Curt Doolittle

Theme: Religion

  • —“What Is Your Opinion of Monarchy”—

    —“WHAT IS YOUR OPINION OF MONARCHY”—

    [M]onarchy (which is a purely christian european order, in which kings are crowned by the church, as an insurer of their fitness), has been limited by traditional (indo european then germanic law) of individual sovereignty, interpersonal reciprocity, truthful testimony, promise, and contract. Russian Tzars had dictatorial power, European monarchs did not. Roman and Greek did not. The rest of the world has some version of chieftain, headman, ruler, but they do not have traditional european law of tort, trespass, property, or what we call natural law. As far as I know we had the optimum form of government evolve in england, with a strong monarchy, a strong parliament as a jury negotiating the monarchy’s requests for money and policy, a house of industry (lords) as a supreme court, and a church for matters of family and society not matters of state. Unfortunately the church did not reform itself into a benevolent house government of natural law, nor did the state force it to, because the malinvestment by the church in it’s supernatural dogma was impossible to overcome. And so we both failed to add a house of ‘the family’ for labor and the underclasses, ad the church fell out of public policy. This resulted in parliaments and houses of government eventually subject to mob (underclass) rule and the frauds, sophists and pseudoscientists who made those classes false promises. If we maintained houses for the classes, and one for women, then we would be able to conduct trades (parliament = parley-ment = parley = negotiating conflicts) between the classes and genders rather than conduct all out propaganda wars in public in an attempt to get the most ignorant to side with one class or the other. As far as I can tell, a monarchy hiring and firing aristocracy to rule the state under that natural law, traditional law, indo european law of trespass, tort, property, combined with christian tolerance and charity) is the optimum form of government. My opinion is that we need only retain voting by direct vote, by economic contribution, when the monarchy wishes to raise taxes (revenues), and that those revenues be directed to stated purposes, not under discretion of the monarchy, and then some constant portion of revenues left to the monarchy to use at its discretion for the development of high commons (beautiful things). And so, we will now either add houses or lose participatory government altogether – as predicted.

  • —“What Is Your Opinion of Monarchy”—

    —“WHAT IS YOUR OPINION OF MONARCHY”—

    [M]onarchy (which is a purely christian european order, in which kings are crowned by the church, as an insurer of their fitness), has been limited by traditional (indo european then germanic law) of individual sovereignty, interpersonal reciprocity, truthful testimony, promise, and contract. Russian Tzars had dictatorial power, European monarchs did not. Roman and Greek did not. The rest of the world has some version of chieftain, headman, ruler, but they do not have traditional european law of tort, trespass, property, or what we call natural law. As far as I know we had the optimum form of government evolve in england, with a strong monarchy, a strong parliament as a jury negotiating the monarchy’s requests for money and policy, a house of industry (lords) as a supreme court, and a church for matters of family and society not matters of state. Unfortunately the church did not reform itself into a benevolent house government of natural law, nor did the state force it to, because the malinvestment by the church in it’s supernatural dogma was impossible to overcome. And so we both failed to add a house of ‘the family’ for labor and the underclasses, ad the church fell out of public policy. This resulted in parliaments and houses of government eventually subject to mob (underclass) rule and the frauds, sophists and pseudoscientists who made those classes false promises. If we maintained houses for the classes, and one for women, then we would be able to conduct trades (parliament = parley-ment = parley = negotiating conflicts) between the classes and genders rather than conduct all out propaganda wars in public in an attempt to get the most ignorant to side with one class or the other. As far as I can tell, a monarchy hiring and firing aristocracy to rule the state under that natural law, traditional law, indo european law of trespass, tort, property, combined with christian tolerance and charity) is the optimum form of government. My opinion is that we need only retain voting by direct vote, by economic contribution, when the monarchy wishes to raise taxes (revenues), and that those revenues be directed to stated purposes, not under discretion of the monarchy, and then some constant portion of revenues left to the monarchy to use at its discretion for the development of high commons (beautiful things). And so, we will now either add houses or lose participatory government altogether – as predicted.

