Curt Doolittle

Theme: Responsibility

  • White, Grey, Black, Lies in P-Law

    Oct 29, 2019, 7:54 PM by Stephen Thomas No one really cares if you lie for vanity’s sake. That’s a white lie.

    Libel, Slander False Advertising Baiting into Hazard Fraud private or Political Subversion of the Commons Conspiracy to subvert the Commons All of which are well defined. Those are black lies. You must lie in public to the public about matters public or conspire to propagate lies to the public about matters public And worse, you mustn’t lie FROM a position OF influence TO the public ABOUT the public, about products, policy, economics, science or law. If you want to tell everyone you wear the wrong size shoe. No one is gonna to arrest you. We will however laugh at you for being so damn petty!

    (—“I would tell you your baby’s is cute, your children are beautiful, your wife is lovely, and you are charming, brave, and witty. None of those is true. But they demonstrate I will invest in building trust in our relationship.”—CurtD )

  • Correctly Apportions Responsibility for The Failure of The West

    Correctly Apportions Responsibility for The Failure of The West https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/correctly-apportions-responsibility-for-the-failure-of-the-west/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 15:25:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265665458868555784

  • Correctly Apportions Responsibility for The Failure of The West

    Oct 30, 2019, 11:23 AM LISA OUTHWAITE CORRECTLY APPORTIONS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE FAILURE OF THE WEST —“Curt Doolittle, You personally do not. There is nothing MGTOW about you.

    <q>”…women are how the marxist, postmodernists, and feminists, brought their repetition of the destruction of civilization into ours.”</q>

    This point, and the general spirit of the original post fell short in terms of fairly apportioning responsibility and, therefore, will have fallen short in terms of re-building legitimate male strength, which must be founded on a more serious appraisal of past mistakes and a full acknowledgement of the burden of blame. The:

    <q>”women have destroyed Western civilisation'</q>

    … argument has become almost a rallying call to less discerning, disenfranchised males and it’s in dire need of correction, or balance certainly, by more superintendent males.”— Lisa Outhwaite Correct.

  • Correctly Apportions Responsibility for The Failure of The West

    Oct 30, 2019, 11:23 AM LISA OUTHWAITE CORRECTLY APPORTIONS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE FAILURE OF THE WEST —“Curt Doolittle, You personally do not. There is nothing MGTOW about you.

    <q>”…women are how the marxist, postmodernists, and feminists, brought their repetition of the destruction of civilization into ours.”</q>

    This point, and the general spirit of the original post fell short in terms of fairly apportioning responsibility and, therefore, will have fallen short in terms of re-building legitimate male strength, which must be founded on a more serious appraisal of past mistakes and a full acknowledgement of the burden of blame. The:

    <q>”women have destroyed Western civilisation'</q>

    … argument has become almost a rallying call to less discerning, disenfranchised males and it’s in dire need of correction, or balance certainly, by more superintendent males.”— Lisa Outhwaite Correct.

  • The Majority of People Prefer Just Masters Over Personal Responsibility

    The Majority of People Prefer Just Masters Over Personal Responsibility https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/the-majority-of-people-prefer-just-masters-over-personal-responsibility/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 15:23:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265664998476517376

  • The Majority of People Prefer Just Masters Over Personal Responsibility

    Oct 30, 2019, 11:27 AM by Peter Vey What’s that old saying? Where people choose comfort over freedom because they desire Just Masters over having to be responsible for their own decisions. Their conclusion is always narrow in scope and they aren’t capable of understanding what is true and just. The same morons will say that all leaders throughout time were evil or oppressive, when a little effort churns up the contrary—many leaders genuinely loved their people, and it showed.

  • The Majority of People Prefer Just Masters Over Personal Responsibility

    Oct 30, 2019, 11:27 AM by Peter Vey What’s that old saying? Where people choose comfort over freedom because they desire Just Masters over having to be responsible for their own decisions. Their conclusion is always narrow in scope and they aren’t capable of understanding what is true and just. The same morons will say that all leaders throughout time were evil or oppressive, when a little effort churns up the contrary—many leaders genuinely loved their people, and it showed.

  • What Does “Bait Into Hazard” Mean?

    What Does “Bait Into Hazard” Mean? https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/what-does-bait-into-hazard-mean-2/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 05:28:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265515118210822144

  • What Does “Bait Into Hazard” Mean?

    Nov 1, 2019, 6:42 PM

    —“You often say “bait into hazard”, any chance you could explain that in more depth? I don’t really get what you mean. Are you talking about moral hazard in economics? And what’s the baiting?”—

    If I suggest you might win at gambling (you can’t), that’s baiting you into hazard. If I entice you into buying drugs, i’m baiting you in to a hazard, since addiction is a spiral. If I offer you a loan to get what you want under impulse or duress, but I can extract interest from you, and then seize your property in restitution. If I promise you equality or socialism when it’s genetics that cause our differences, and you act to destroy your civilization, then that’s all baiting into hazard. if I promise you salvation in heaven if you rebel against the government that is trying to create order and prosperity over the next few decades, that is baiting you into a hazard. In other words, you are entering into a voluntary exchange that is not in your interests, simply because for whatever reason you are vulnerable to the trap.

  • What Does “Bait Into Hazard” Mean?

    Nov 1, 2019, 6:42 PM

    —“You often say “bait into hazard”, any chance you could explain that in more depth? I don’t really get what you mean. Are you talking about moral hazard in economics? And what’s the baiting?”—

    If I suggest you might win at gambling (you can’t), that’s baiting you into hazard. If I entice you into buying drugs, i’m baiting you in to a hazard, since addiction is a spiral. If I offer you a loan to get what you want under impulse or duress, but I can extract interest from you, and then seize your property in restitution. If I promise you equality or socialism when it’s genetics that cause our differences, and you act to destroy your civilization, then that’s all baiting into hazard. if I promise you salvation in heaven if you rebel against the government that is trying to create order and prosperity over the next few decades, that is baiting you into a hazard. In other words, you are entering into a voluntary exchange that is not in your interests, simply because for whatever reason you are vulnerable to the trap.