Curt Doolittle

Theme: Reform

  • REBUILDING THE UNIVERSITY AS PREPARATION FOR ASSISTANCE IN OPERATION, GOVERNMENT

    REBUILDING THE UNIVERSITY AS PREPARATION FOR ASSISTANCE IN OPERATION, GOVERNMENT AND RULE
    We will ‘literally’ have to rebuild a university system that teaches the logics, grammars, natural law and the legal spectrum, the economic spectrum from behavioral to political, and political spectrum from government, to institutions, to war.

    Because for all intents and purposes Harvard, Yale, Stanford and their lesser peers, largegly teach SEDITION against the science of all of the above.

    The study of law, even at our best institutions – or maybe, especially at our best institutions, is literally the organized destruction of our civilization from within using the marxist-to-woke seditions, positive law, and systematic lawfare, that takes avantage of a half dozen holes in our constitution and the benevolent optimism of our high trust trifunctionalism that only a tiny fraction of us understand, our christian religion whose weakness only a few of us understand, our post-hoc common law the luxury of which few understand, and the democratic process of our republican government, which again, very few understand.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute
    The Science of Human Cooperation

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-24 13:52:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1639263876679188480

  • Define “catch on” 😉 The need for ‘activism’ to bring about these changes? The m

    Define “catch on” 😉

    The need for ‘activism’ to bring about these changes?
    The minimum legislative or legal changes to allow us to hold public discourse on solving the crisis of the age?
    The set of policies that will solve the crisis of the age, and prepare us for the future?
    The cause of the crisis of the age as a natural consequence of this point in historical development – despite that it’s even more offensive to many than was darwin?
    The changes to the constitution necessary to reform and prevent another repeat of the present?
    The changes to the common law necessary to do so?
    The science and logic of first principles of evolutionary computation as the paradigm and standard and weights of measures across all disciplines?
    The grammars as a hierarchy of computable paradigms of increasing dimensions?
    The P-Grammar of operational prose, testimony, and reciprocity?
    The P-Method of disambiguation into ordinal measurements by enumeration, serialization, and operationalization.
    The reformation of each of the disciplines to end incommensurability, paradigmatic isolation, and the pseudoscience and scientific failure that’s resulted?
    The reformation of the behavioral sciences, in particular psychology and sociology, but also economics and politics?

    How far down the rabbit hole do you want me to explain to people. This is more in line with the scope of work of aristotle (everything), or the empirical revolution, or the scientific revolution, but it’s the completion of the unification of the science by solving the behavioral sciences as thoroughly as we did the physical.

    I mean. What do I need people to understand vs what do we need different groups of people to understand? 😉

    If you look at that list, what do you think that 10% needs to understand. Because our experience is that the people who actually participate in political matters consists of a fraction who are almost always trying to solve point problems and are ignorant of the broader context.

    So yes, advice is appreciated. 😉

    Reply addressees: @dannysmanifesto

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-24 00:15:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1639058416927686657

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1639054727358074880

  • Define “catch on” 😉 The need for ‘activism’ to bring about these changes? The m

    Define “catch on” 😉

    The need for ‘activism’ to bring about these changes?
    The minimum legislative or legal changes to allow us to hold public discourse on solving the crisis of the age?
    The set of policies that will solve the crisis of the age, and prepare us for the future?
    The cause of the crisis of the age as a natural consequence of this point in historical development – despite that it’s even more offensive to many than was darwin?
    The changes to the constitution necessary to reform and prevent another repeat of the present?
    The changes to the common law necessary to do so?
    The science and logic of first principles of evolutionary computation as the paradigm and standard and weights of measures across all disciplines?
    The grammars as a hierarchy of computable paradigms of increasing dimensions?
    The P-Grammar of operational prose, testimony, and reciprocity?
    The P-Method of disambiguation into ordinal measurements by enumeration, serialization, and operationalization.
    The reformation of each of the disciplines to end incommensurability, paradigmatic isolation, and the pseudoscience and scientific failure that’s resulted?
    The reformation of the behavioral sciences, in particular psychology and sociology, but also economics and politics?

    How far down the rabbit hole do you want me to explain to people. This is more in line with the scope of work of aristotle (everything), or the empirical revolution, or the scientific revolution, but it’s the completion of the unification of the science by solving the behavioral sciences as thoroughly as we did the physical.

    I mean. What do I need people to understand vs what do we need different groups of people to understand? 😉

    If you look at that list, what do you think that 10% needs to understand. Because our experience is that the people who actually participate in political matters consists of a fraction who are almost always trying to solve point problems and are ignorant of the broader context.

