Curt Doolittle

Theme: Institution

  • 1) “Priests” had no doctrine only obligatory rituals (the japanese ritual model)

    1) “Priests” had no doctrine only obligatory rituals (the japanese ritual model). The monarchy originally performed the rituals, then appointed patricians, but the duty was separated under the republic because of scale. All that I know of were a variation on sacrifice (contract).

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-31 15:47:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1035554564567650305

    Reply addressees: @ZeusHypatos

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1035547155963027456

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1035547155963027456

  • civic ceremonies were performed by the nobility. They were tutored in the proces

    civic ceremonies were performed by the nobility. They were tutored in the process.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-31 15:08:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1035544891567362049

    Reply addressees: @ZeusHypatos

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1035526664690835459

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1035526664690835459

  • BRITISH VS AMERICAN LEGAL SYSTEMS I think the open question is between the briti

    BRITISH VS AMERICAN LEGAL SYSTEMS

    I think the open question is between the british model of professional litigators of the court, and professional advocates for the individual, and the… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=289004565029774&id=100017606988153

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-31 14:51:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1035540683317305344

  • “Here’s how a typical speeding ticket (in this case a ticket from Indiana that w

    —“Here’s how a typical speeding ticket (in this case a ticket from Indiana that we paid though our Traffic Justice Program) is divvied up:

    State Courts: $49.00

    County Courts: $18.90

    City Courts: $2.10

    Law Enforcement Fee: $4.00

    Jury Fee: $2.00

    Highway Work Zone: $0.50 (??)

    Auto Record Keeping Fee: $7.00

    Document Storage Fee: $2.00

    Infractional Judgments: $99.50 The fine!

    Public Defense Administration Fee: $3.00

    Judicial Insurance Adjustment: $1.00

    Judicial Salaries Fee: $18.00: Do you think murderers and rapists pay this fee too?

    DNA Sample Processing Fee: $2.00 Very common service for traffic tickets.

    Court Administration Fee: $5.00

    Total Cost Of Ticket: $214.00

    Traffic tickets are the mother’s milk of the court system. Thousands of judges rule on traffic cases knowing full well that guilty verdicts pay their salary, fund their retirement systems, and build their courthouses.

    This should help explain why average traffic ticket recipients start out with two strikes against them when they enter traffic court. The court system just can’t afford to offer real justice. If it did it would drown in its own workload and go broke in the process.”—-

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-31 13:41:00 UTC

  • It’s not that complicated. We have known this fact for two thousand years: (a) n

    It’s not that complicated. We have known this fact for two thousand years: (a) no professional priests, (b) no professional politicians (c) no monopoly bureaucracy, and therefore no insulation from the market.

    The ancients did it right. Civic everything.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-31 12:34:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1035506130494083072

  • NO. ROME HAD NO ‘PRIESTS’ AS WE UNDERSTAND IT 1) “Priests” had no doctrine only

    NO. ROME HAD NO ‘PRIESTS’ AS WE UNDERSTAND IT

    1) “Priests” had no doctrine only obligatory rituals (the japanese ritual model). The monarchy originally performed the rituals, then appointed patricians, but the duty was separated under the republic because of scale. All that I know of were a variation on sacrifice (contract).

    2) To equate “the performance of ritual”, when it was not required they even understand the words they spoke, only that they performed the ritual precisely, with ‘priesthood’ as ‘a competitor to the state’ or means of state sponsored deception, is more than a mischaracterization.

    3) A professional priesthood in the sense I use it (education in doctrine under pretense of divine authority) as a competitor to the state (see Huntington’s history mesopotamia) rather than archetypes and anthropomorphic instantiations of nature, was an import.

    4) Alexander should be heralded for his techniques and cursed for his introduction of semitism and supernaturalism to old europe. Thankfully the romans were as skeptical of those religions as they were of greek sophisms.

    5) once you start looking at history as the battle between western truth and law for aristocracy and it’s domestication of animal man, and semitic occultism and sophism for the expansion of production by the underclasses, the cycles of history are much more obvious.

    6) Masculine western truth, duty, reciprocity, and empirical law, eastern masculine hierarchical and empirical bureaucracy, and semitic feminine fictional rule of flood river production. Everything comes back to geography, climate, means of production, and degree of neoteny.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-31 12:00:00 UTC

  • CAPITALIST POLICE? —“If police investigations were run by capitalist philosoph

    CAPITALIST POLICE?

