constrain a monarchy with a revolution for having failed to constrain the government.

    They did? Conquerors thought in terms of fear and terror when their gods and mythos put them equal to gods, and they conquered everything from Spain to the edge of china? Those institutions arose out of the necessity of a small number of professional warriors dependent upon expensive technology (horse, bronze, chariot) that could not pay for a standing army and were dependent upon raising voluntary militia due to the inability of western peoples (horses, cattle, grasslands) to concentrate capital as was possible in the flood river valley civilizations (grains) and pastoralist early neolithic farmers (sheep, grain). I don’t make errors. Because I don’t read literature (lies). I study Archaeology, Technology, Economics, Military and Legal records are evidence – literature is fiction and deceit. 😉 You can’t do that because it would falsify your entire mythology, network of lies, and method of excuses making by lies. I know. It’s OK. You can’t help it. It’s genetic. ON SCHMITT(GERMANY) IN CONTEXT Schimtt btw was following the natural human bias expressed in intellectual tradition of trying to solve the problem of a stable state in a period of necessity of rapid adaptation, when the deliberative (adversarial) model of political (middle class) compromise was insufficiently responsive, and required extraordinary impositions on the investments of stakeholders. As is usual for continentals, who cannot manage to escape the dependence upon obedience as a means of avoiding interpersonal conflict, competition, and compromise, it never occurred to Schmidt that the anglo-saxon pre-napoleonic method of political decidability, or it’s roman and it’s greek predecessors, nor its proto-germanic predecessors, nor its western indo-european predecessors placed decisions with the family, the jury/thang, the warriors/nobles, or the chieftain/king depending upon the category of the question at hand. In times of war we give unto generals (dictators), in times of peace we give over to the middle class (republics) in times of windfall we give over to the people (democracy). So that the problem is that the pursuit of power by people, middle, nobility, and monarchy were unable to discover (as had the anglos) the means of transferring power dependent upon the condition – and that as warfare transitioned from purely territorial agrarian to trade and industrial economic and ideological warfare, that having failed to articulate their customs as formal law prohibited them from discovering rules for the distribution and concentration of power as context required. Schmidtt like all continentals since the french revolution, was another idiot trying to restore the hierarchy of church(political judiciary), judiciary(material judiciary), monarchy(military) burgher(middle class) and labor, without realizing that they were still trying to escape the church and restore traditional rule – but instead were still stuck on countering anglo empiricism and its continuous competition and trying to recreate secular theological harmony. The continent is a catastrophe with the french trying to recreate latin church authoritarianism, the germans lost in trying to work away guilt that they should not have for resisting russian jews and french authority with wishful thinking instead of monarchical and traditional restoration, with the slavs understanding completely, and the Russians waiting for revenge.

  • The Constancy of The Western Tradition Over 3500 Years – Regardless of Propaganda

    Feb 5, 2020, 12:03 PM

    —“Your reified medieval “associations” are products of anarcho-social — not state — covenants”—(((Gamhard McCoy)))

    Bronze age, mediterranean age, continental age, north sea age, atlantic age institutions are continuous products of customary law made necessary by military strategy, given geography, technology, numbers, and have been consistent for at least 3500 years. A sovereign man requires the self, a holding requires family, a manor adds employees, a princedom adds counsellors, a state adds bureaucracy, and empire unites states. But they are just names for the same process at increasing scales producing a homogenous hierarchy organized by the same simple rule: sovereignty. (I know what you are paraphrasing, but quoting others words says nothing about demonstrated behavior – which is the difference between myth/literature/propaganda and law/science/records. Notice how I only mention literary works in order to illustrate that they are almost universally wrong – which is why the history of thought is either a set of lies by the bottom(theology and mythology) or a set of lies by the middle ( philosophy and literature). Those in power just rule and leave evidence. They have no one to convince.) There were only three degrees available to our ancestors, reflecting the two priesthoods: Theology(Social), and Law(Political), and the practical: medicine(Physical). Tripartism in everything.

  • The Constancy of The Western Tradition Over 3500 Years – Regardless of Propaganda

    Feb 5, 2020, 12:03 PM

    —“Your reified medieval “associations” are products of anarcho-social — not state — covenants”—(((Gamhard McCoy)))

    Bronze age, mediterranean age, continental age, north sea age, atlantic age institutions are continuous products of customary law made necessary by military strategy, given geography, technology, numbers, and have been consistent for at least 3500 years. A sovereign man requires the self, a holding requires family, a manor adds employees, a princedom adds counsellors, a state adds bureaucracy, and empire unites states. But they are just names for the same process at increasing scales producing a homogenous hierarchy organized by the same simple rule: sovereignty. (I know what you are paraphrasing, but quoting others words says nothing about demonstrated behavior – which is the difference between myth/literature/propaganda and law/science/records. Notice how I only mention literary works in order to illustrate that they are almost universally wrong – which is why the history of thought is either a set of lies by the bottom(theology and mythology) or a set of lies by the middle ( philosophy and literature). Those in power just rule and leave evidence. They have no one to convince.) There were only three degrees available to our ancestors, reflecting the two priesthoods: Theology(Social), and Law(Political), and the practical: medicine(Physical). Tripartism in everything.

  • Tripartism and Trifunctionalism

    Feb 6, 2020, 10:48 AM Under Social Tripartism and Elite Trifunctionalism, we find

    1. The Scientific and Technical ‘Priesthood’ (The material Universe of those who work)
    2. The Juridical ‘Priesthood’ (Via Negativa – actions of Man) – Those who fight
    3. The Political ‘Priesthood” (via-positiva – organization of man) – Those who pray

    While these three forces of elites al compete with one another in an ever shifting equilibrium, the political priesthood is unsettleld on method:

    1. Material: History and Realism
    2. Mental: Philosophy and Idealism
    3. Emotional: Theology and Mythology