Curt Doolittle

Theme: Reform

  • RUSSIA: Only Reformation of your trust will end American Hegemony. And ending it

    RUSSIA: Only Reformation of your trust will end American Hegemony. And ending it is good for us all. http://www.propertarianism.com/U2zeI #tcot #nrx #tlot

    Source date (UTC): 2015-08-07 12:00:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/629623134686191616

  • Thoughts on Religious Reformation

    [C]hristianity: the gradual expiration of impulsive hatred and its replacement with rational justice. QUESTION: What if the New Testament was our Old Testament and the ‘New’ the Western ethical cannon?

    MAN – God (Truth). – Gods (perfection in individual virtues). – Those humans who were godlike (demonstrated perfection in life). – Those humans who worked to be godlike. (but whose names we do not always remember) – Those humans who refrained from being ungodly. – Those humans who were ungodly. – And those humans who were evil. GODS – Center: God (perfection), Man, Woman, 2boys, 2girls, Earth. (Family + earth) – North:Sun: Truth, Law, Justice, (War. Masculine) – East:Fire: Contract, Production, Distribution, Trade – West:Water: Art, Invention, Knowledge, Craft – South:Earth: Love, Caretaking, Nurture, Charity (Feminine) NOT ONE BUT MANY – Monotheism is the folly of conformity to tyranny: that we must be identical slaves, rather than specialists who participate in a division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor and advocacy and inform one another through voluntary cooperation. – Pick your saint and seek to live as your saint. – The religion of specialists for an economy of specialists in a heterogeneous polity.

  • Thoughts on Religious Reformation

    [C]hristianity: the gradual expiration of impulsive hatred and its replacement with rational justice. QUESTION: What if the New Testament was our Old Testament and the ‘New’ the Western ethical cannon?

    MAN – God (Truth). – Gods (perfection in individual virtues). – Those humans who were godlike (demonstrated perfection in life). – Those humans who worked to be godlike. (but whose names we do not always remember) – Those humans who refrained from being ungodly. – Those humans who were ungodly. – And those humans who were evil. GODS – Center: God (perfection), Man, Woman, 2boys, 2girls, Earth. (Family + earth) – North:Sun: Truth, Law, Justice, (War. Masculine) – East:Fire: Contract, Production, Distribution, Trade – West:Water: Art, Invention, Knowledge, Craft – South:Earth: Love, Caretaking, Nurture, Charity (Feminine) NOT ONE BUT MANY – Monotheism is the folly of conformity to tyranny: that we must be identical slaves, rather than specialists who participate in a division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor and advocacy and inform one another through voluntary cooperation. – Pick your saint and seek to live as your saint. – The religion of specialists for an economy of specialists in a heterogeneous polity.

  • The Great Error, And The Great Lie To Compensate For It.

    (important piece) (solutions) (historical context)
    [A]merica was designed to restore and preserve the Anglo Saxon rights of Englishman, for Englishman and the occasional Scot. The constitution is an English document articulating English rights, for English men and their families, justified as necessary using Natural Law thought beneficial for all men. The source of the declaration constitution and bill of rights was English, Anglo Saxon, Norman, Germanic, Indo-European traditional common law. Everyone else is a free rider. The constitution is not a living document open to interpretation but the most modern articulation in law of that ancient aristocratic egalitarian tradition, designed to require strict construction, by formal operations, and near universal assent in order to implement change. It is the most conservative document ever written, depriving the government, the court, and the people of the ability to infringe upon those ancient rights. The error in Britain and then in the states, was the failure to see government not as a constructor of law, but as a market for the contractual construction of commons between the classes, holding different abilities, knowledge and interests. And that as the franchise expanded with economic and military participation, the British and Americans failed to add new “houses” for the new states, colonies, classes and genders. All political, moral, ethical and legal philosophy since the revolutionary period has consisted entirely of a series of convenient lies, justifications, and errors by which to compensate for the failure to extend the classical liberal model to allow citizens to construct a market for contractual commons, maintain separation of law and contract creation, and to convert from ascent by majority rule to dissent via suit in court of law by universal standing. But the progressive lies are just that. Lies. The constitution is the most strictly constructed, empirically demanding, operationally articulated document in history. And progressives have sought to destroy it for the better part of two centuries while lauding the power the errors of the British and Americans granted them to do so. This is the greatest legal deception in human history third only to the forcible introduction of Christianity, and the universal deceit of scriptural monotheism. Perhaps I should claim Propertarianism was written in metal tablets buried in the ground or handed to me in a burning bush or visited to me in my dreams, rather than the product oaf a life-long search to the problem of political and ethical conflict that has plagued us since 1960. But no. That would be a violation of those ancient traditions: speak the truth even if it means your death. All else follows from that expensive payment in exchange for reciprocity.
    [A]t this point in time we know that the economic benefit of slavery in the states, and the desire of the throne to ban slavery were in conflict. We also know that the americans didn’t want to pay the crown for the defense in the french and indian war, yet the british felt that they had nearly bankrupted the crown to protect the colonies. We also know that the americans were desperate to remain united with the crown. We also know that the crown could not for some reason develop the solution of a separate house for the colonies, or grant them membership in the house. The problem was solvable in 1775, but no one thought about legal dissent instead of democratic assent, or new houses for newly enfranchised interests.  It’s tragic. The tragedy of my people. Makes me sad as hell. – Curt

