Curt Doolittle

Theme: Institution

  • “I understood it to mean “we invented the concept of God’s as our highest ideals

    —“I understood it to mean “we invented the concept of God’s as our highest ideals”.—Carl Onni

    You mean authoritarianism and monopoly rather than as in history, an extended family of various traits relying on various archetypes.

    It is very easy to convince people that what they do is good. It is very hard to show them that what they deem good is bad. Principally because their intuitions have been trained by deception and ritual, because there was no means of training them by reason and practice.

    No cult survives falsification by science, and no good of cults cannot be produced by training. There are only two religions that are not evil: stoicism and shintoism, with original buddhism simply a pre-scientific attempt (as in philosophy vs science) to produce an insular stoicism; where stoicism sought to produce a civic discipline.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-16 10:57:00 UTC

  • September 16th, 2018 11:16 AM [W]e just need to restore the family as the primar

    September 16th, 2018 11:16 AM

    [W]e just need to restore the family as the primary insurer such that people struggle to produce families as insurers rather than the state as an insurer with poor judgement.

  • September 16th, 2018 11:16 AM [W]e just need to restore the family as the primar

    September 16th, 2018 11:16 AM

    [W]e just need to restore the family as the primary insurer such that people struggle to produce families as insurers rather than the state as an insurer with poor judgement.

  • Ownership of Our Lines

    September 16th, 2018 10:52 AM OWNERSHIP OF OUR LINES [W]e no longer own our children. If we owned our children still, we could influence their marriages. If we owned our government still, we could end alien immigration. We own neither and therefore no longer own self-determination of our line or our kin. As such you ask me to do what I cannot in the circumstance, and I ask you to do what we can do in the circumstance: fight to return our ownership – to create an alternative circumstance. The question is, will you fight? If you will not fight then your words are those of a woman: the ridicule of scolds is evidence of their powerlessness and lack of agency. And you are of no matter other than to be punished for your scolding.

  • The Idea of Apprenticeships Was Admirable

    —“The idea of apprenticeships was admirable: for a fixed term, usually seven years, a master or mistress of a trade would train a young person so that he could earn his living at that trade. The master kept the apprentice in board, lodging and clothes, but had no duty to pay him, although many did in the final years of the term, when the apprentice had learned enough to be helpful. The system applied throughout society. Prosperous merchants, goldsmiths and bankers made tidy sums from the premiums paid by the parents of hopeful apprentices. The members of the Company of Watermen and Lightermen of the River Thames, who had a monopoly of river traffic, had 2,140 apprentices in 1858. Poor masters could profit from the unpaid labour of children taken from the parish workhouse”—-

  • The Idea of Apprenticeships Was Admirable

    —“The idea of apprenticeships was admirable: for a fixed term, usually seven years, a master or mistress of a trade would train a young person so that he could earn his living at that trade. The master kept the apprentice in board, lodging and clothes, but had no duty to pay him, although many did in the final years of the term, when the apprentice had learned enough to be helpful. The system applied throughout society. Prosperous merchants, goldsmiths and bankers made tidy sums from the premiums paid by the parents of hopeful apprentices. The members of the Company of Watermen and Lightermen of the River Thames, who had a monopoly of river traffic, had 2,140 apprentices in 1858. Poor masters could profit from the unpaid labour of children taken from the parish workhouse”—-

  • Compulsory Labor and Compensation in England

    —“The Statute of Artificers (usually called the Statute of Apprentices) was passed in 1563 and remained on the Statute Book until 1819; the Poor Law Act of 1601 – which provided for much else besides poor relief – remained largely operative until the 20th c. Between them, these Acts attempted `to banish idleness, to advance husbandry and to yield to the hired person, both in times of scarcity and in times of plenty, a convenient proportion of wages’. They controlled entry into the class of skilled workmen by providing a compulsory seven years’ apprenticeship; they reserved the superior trades for the sons of the better off; they assumed a universal duty to work on all the able-bodied; and empowered justices to require unemployed artificers to work in husbandry; they required permission for a workman to transfer from one employer to another; they severely restricted the freedom of movement of the poor by enabling a person without means to be removed, by order of the justices, to his original parish or last place of settlement; and they empowered justices to fix wage rates for virtually all classes of workmen.” —-

  • Compulsory Labor and Compensation in England

    —“The Statute of Artificers (usually called the Statute of Apprentices) was passed in 1563 and remained on the Statute Book until 1819; the Poor Law Act of 1601 – which provided for much else besides poor relief – remained largely operative until the 20th c. Between them, these Acts attempted `to banish idleness, to advance husbandry and to yield to the hired person, both in times of scarcity and in times of plenty, a convenient proportion of wages’. They controlled entry into the class of skilled workmen by providing a compulsory seven years’ apprenticeship; they reserved the superior trades for the sons of the better off; they assumed a universal duty to work on all the able-bodied; and empowered justices to require unemployed artificers to work in husbandry; they required permission for a workman to transfer from one employer to another; they severely restricted the freedom of movement of the poor by enabling a person without means to be removed, by order of the justices, to his original parish or last place of settlement; and they empowered justices to fix wage rates for virtually all classes of workmen.” —-

  • “The idea of apprenticeships was admirable: for a fixed term, usually seven year

    —“The idea of apprenticeships was admirable: for a fixed term, usually seven years, a master or mistress of a trade would train a young person so that he could earn his living at that trade. The master kept the apprentice in board, lodging and clothes, but had no duty to pay him, although many did in the final years of the term, when the apprentice had learned enough to be helpful. The system applied throughout society. Prosperous merchants, goldsmiths and bankers made tidy sums from the premiums paid by the parents of hopeful apprentices. The members of the Company of Watermen and Lightermen of the River Thames, who had a monopoly of river traffic, had 2,140 apprentices in 1858. Poor masters could profit from the unpaid labour of children taken from the parish workhouse”—-

    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-12 19:28:00 UTC

  • COMPULSORY LABOR AND COMPENSATION IN ENGLAND —`The Statute of Artificers (usua

    COMPULSORY LABOR AND COMPENSATION IN ENGLAND

    —`The Statute of Artificers (usually called the Statute of Apprentices) was passed in 1563 and remained on the Statute Book until 1819; the Poor Law Act of 1601 – which provided for much else besides poor relief – remained largely operative until the 20th c. Between them, these Acts attempted `to banish idleness, to advance husbandry and to yield to the hired person, both in times of scarcity and in times of plenty, a convenient proportion of wages’. They controlled entry into the class of skilled workmen by providing a compulsory seven years’ apprenticeship; they reserved the superior trades for the sons of the better off; they assumed a universal duty to work on all the able-bodied; and empowered justices to require unemployed artificers to work in husbandry; they required permission for a workman to transfer from one employer to another; they severely restricted the freedom of movement of the poor by enabling a person without means to be removed, by order of the justices, to his original parish or last place of settlement; and they empowered justices to fix wage rates for virtually all classes of workmen.’ —-

    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-12 19:24:00 UTC