  • Because of The Technique Used to Sell and Argue the Abrahamic Religions

    Because of The Technique Used to Sell and Argue the Abrahamic Religions https://propertarianism.com/2019/10/03/because-of-the-technique-used-to-sell-and-argue-the-abrahamic-religions/

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-03 20:08:31 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179850739730014208

  • Because of The Technique Used to Sell and Argue the Abrahamic Religions

    —“Can you explain how that paradigm is Abrahamic?”— Sean-Vernon Sutherland

    (Referring to capitalism vs socialism instead of rule of law and arbitrary rule) [U]sing the method of persuasion consisting of false promise, pilpul, and critique (undermining) by which the abrahamic religions of the old world, and the new world: marxism, socialism, feminism, postmodernism, and denialism, with of course, fundamentalist islam persisting. It’s the female method of undermining, rather than western masculine truth and reciprocity. in effect the abrahamic method (undermining) is the primary competitor to european science and chinese reason. It is the art of lying. Study women’s conflict strategy.

    —“I don’t see what that has to do with Abraham.”— Sean-Vernon Sutherland

    Then maybe you don’t need to. Unless you want to learn the different means by which different civilizations conduct their propaganda (mythology) and group strategy then it’s not important for you. Just learn the technique, learn the technique of western truth, and every civilization employs a system of argument (persuasion) somewhere between european truth and abrahamic lying, with chinese closest to european, followed by hindustani, followed by buddhist followed by abrahamic (middle eastern, monotheistic, supernatural sophism, and its modern reformation in pseudoscience, and sophism). If we use the term rabbinical (who invented it) then we exclude christianity, islam, judaism, marxism, freudianism, boasianism, postmodernism, feminism and denialism (political correctness) which are all constructed by the same means. So we use abahamic to encompass both the first generation of abrahamic sophisms (abrahamic religions) and the second generation (marxism, socialism, postmodernism, feminism, denialism, political correctness). This (The Gramamars) is one of the foundational methodologies in propertarianism: 0. Enumeration, Serialization, Disambiguation, and Operationalization1. Testimonial Truth and The Grammars of truth and deceit2. Reciprocity, Demonstrated Interest3. Compatibilism4. Strict construction of law5. Perfect Government There is much more than that but that’s about all people can manage at one time.

  • Because of The Technique Used to Sell and Argue the Abrahamic Religions

    —“Can you explain how that paradigm is Abrahamic?”— Sean-Vernon Sutherland

    (Referring to capitalism vs socialism instead of rule of law and arbitrary rule) [U]sing the method of persuasion consisting of false promise, pilpul, and critique (undermining) by which the abrahamic religions of the old world, and the new world: marxism, socialism, feminism, postmodernism, and denialism, with of course, fundamentalist islam persisting. It’s the female method of undermining, rather than western masculine truth and reciprocity. in effect the abrahamic method (undermining) is the primary competitor to european science and chinese reason. It is the art of lying. Study women’s conflict strategy.

    —“I don’t see what that has to do with Abraham.”— Sean-Vernon Sutherland

    Then maybe you don’t need to. Unless you want to learn the different means by which different civilizations conduct their propaganda (mythology) and group strategy then it’s not important for you. Just learn the technique, learn the technique of western truth, and every civilization employs a system of argument (persuasion) somewhere between european truth and abrahamic lying, with chinese closest to european, followed by hindustani, followed by buddhist followed by abrahamic (middle eastern, monotheistic, supernatural sophism, and its modern reformation in pseudoscience, and sophism). If we use the term rabbinical (who invented it) then we exclude christianity, islam, judaism, marxism, freudianism, boasianism, postmodernism, feminism and denialism (political correctness) which are all constructed by the same means. So we use abahamic to encompass both the first generation of abrahamic sophisms (abrahamic religions) and the second generation (marxism, socialism, postmodernism, feminism, denialism, political correctness). This (The Gramamars) is one of the foundational methodologies in propertarianism: 0. Enumeration, Serialization, Disambiguation, and Operationalization1. Testimonial Truth and The Grammars of truth and deceit2. Reciprocity, Demonstrated Interest3. Compatibilism4. Strict construction of law5. Perfect Government There is much more than that but that’s about all people can manage at one time.

  • We Are the Continuation of The European Civilizational Arc

    1. The Western Indo Europeans were fighting submission to nature in every aspect of the social order: nature(technology), family, polity, and religion. They invented the Agency of Man. The application of mastery of metallurgy, the horse, the wheel and war to all aspects of human experience.
    2. Aristotle was fighting ignorance in all the disciplines – including religion, custom, and politics. He invented Empiricism: the transfer of testimony in a court of peers to all aspects of human experience.

    3. Galileo was fighting supernaturalism and denial in the physical sciences: physics, chemistry, biology. He was the principle advocate of Science: The restoration of testimony using mathematics in court a court of peers to all aspects of life.