  • The Great Error, And The Great Lie To Compensate For It.

    (important piece) (solutions) (historical context)
    [A]merica was designed to restore and preserve the Anglo Saxon rights of Englishman, for Englishman and the occasional Scot. The constitution is an English document articulating English rights, for English men and their families, justified as necessary using Natural Law thought beneficial for all men. The source of the declaration constitution and bill of rights was English, Anglo Saxon, Norman, Germanic, Indo-European traditional common law. Everyone else is a free rider. The constitution is not a living document open to interpretation but the most modern articulation in law of that ancient aristocratic egalitarian tradition, designed to require strict construction, by formal operations, and near universal assent in order to implement change. It is the most conservative document ever written, depriving the government, the court, and the people of the ability to infringe upon those ancient rights. The error in Britain and then in the states, was the failure to see government not as a constructor of law, but as a market for the contractual construction of commons between the classes, holding different abilities, knowledge and interests. And that as the franchise expanded with economic and military participation, the British and Americans failed to add new “houses” for the new states, colonies, classes and genders. All political, moral, ethical and legal philosophy since the revolutionary period has consisted entirely of a series of convenient lies, justifications, and errors by which to compensate for the failure to extend the classical liberal model to allow citizens to construct a market for contractual commons, maintain separation of law and contract creation, and to convert from ascent by majority rule to dissent via suit in court of law by universal standing. But the progressive lies are just that. Lies. The constitution is the most strictly constructed, empirically demanding, operationally articulated document in history. And progressives have sought to destroy it for the better part of two centuries while lauding the power the errors of the British and Americans granted them to do so. This is the greatest legal deception in human history third only to the forcible introduction of Christianity, and the universal deceit of scriptural monotheism. Perhaps I should claim Propertarianism was written in metal tablets buried in the ground or handed to me in a burning bush or visited to me in my dreams, rather than the product oaf a life-long search to the problem of political and ethical conflict that has plagued us since 1960. But no. That would be a violation of those ancient traditions: speak the truth even if it means your death. All else follows from that expensive payment in exchange for reciprocity.
    [A]t this point in time we know that the economic benefit of slavery in the states, and the desire of the throne to ban slavery were in conflict. We also know that the americans didn’t want to pay the crown for the defense in the french and indian war, yet the british felt that they had nearly bankrupted the crown to protect the colonies. We also know that the americans were desperate to remain united with the crown. We also know that the crown could not for some reason develop the solution of a separate house for the colonies, or grant them membership in the house. The problem was solvable in 1775, but no one thought about legal dissent instead of democratic assent, or new houses for newly enfranchised interests.  It’s tragic. The tragedy of my people. Makes me sad as hell. – Curt

  • Q&A: Revolution. Will it Result in the ‘Right’ People?

    (worth repeating)QUESTION:

    —“How do we demand a return to an Aristocracy of the right people? This is a steep hill we’re climbing.”—

    ANSWER: [T]he right people are impossible to know. And even such, it’s not a matter of choosing the right people. It’s a matter of preventing all the WRONG people. And preventing the wrong people is something that we can do. Prosecute the bad, and only the good remain. Determine the false, and only true remains. Fragility is easy to exploit into a cascade. It was one thing to promise democracy when there was no empirical evidence. But the evidence is in. It’s genocidal. Mostly because women lacked the experience and accountability for the votes that they cast. We got what the majority of women and the minority of men desired: largely by destroying the family and expanding immigration, and transferring reproduction from the middle to the lower classes through aggressive taxation. The problem for creating momentum in any revolution is that people need an alternative institutional framework to accept, if not advocate, that will solve present problems and provide them with a means of understanding how the future might unfold. So, we need something for them to demand. Just as the founding fathers did. Just as all enlightenment movements did. And it must take a moral high ground. After that, there are 3 hours of energy, 3 days of water, 6 days of food in the channel, and an economy that cannot tolerate shocks. Long gone are the days where the multitudes must take to the streets with pitchforks. A small number of men with a few pages of instructions can do far more damage than the communist insurgents did. A sustained but short period of unpredictability and a positive set of demands will collapse the channels, and the government with it. All governance is an illusion created by the accumulated momentum of common interests. It is a fragile illusion easily dispelled, which is why governors are so paranoid about the slightest threat. It’s easy, with just a few thousand. With 1% it’s all but certain. We have more than 1% if we give them actionable direction. (Look at the middle east.)