    —“If police investigations were run by capitalist philosophy, would the poor get adequate justice?”—

    THE CORRECT ANSWER

    Police investigations already are capitalistic. They balance the market for tolerance with crime rates with the market for taxes to pay for the suppression, prosecution, and punishment of crimes. The cost of the externalities of physical crimes are far smaller than the cost of the externalities of clerical and informational crime. The distrust produced by physical crime is greater than the distrust created by clerical and informational crime.

    The problem for the poor is that they have worse ABILITIES and worse PERSONALITIES, and even worse HABITS than their working, middle, and upper class peers, and therefore low sexual, social, economic, and political value to other people. Hence, they are poor. They have nothing to trade. And worse, even interacting with them forces others to bear the cost of doing so.

    We ended the period of stagnant human capital by the middle of the last century. That is why IQ’s are declining. We are now reversing gains of modernity by increasing the rates of reproduction of the underclasses by suppressing the rates of reproduction of the middle classes through tax extraction.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-31 11:05:00 UTC

  • BRITISH VS AMERICAN LEGAL SYSTEMS I think the open question is between the briti

    BRITISH VS AMERICAN LEGAL SYSTEMS

    I think the open question is between the british model of professional litigators of the court, and professional advocates for the individual, and the american model without the intermediary position.

    It is much harder to ‘pull bullshit’ in court in the british model. It is much easier to ‘pull bullshit’ in legislation in the british model. I am not yet sure if the house of lords is superior to the supreme court or not, but there is good reason to think it might be. Or, that the lords AND a supreme court would be superior to either condition.

    American constitution is better given the fact that our founding documents (declaration, constitution, bill of rights) are written, and consistent, if not as consistent as we could make them today – and aside from the fact that one requires all three documents to make sense of the constitution or the bill of rights becuase the natural law of reciprocity is not stated, and instead states men are equal rather than must be equal for the law of reciprocity (natural law) to fulfill it’s purpose of harmony.

    Conversely, the american model is far more common law (meaning permissive – less regulation) than the british model (meaning impermissive – more regulation).

    So this means that while americans have a superior juridical presumption (optimistic leading to more innovation, but more court disputes to resolve) while the british have less litigation to resolve because of higher regulation. I think the impact on the cultures is vast and the regulation culture in the uk has led to the feminization of the british male in less than eighty years.

    The optimum is probably the mixture of the two systems, with near zero regulation in america, and adding the intermediary between the lawyer and the court so that less nonsense occurs in court.

    It can be embarrasing to listen to young lawyers speak for their clients in court, rather than tell them “there is no fking way this is goonna fly so I won’t take your money”.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-31 10:51:00 UTC

  • NO PROFESSIONAL PARASITES It’s not that complicated. We have known this fact for

    NO PROFESSIONAL PARASITES

    It’s not that complicated. We have known this fact for two thousand years: (a) no professional priests, (b) no professional politicians (c) no monopoly bureaucracy, and therefore no insulation from the market.

    Add (d) full accountability for the truthfulness of public speech by involuntary warranty of consistency, correspondence, existential possibility, rationality, reciprocity, and full accounting.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-31 08:34:00 UTC

  • Talmudism: Pilpul (Sophism) In Law

    by Steven Jackson Talmudism is a method of exploiting the human error in the letter of the law to escape the spirit of the law. As law is a part of culture, within a homogeneous society peers can be relied upon to judge each other with regards to social norms. Hence the success of the Anglo jury of peers system. Laws do not need to be codified under such a system as the jury judges how reasonable the plaintiff’s actions were by comparing them to what their own would be given the circumstances. Talmudism is the codification of law and a strict adherence to exactly how it is written or how the bureaucracy is performed. This allows individuals to escape justice through loopholes and human error. This codification is only necessary when society is composed of various cultures. Within cultures there are different classes. So maybe underclass is the wrong and outgroup is the right word. Talmudism begins when several cultures interact in a single society and laws have to be codified to accommodate cultural differences. The abuse of the codification arises when pilpul is used to argue the letter of the law against the spirit of the law to escape justice. Law does not lead to talmudism, disregard for the host culture does