    4. Darwin was fighting supernaturalism in the biological sciences. He was the principle advocate of realism and naturalism in biology: the restoration of naturalism in biological and social sciences.

    5. Propertarians are fighting pseudoscience and sophism and denial in the human sciences: language, psychology, sociology, politics, and group strategy: The completion of social science: The application of testimony using the measurement of reciprocity.

    What’s Next? We will only save ourselves, and mankind from another dark age if we do not make the mistakes of the greeks and the romans, and the monarchists – optimism that other men, are equal in ability and interest to european men.

  • We Are the Continuation of The European Civilizational Arc

    1. The Western Indo Europeans were fighting submission to nature in every aspect of the social order: nature(technology), family, polity, and religion. They invented the Agency of Man. The application of mastery of metallurgy, the horse, the wheel and war to all aspects of human experience.
    2. Aristotle was fighting ignorance in all the disciplines – including religion, custom, and politics. He invented Empiricism: the transfer of testimony in a court of peers to all aspects of human experience.

    3. Galileo was fighting supernaturalism and denial in the physical sciences: physics, chemistry, biology. He was the principle advocate of Science: The restoration of testimony using mathematics in court a court of peers to all aspects of life.

    4. Darwin was fighting supernaturalism in the biological sciences. He was the principle advocate of realism and naturalism in biology: the restoration of naturalism in biological and social sciences.

    5. Propertarians are fighting pseudoscience and sophism and denial in the human sciences: language, psychology, sociology, politics, and group strategy: The completion of social science: The application of testimony using the measurement of reciprocity.

    What’s Next? We will only save ourselves, and mankind from another dark age if we do not make the mistakes of the greeks and the romans, and the monarchists – optimism that other men, are equal in ability and interest to european men.

  • Wisdom Literature Good and Bad

    [W]isdom literature is necessary. Fairy Tales, Myths, Legends, all use unknown forces to educate us. That’s just different from using wisdom (advice) as truth (decidability). One cannot deduce in argument from such premises. But one can seek counsel, and give counsel with wisdom. It’s just a degree of precision: Analogy (wisdom) for broad, Virtues for less broad, General Rules for narrower, Law for narrower, science for narrower, and math for narrowest. This range allows us graceful increase and decrease in precision – or dishonestly, to obscure precision. We must only know whether we are using the sufficient degree of precision for the question, whether we lack information for, or are ignorant of, further precision, or whether we are obscuring greater precision for dishonest purposes. Theology uses all three – unfortunately.

  • Wisdom Literature Good and Bad

    [W]isdom literature is necessary. Fairy Tales, Myths, Legends, all use unknown forces to educate us. That’s just different from using wisdom (advice) as truth (decidability). One cannot deduce in argument from such premises. But one can seek counsel, and give counsel with wisdom. It’s just a degree of precision: Analogy (wisdom) for broad, Virtues for less broad, General Rules for narrower, Law for narrower, science for narrower, and math for narrowest. This range allows us graceful increase and decrease in precision – or dishonestly, to obscure precision. We must only know whether we are using the sufficient degree of precision for the question, whether we lack information for, or are ignorant of, further precision, or whether we are obscuring greater precision for dishonest purposes. Theology uses all three – unfortunately.

  • The Outstanding Issue of The Second American Constitution

    [T]he issue in the first american constitution was the exception of slavery. The issue in the second american constitution will be the exception of christianity. I’m just recording that this exception, like the first one, is necessary – but it will lead to the same problems, without a continuation of the reformation of christianity. We have at least Religious, Fascist, Traditional, Constitutional, Ratio-economic, and Scientific ‘factions’ that we must satisfy in order to form a more perfect union. Mine must sacrifice tolerance for christian abrahamism; the fascists must tolerate monarchy via negativa instead of a strong man via positiva; and the christians must tolerate the protestantization of christianity as a folk religion, the ongoing decline (3rd Worlding) of the catholic church, and our inability to restore churches to control of family law and education – in exchange for defense by the state, advocacy by the state, and competition between theological, moral, rational, and scientific practices of christianity and our ancient germanic and slavic religions of nature and the hearth. In exchange we all get restoration of our nation state(s), and the permanent destruction of the second abrahamic attack on western civilization – all civilization for that matter, by a monopoly religion within the state. HIERARCHY OF LAWS OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION (TRUTH) … > Physical Laws … … > Heathen (Pagan) Law of War … … … > Natural Law of Cooperation: Reciprocity … … … … > Christian Law Of Investment in Cooperation