    So yes, advice is appreciated. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-24 00:15:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1639058417116487681

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1639054727358074880

  • My(our organization’s) goal is to make it unnecessary. The spectrum of forms it

    My(our organization’s) goal is to make it unnecessary.
    The spectrum of forms it will take if we fail is horrible. Don’t think in terms of the French Revolution or American Civil War, but the bolshevik or the Syrian Civil War. House to house.
    Instead, we want as close to Maydan as possible.
    The USG folded in three weeks in the 60s.
    The USG cannot afford to lose legitimacy.
    And what we are asking for is moral and restores legitimacy.
    We aren’t trying to win so much as make everyone win except the financial sector, bureaucracy, academy, and media who are the ‘sellers and distributors of false promises and lies’.

    Reply addressees: @Stealth_Bandit

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-23 18:05:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638965190115880966

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638951272786321409

  • My(our organization’s) goal is to make it unnecessary. The spectrum of forms it

    My(our organization’s) goal is to make it unnecessary.
    The spectrum of forms it will take if we fail is horrible. Don’t think in terms of the French Revolution or American Civil War, but the bolshevik or the Syrian Civil War. House to house.
    Instead, we want as close to Maydan as possible.
    The USG folded in three weeks in the 60s.
    The USG cannot afford to lose legitimacy.
    And what we are asking for is moral and restores legitimacy.
    We aren’t trying to win so much as make everyone win except the financial sector, bureaucracy, academy, and media who are the ‘sellers and distributors of false promises and lies’.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-23 18:05:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638965190183075840

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638951272786321409

  • The problem with creating a revolution, even if it is one of constitutional rest

    The problem with creating a revolution, even if it is one of constitutional restoration, and the restoration of natural law of cooperation, is not making those who you must live with afterward, more desirous of killing you than the government they barely tolerated in the first place.

    I want to win without anyone firing a shot.
    If it gets to skull pyramids that just means I’ve failed.
    (Even if some part of me, at certain times, prefers skull pyramids. 😉 )

    Reply addressees: @1776Sic @ConceptualJames

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-23 18:00:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638963978985435141

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638955828567744535

  • The problem with creating a revolution, even if it is one of constitutional rest

    The problem with creating a revolution, even if it is one of constitutional restoration, and the restoration of natural law of cooperation, is not making those who you must live with afterward, more desirous of killing you than the government they barely tolerated in the first place.

    I want to win without anyone firing a shot.
    If it gets to skull pyramids that just means I’ve failed.
    (Even if some part of me, at certain times, prefers skull pyramids. 😉 )

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-23 18:00:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638963979052544018

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638955828567744535

  • Difference between replacing humans to stop repetitive stress injuries to the bo

    Difference between replacing humans to stop repetitive stress injuries to the body, and replacing humans to replace interpersonal service. This is an easy legislative fix.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-22 00:59:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638344519161618432

    Reply addressees: @Philosophi_Cat

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638217931644366848

  • Bryan, What would you suggest, if I were to interview @ErikVoorhees, I try to dr

    Bryan,
    What would you suggest, if I were to interview @ErikVoorhees, I try to draw attention to? I understand the moral message but then of course, that’s ‘not enough’ to make the case.

    As you know I have these concerns:
    1) that registry and transfer of title are more important than money substitutes.
    2) that trading the spectrum of financial instruments is more important than money substitutes.
    3) that originating and holding loans and only selling shares in them is more important than money substitutes.
    4) that escrow and clearing are more important than money substitutes.
    5) that solving ‘banklessness’ is more important than money substitutes.
    6) that modern economies cannot function without fiat currency (and privatization of appreciation isn’t earned income.)
    7) that States can (and likely will) create digital fiat and will suppress non-state money substitutes.
    8) that most states will issue short term exchange for existing digital for fiat digital, before gradually suppressing them.
    9) So my question is, are we really so much worried about money substitutes, or even if we only solve the above problems isn’t that enough?
    10) Maybe, why not just call digital what it is? Shares in the network (token money), and treat it like any other tradable financial medium, as a way of insulating one’s wealth from inflation et al?

    Thanks 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-21 21:07:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638286347260526595

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638278376795394050

  • Q: IS MARRIAGE IN THE WEST “BAITING INTO HAZARD?” (yes but it’s fixable) Right n

    Q: IS MARRIAGE IN THE WEST “BAITING INTO HAZARD?”
    (yes but it’s fixable)
    Right now it sure does. However, that’s due to “positive law” that violated natural law, the common law, concurrent legislation, and all evidence across all of human history. if we are going to permit divorces then we have to restore liability for interference in a marriage, and end no-fault divorce, child support, and alimony. And AFAIK that will all end this decade.

    Reply addressees: @Chris29819258

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-20 18:05:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1637878159646261249

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1637869080366440450