  • Q&A: Revolution. Will it Result in the ‘Right’ People?

    (worth repeating)QUESTION:

    —“How do we demand a return to an Aristocracy of the right people? This is a steep hill we’re climbing.”—

    ANSWER: [T]he right people are impossible to know. And even such, it’s not a matter of choosing the right people. It’s a matter of preventing all the WRONG people. And preventing the wrong people is something that we can do. Prosecute the bad, and only the good remain. Determine the false, and only true remains. Fragility is easy to exploit into a cascade. It was one thing to promise democracy when there was no empirical evidence. But the evidence is in. It’s genocidal. Mostly because women lacked the experience and accountability for the votes that they cast. We got what the majority of women and the minority of men desired: largely by destroying the family and expanding immigration, and transferring reproduction from the middle to the lower classes through aggressive taxation. The problem for creating momentum in any revolution is that people need an alternative institutional framework to accept, if not advocate, that will solve present problems and provide them with a means of understanding how the future might unfold. So, we need something for them to demand. Just as the founding fathers did. Just as all enlightenment movements did. And it must take a moral high ground. After that, there are 3 hours of energy, 3 days of water, 6 days of food in the channel, and an economy that cannot tolerate shocks. Long gone are the days where the multitudes must take to the streets with pitchforks. A small number of men with a few pages of instructions can do far more damage than the communist insurgents did. A sustained but short period of unpredictability and a positive set of demands will collapse the channels, and the government with it. All governance is an illusion created by the accumulated momentum of common interests. It is a fragile illusion easily dispelled, which is why governors are so paranoid about the slightest threat. It’s easy, with just a few thousand. With 1% it’s all but certain. We have more than 1% if we give them actionable direction. (Look at the middle east.)

  • #NRx #tcot #tlot – The restoration of the west in our lifetimes. Welcome to the

    #NRx #tcot #tlot – The restoration of the west in our lifetimes. Welcome to the revolution: http://www.propertarianism.com/aiLgx

    Source date (UTC): 2015-08-06 11:51:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/629258471234473984

  • More than that. The restoration of the west in our lifetimes. Welcome to the rev

    More than that. The restoration of the west in our lifetimes. Welcome to the revolution: http://www.propertarianism.com/aiLgx

    Source date (UTC): 2015-08-06 11:50:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/629258199196139520

    Reply addressees: @Outsideness @AliceTeller

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/629247529503174656

    IN REPLY TO:

    @Outsideness

    @curtdoolittle @AliceTeller A new chief cat-herder?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/629247529503174656

  • Welcome To The Revolution.

    (important piece)(pinned)

    [I] do my work in public, like a medieval street merchant. You get to see the product being made. Including its successes and failures. It’s been an interesting experience for me and those who follow me.

    But for new-comers, my work is radical. Trying to follow or understand it is non-trivial. I place a great deal of burden on the audience for knowledge of physical science, economics, law, and philosophy. On my website is a ‘short list’ of books that I try to keep current that should allow someone with a university education in an empirical discipline to gain a basic scientific knowledge necessary to understand propertarianism. But even reading those works will take time. So I’ll try to give you an outline and a starting place:

    [showhide type=”pressrelease” more_text=”(Show the rest of the Post…)” less_text=”(Hide Text..)” hidden=”yes”]

    [P]ropertarianism is a reformation of truth, epistemology, ethics, politics and aesthetics – and as broad an effort as that any other thinker’s in enlightenment history: Kant’s(rationalism), Marx’s(pseudoscience), and equalled only in recent scope by Heidegger (pseudorationalism) – all of whom were on the opposite end of the spectrum and at best ‘anti-scientific’. Instead, Propertarianism is a continuation of the Locke/Smith/Hume revolution, and a refutation of the Kant/Marx/Heidegger counter-revolution’s introspective revolt using experiential meaning against comparatively autistic science (truth).

    And, even if you possess the underlying knowledge, my program is RADICAL, and that means novel, and somewhat hard to learn:

    1 – Testimonial truth and Testimonialism (epistemology) are themselves a profound innovation that unifies science, philosophy, morality and law into truth-telling or ‘testimony’ which is the only existentially possible truth available for man to write and speak. Under testimonialism, we warranty we have performed the necessary due diligence to claim we testify truthfully. This due diligence is an extension of the scientific method to include ethics constructed as a rigorous logic: a scientific ethics.

