Curt Doolittle

Theme: Reciprocity

  • First, he’s not average IQ’d. He’s just not a genius. Mypoint is that if you are

    First, he’s not average IQ’d. He’s just not a genius. Mypoint is that if you are raised, trained, and educated in Military(state-heroic), Legal(social-reciprocal), and Christian(personal-charitable) traditions then you don’t need to be smart. You need to be moral and not dumb.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-08 13:57:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336309011084431362

    Reply addressees: @EricLiford

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336308276376596480

  • (4 of 6) … c) Enforcement of the Law of Non-Aggression – extending self-defens

    (4 of 6)
    … c) Enforcement of the Law of Non-Aggression – extending self-defense, standing one’s ground, castle doctrine, and civil defense of the commons – licensing shoot-to-kill on the first demonstration of aggression whether by obstruction, challenge, threat, or force.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-07 18:30:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336015192807890944

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336015191398604801

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    (3 of 6)
    … b) The criminalization of all attempts at suppression of testimonial, truthful, reciprocal, empirical speech, and licensing of extrajudicial punishment to cease them.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1336015191398604801

  • (3 of 6) … b) The criminalization of all attempts at suppression of testimonia

    (3 of 6)
    … b) The criminalization of all attempts at suppression of testimonial, truthful, reciprocal, empirical speech, and licensing of extrajudicial punishment to cease them.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-07 18:30:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336015191398604801

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336015190022889479

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    (2 of 6)

    … a) All Political Speech and Political Affiliation is Protected Speech, and Political Affiliation Protected class.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1336015190022889479

  • NO MORE LIES —“The lie that undermines the golden rule.”—@LukeWeinhagen

    NO MORE LIES

    —“The lie that undermines the golden rule.”—@LukeWeinhagen https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1335717977795276801

  • NO MORE LIES: Stop the social construction of false promise of freedom from phys

    NO MORE LIES: Stop the social construction of false promise of freedom from physical (scarcity), natural (amorality, reciprocity, kin selection), evolutionary (genetic load, regression to the mean, natural selection) laws by virtue signaling to appeal to female magical-thinking.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-06 22:49:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1335717977795276801

  • Can we please stop the social construction of false promise of freedom from phys

    Can we please stop the social construction of false promise of freedom from physical(scarcity), natural(amorality, reciprocity, kin selection), evolutionary(genetic load, regression to the mean, natural selection) laws by virtue signaling to appeal to female magical-thinking?

    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-06 15:01:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1335600217849257984

    Reply addressees: @alicetweet

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1335388363361280001

  • Rights

    Are Rights testable in P-Law? If yes, are rights demonstrated by isolated + interpersonal exchanges for the acquisition of property, or are they ultimately only demonstrable by territorial sovereignty? —Romanius @ContraFabianist

    1. Cure yourself of Platonism:

    • Definition of a Right,
    • Within a Group Strategy of Eugenia vs Dysgenia,
    • whether they are Natural or Unnatural,
    • Creating a Demand for Rights vs
    • the Possibility of that Right, vs
    • how Rights can be brought into existence, vs
    • the Existence of Rights. 😉

    2. Rights can only be brought into existence by

    • (a) territorial sovereignty- military, state
    • (b) an insurer of last resort – court and court enforcement such as sheriffs, deputies and militia or a hierarchy of police and military.
    • (c) Under State vs Govt, Govt produces Commons.

    3. This is the complete answer to your question – by operationalizing we limit all the game playing associated with the difference between theology(supernatural), philosophy(sophistry), and law(science). 4. Yes rights are testable in P-Law and in the P-law amendments to the constitution.

  • Rights

    Are Rights testable in P-Law? If yes, are rights demonstrated by isolated + interpersonal exchanges for the acquisition of property, or are they ultimately only demonstrable by territorial sovereignty? —Romanius @ContraFabianist

    1. Cure yourself of Platonism:

    • Definition of a Right,
    • Within a Group Strategy of Eugenia vs Dysgenia,
    • whether they are Natural or Unnatural,
    • Creating a Demand for Rights vs
    • the Possibility of that Right, vs
    • how Rights can be brought into existence, vs
    • the Existence of Rights. 😉

    2. Rights can only be brought into existence by

    • (a) territorial sovereignty- military, state
    • (b) an insurer of last resort – court and court enforcement such as sheriffs, deputies and militia or a hierarchy of police and military.
    • (c) Under State vs Govt, Govt produces Commons.

    3. This is the complete answer to your question – by operationalizing we limit all the game playing associated with the difference between theology(supernatural), philosophy(sophistry), and law(science). 4. Yes rights are testable in P-Law and in the P-law amendments to the constitution.

  • Retaliation Rules without Restitution

    (by Brandon Hayes @ThruTheHayes)

    1. Natural law prevents retaliation cycles by requiring all acts, words, & displays to be due diligent & warrantied with promise of restitution for damages. Without restitution comes unmeasured retaliation in seek of Nash equilibration. — Brandon Hayes @ThruTheHayes
    2. The ideology of human rights posits unified humanity at once as a given fact and as an ideal, as something that is and something that should be; in other words, as a sort of potential truth that cannot be verified and would appear fully only when it is realised. — @alaindebenoist

    3. Human rights were developed to force states to internal production rather than conquest. The LEFT twisted this yet again as The False Promise of Freedom from Physical Natural and Evolutionary Laws, given the vast difference in group demographics (eugenics). — Curt Doolittle
    4. The feminine can only manifest as an ideology (the left) when it is itself the beneficiary of freedom from physical nature and evolutionary laws – to offer anything other than that false promise would be to self destruct. — @LukeWeinhagen
    5. But there is no beneficiary of freedom from the laws of physics, nature, and evolution. Because that’s absurd. Wait, that’s his precise point.—@TruthQuest11
    6. It’s insurance from them. A father, a husband or whole social group can insure a woman from effects of nature. It’s stable as long as women don’t get to make decisions about what needs to be insured and how much in place of their insurers. —@WorMartiN

  • Retaliation Rules without Restitution

    (by Brandon Hayes @ThruTheHayes)

    1. Natural law prevents retaliation cycles by requiring all acts, words, & displays to be due diligent & warrantied with promise of restitution for damages. Without restitution comes unmeasured retaliation in seek of Nash equilibration. — Brandon Hayes @ThruTheHayes
    2. The ideology of human rights posits unified humanity at once as a given fact and as an ideal, as something that is and something that should be; in other words, as a sort of potential truth that cannot be verified and would appear fully only when it is realised. — @alaindebenoist

    3. Human rights were developed to force states to internal production rather than conquest. The LEFT twisted this yet again as The False Promise of Freedom from Physical Natural and Evolutionary Laws, given the vast difference in group demographics (eugenics). — Curt Doolittle
    4. The feminine can only manifest as an ideology (the left) when it is itself the beneficiary of freedom from physical nature and evolutionary laws – to offer anything other than that false promise would be to self destruct. — @LukeWeinhagen
    5. But there is no beneficiary of freedom from the laws of physics, nature, and evolution. Because that’s absurd. Wait, that’s his precise point.—@TruthQuest11
    6. It’s insurance from them. A father, a husband or whole social group can insure a woman from effects of nature. It’s stable as long as women don’t get to make decisions about what needs to be insured and how much in place of their insurers. —@WorMartiN