Curt Doolittle

Theme: Reciprocity

  • Power Exists, Not Rights. Rights Must Be Exchanged And Enforced With Power.

    THERE EXIST NO RIGHTS Rights do not exist between peoples. Power exists. Rights are exchanged between kin for the purpose of cooperation in the pursuit of wealth and power. Everything else is just religious wishful thinking – the kind of thinking that makes people poor.

  • Power Exists, Not Rights. Rights Must Be Exchanged And Enforced With Power.

    THERE EXIST NO RIGHTS Rights do not exist between peoples. Power exists. Rights are exchanged between kin for the purpose of cooperation in the pursuit of wealth and power. Everything else is just religious wishful thinking – the kind of thinking that makes people poor.

  • Support for Natural Law

    by Daniel Roland Anderson And we have a mechanism for correcting non-correspondence of the constitution with natural law: the Amendment process—which won’t work in our current demographic situation. Do you know many judges you’d trust to implement Natural Law over the plain text of the document? I don’t. When I hear a “constitutionalist” go on about Natural Law, it’s 99.9% ignorant blather. Curt is the first guy in years to use the term Natural Law in a way that doesn’t make me want to punch someone. I suspect Curt provides for decidability whereas others use Natural Law to stand in for “whatever I think is good right now.” Curt has done great things for the Common Law that many constitutionalists would throw out with the bathwater if judicial abuse of discretion. (CD: Bingo)

  • Support for Natural Law

    by Daniel Roland Anderson And we have a mechanism for correcting non-correspondence of the constitution with natural law: the Amendment process—which won’t work in our current demographic situation. Do you know many judges you’d trust to implement Natural Law over the plain text of the document? I don’t. When I hear a “constitutionalist” go on about Natural Law, it’s 99.9% ignorant blather. Curt is the first guy in years to use the term Natural Law in a way that doesn’t make me want to punch someone. I suspect Curt provides for decidability whereas others use Natural Law to stand in for “whatever I think is good right now.” Curt has done great things for the Common Law that many constitutionalists would throw out with the bathwater if judicial abuse of discretion. (CD: Bingo)

  • There is Only One Natural Law

    There is only one natural law, and that is reciprocity. That law is empirically evolving at all times in that branch of law we call tort. That tort law evolves by incremental suppression of parasitism by new discoveries of ir-reciprocity that violate the one law of reciprocity. The principle problem in tort history is the failure to define property as property-in-toto, and this problem has been caused by the Ruler’s interest in preventing defectors as well as defeaters, while at the same time collecting fees for doing so. Like regulating an economy via money supply, we have a very hard time finding a measurement that provides us with decidability that produces no even worse externalities. The answer in both cases is markets, rule of law, and universal standing in matters of the commons, such that the governor is not necessary as other than a judge of last resort. The west invented rule without government for the same reason we invented law without discretion: the consequence of a voluntary militia of equal sovereigns is the only decidability that is possible is tort (reciprocity).

  • There is Only One Natural Law

    There is only one natural law, and that is reciprocity. That law is empirically evolving at all times in that branch of law we call tort. That tort law evolves by incremental suppression of parasitism by new discoveries of ir-reciprocity that violate the one law of reciprocity. The principle problem in tort history is the failure to define property as property-in-toto, and this problem has been caused by the Ruler’s interest in preventing defectors as well as defeaters, while at the same time collecting fees for doing so. Like regulating an economy via money supply, we have a very hard time finding a measurement that provides us with decidability that produces no even worse externalities. The answer in both cases is markets, rule of law, and universal standing in matters of the commons, such that the governor is not necessary as other than a judge of last resort. The west invented rule without government for the same reason we invented law without discretion: the consequence of a voluntary militia of equal sovereigns is the only decidability that is possible is tort (reciprocity).

  • There is only one natural law, and that is reciprocity. That law is empirically

    There is only one natural law, and that is reciprocity. That law is empirically evolving at all times in that branch of law we call tort. That tort law evolves by incremental suppression of parasitism by new discoveries of irreciprocity that violate the one law of reciprocity. The principle problem in tort history is the failure to define property as property-in-toto, and this problem has been caused by the Ruler’s interest in preventing defectors as well as defeaters, while at the same time collecting fees for doing so. Like regulating an economy via money supply, we have a very hard time finding a measurement that provides us with decidabilty that produces no even worse externalities. The answer in both cases is markets, rule of law, and universal standing in matters of the commons, such that the governor is not necessary as other than a judge of last resort. The west invented rule without government for the same reason we invented law without discretion: the consequence of a voluntary militia of equal sovereigns is the only decidability that is possible is tort (reciprocity).

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-21 12:10:00 UTC

  • “Natural law, where it conflicts, must supersede the plain text of the constitut

    —“Natural law, where it conflicts, must supersede the plain text of the constitution.”— Zachary Miller

    Yep.

    The constitution either reflects natural law or it is an irreciprocal contract and therefore CANNOT BE A CONSTITUTION of natural law. Ergo, no constitutional construction may violate the natural law of reciprocity.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-21 12:02:00 UTC

  • Unalterable. (Deterministic)

    International trade is almost entirely capitalist, and reciprocal – they have no choice. Contrary to propaganda, all states are largely social democratic – they have no choice. Contrary to image, businesses are largely socialist internally – they have no choice. As expected, all families are communist – they have no choice. Because each demands what is necessary to maintain the balance between available information, possible incentives, probable means and desired ends. However when we try to misapply decidability from one condition to the other, we do so in opposition to the available information, available incentives, possible means, and desired ends. This is not alterable.

  • Unalterable. (Deterministic)

    International trade is almost entirely capitalist, and reciprocal – they have no choice. Contrary to propaganda, all states are largely social democratic – they have no choice. Contrary to image, businesses are largely socialist internally – they have no choice. As expected, all families are communist – they have no choice. Because each demands what is necessary to maintain the balance between available information, possible incentives, probable means and desired ends. However when we try to misapply decidability from one condition to the other, we do so in opposition to the available information, available incentives, possible means, and desired ends. This is not alterable.