    See An Introduction To Testimonial Truth.

    2 – Propertarian Ethics (ethics and morality) is an objective amoral language for expression and comparison of ethics that states that only productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer, free of externalities of the same criteria are rationally tolerable if we are to preserve the incentive to cooperate, and not to retaliate, and thereby preserve the disproportionate rewards of cooperation. As such the preservation of cooperation is the basis for ethics. And all ethical propositions are decidable.

    See An Introduction to Propertarian Ethics.

    3 – Propertarian Liberalism (politics) is a radical reformation of classical liberalism that articulates how and why the classical liberal model failed: failing to create new houses for newly enfranchised classes with competing reproductive interests, and the conflation of law with contract – thereby creating a voluntary market for the production of commons between classes with disparate interests and abilities.

    Propertarianism invalidates democratic assent, replacing it with legal criticism, meaning that any political contract that is not illegal may pass, and other groups may prohibit it only if it fails the legal prohibition on involuntary transfer – thus eliminating monopoly rule under democracy, and converting the legislative branch to a market for the production of commons.

    4 – Propertarian Strict Construction (law) is a reformation of law that completes the now-failed american constitutional program by requiring strict construction equal to that of mathematical proofs, thereby eliminating legal activism, parasitism, and providing universal decidability to matters of law, reducing the court’s function to determination of truth telling, and responsibility for causal relations.

    5 – Propertarian Informational Commons (law) is an extension of the prohibition on “Abusus” (pollution or abuse) with which we protect the commons of the air, water, land, infrastructure, parks and monuments from damage, privatization, and consumption. Under universal standing in matters of the commons, activists can use the courts to protect not only air, land, sea, wildlife, but the truthfulness of information.

    [P]ropertarianism provides the missing logic of cooperation that has caused the artificial separation between science, philosophy, and law for 2500 years. This has stumped great minds for over two millennia. I am just a lucky man, standing on the shoulders of giants, peering into history, and by accident at the right point in time; and I see the errors of the past only because I am keenly aware of the failure of the 20th century philosophers, the success of operational thinking we call 20th century computer science, and the recent innovations in genetic, biological, cognitive, behavioral sciences since Pinker fired the first volley.

    If this problem stumped so many greater minds than mine, it is no wonder that it’s hard for some of you to grasp the scope of the revolution in intellectual history. I understand it.

    There will always be passionate activists and those heavily invested in dogma that will hold desperately to their priors and criticize innovations that they do not understand. This is natural human conservatism regardless of which point of the political and moral compass they originate from. And it is very hard to ask passionate people who are heavily invested in comforting justificationary priors to spend a great deal of effort in learning a radical program that requires substantial effort and knowledge to understand and apply. Those people may possess the ability, not possess the ability, have the time and effort, or not have the time and effort, be willing to invest, or not willing to invest.

    So the only means of demonstrating to them that they should or must invest in learning such a thing, is for those who choose to make that investment for whatever reason, by their arguments and by their numbers, provide evidence that they should do so.

    That is where you come in.

    [P]ropertarianism is the antidote to Marxism, Pseudoscience, Postmodernism and Deceit. It is the correction and completion of the classical liberal project, which is itself an expansion of the anglo saxon franchise, and in turn an expansion of the european and indo-european project: the heroic society. Where the greatest heroism is the costly burden of truth telling and personal sovereignty.

    If there is any end of history, it is not marxist socialism, or democratic secular humanism, but the truthful society made possible by the reformation of classical liberalism to facilitate cooperation between heterogeneous peoples while prohibiting every possible means of parasitism, and demanding productive efforts in order to survive. By prohibiting all parasitism we leave only productive voluntary exchange as a means of survival.

    So it may indeed be work to follow me on this journey. But buy doing so you are participating in the greatest revolution since Marxism, and together we are constructing the only means I have found for the restoration and perpetuation of western civilization: the people who speak the truth, and the vast benefits that we westerners bring to mankind by having spoken the truth; despite the terrible difficulty in learning how to speak truthfully, and the enormous cost of truthful speech that each of us pays every day, as the most important tax, so that with truth telling that we have used in both the ancient and modern eras, to drag humanity kicking and screaming against its will, out of illness and disease, malthusian poverty, constant conflict, universal ignorance and crippling mysticism.

    Liberty in our lifetimes.

    Welcome to the revolution.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Philosophy of Aristocracy
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

    [/showhide]