Curt Doolittle

Theme: Sovereignty

  • —“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.

  • Why We Need to Peacefully Separate and Let Eachother Go Our Separate Ways

    Why We Need to Peacefully Separate and Let Eachother Go Our Separate Ways https://propertarianism.com/2019/10/03/why-we-need-to-peacefully-separate-and-let-eachother-go-our-separate-ways/

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-03 20:07:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179850409139228675

  • Why We Need to Peacefully Separate and Let Eachother Go Our Separate Ways

    [T]here are only a few directions the brain can evolve: 1) Neoteny (delay of maturity, retention of childlike features, giving more time for cognitive development). … a) developmental specialization (sense, physical, social, abstract), which for some reason we tend to vary in. … b) Prefrontal, cortical, inhibition (agency) – appears to be neotonic in origin. … c) Intelligence (I won’t get into that here) but there are many underlying variables including neocortical volume. The big 5/6 personality traits, and measured differences in brain volume and function can be described by these dimensions. 2) Sex: feminine and masculine, and this happens in early development. The differences in gender distributions of the big 5/6 (called ‘factors’, and their subfactors can be described by masculine and feminine differences, which are largely reduced to agreeableness, assertiveness, risk. We call these two resulting moral biases conservative (masculine pack) and liberal (feminine herd). And they reflect the different evolutionary strategies of males and females. Even so, all of us exist on a spectrum from the female mind to the male mind. There are pack (masculine minded) women, herd (feminine) minded men. Mental illness, anti social behavior, cognitive biases, moral intuition, use of language, vary consistently along this spectrum with very simple tests identifying the sex of the brain – regardless of sexual attraction, which is a developmental success or failure. One of the differences in cognitive biases between men and women is that men see differences and are slightly better at generalizing observations, and women the opposite at seeing similarity and individual empathy. This is our division of labor, and again – all of us are somewhere on this spectrum of masculine to feminine biases. And the cause of these differences is well understood, not only in hormones and developmental rehearsal of different biases, but in the structure of information processed in the brain, where one side (female) is language empathy and prey focused, and the other is action, objectivity, and predator focused. SO WHAT DO WE DO? We were speciating into regional human groups when we discovered farming. We were forced to compromise with each other during farming. Farming is over and we are now wealthy enough to pursue our genetic biases (interests, strategies) and so we must separate between masculine (suburban and rural hunters) and feminine (urban gatherers) and there is no reason not to. We are simply able to afford specialization. It’s time to return to speciation and stop fighting our instincts as different animals returning to speciation now that the agrarian era is over.

  • Why We Need to Peacefully Separate and Let Eachother Go Our Separate Ways

    [T]here are only a few directions the brain can evolve: 1) Neoteny (delay of maturity, retention of childlike features, giving more time for cognitive development). … a) developmental specialization (sense, physical, social, abstract), which for some reason we tend to vary in. … b) Prefrontal, cortical, inhibition (agency) – appears to be neotonic in origin. … c) Intelligence (I won’t get into that here) but there are many underlying variables including neocortical volume. The big 5/6 personality traits, and measured differences in brain volume and function can be described by these dimensions. 2) Sex: feminine and masculine, and this happens in early development. The differences in gender distributions of the big 5/6 (called ‘factors’, and their subfactors can be described by masculine and feminine differences, which are largely reduced to agreeableness, assertiveness, risk. We call these two resulting moral biases conservative (masculine pack) and liberal (feminine herd). And they reflect the different evolutionary strategies of males and females. Even so, all of us exist on a spectrum from the female mind to the male mind. There are pack (masculine minded) women, herd (feminine) minded men. Mental illness, anti social behavior, cognitive biases, moral intuition, use of language, vary consistently along this spectrum with very simple tests identifying the sex of the brain – regardless of sexual attraction, which is a developmental success or failure. One of the differences in cognitive biases between men and women is that men see differences and are slightly better at generalizing observations, and women the opposite at seeing similarity and individual empathy. This is our division of labor, and again – all of us are somewhere on this spectrum of masculine to feminine biases. And the cause of these differences is well understood, not only in hormones and developmental rehearsal of different biases, but in the structure of information processed in the brain, where one side (female) is language empathy and prey focused, and the other is action, objectivity, and predator focused. SO WHAT DO WE DO? We were speciating into regional human groups when we discovered farming. We were forced to compromise with each other during farming. Farming is over and we are now wealthy enough to pursue our genetic biases (interests, strategies) and so we must separate between masculine (suburban and rural hunters) and feminine (urban gatherers) and there is no reason not to. We are simply able to afford specialization. It’s time to return to speciation and stop fighting our instincts as different animals returning to speciation now that the agrarian era is over.

  • Sovereigntarianism

    Sovereigntarianism https://propertarianism.com/2019/10/03/sovereigntarianism/

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-03 20:05:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179849962936356864

  • Sovereigntarianism

    [C]apitalism creates an economic market producing a war of all against all. Socialism creates a political market producing a war of all against all. Rule of law by Reciprocity, Reciprocal insurance of Sovereignty, and paying the high cost of Heroism and Excellence, Truth and Duty, and Paternalism and Charity, create the optimum polity without the extremes of capitalism or socialism at the cost of total suppression of the irreciprocal and false, under that rule of law by reciprocity and reciprocal insurance. Reciprocal insurance of SovereigntyRule of Law by ReciprocityHeroism and Excellence (Beauty)Truth and DutyPaternalism and Charity We create commons, accumulate capital, and its multipliers. The enemy consumes like locusts and creates only temporary economic velocity. These are very expensive commons because they require we trust one another to invest in a commons that will not be consumed – because every man is a father, sheriff, warrior, and if necessary, judge of the commons and will defend it. We must separate and return to speciation, or the consumption of accumulated material, institutional, informational, genetic, and planetary capital will be consumed by the enemy.

  • Sovereigntarianism

    [C]apitalism creates an economic market producing a war of all against all. Socialism creates a political market producing a war of all against all. Rule of law by Reciprocity, Reciprocal insurance of Sovereignty, and paying the high cost of Heroism and Excellence, Truth and Duty, and Paternalism and Charity, create the optimum polity without the extremes of capitalism or socialism at the cost of total suppression of the irreciprocal and false, under that rule of law by reciprocity and reciprocal insurance. Reciprocal insurance of SovereigntyRule of Law by ReciprocityHeroism and Excellence (Beauty)Truth and DutyPaternalism and Charity We create commons, accumulate capital, and its multipliers. The enemy consumes like locusts and creates only temporary economic velocity. These are very expensive commons because they require we trust one another to invest in a commons that will not be consumed – because every man is a father, sheriff, warrior, and if necessary, judge of the commons and will defend it. We must separate and return to speciation, or the consumption of accumulated material, institutional, informational, genetic, and planetary capital will be consumed by the enemy.

  • EXCHANGE OF KIN AS SECURITY —“Uncle Curt, what was it called when Kings would

    EXCHANGE OF KIN AS SECURITY

    —“Uncle Curt, what was it called when Kings would exchange Princes for a required amount of time, and keep as their ward the exchanged Prince? As this was keep… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=477334052863490&id=100017606988153

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-03 14:13:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179761292070002689

  • We are trying to restore TRUTH BEFORE FACE, Sovereignty Reciprocity, Jury, and M

    We are trying to restore TRUTH BEFORE FACE, Sovereignty Reciprocity, Jury, and Markets in all aspects of life. The entire western edifice and its success in ancient and modern worlds, depends on those few institutions. And you’re sitting here voluntarily engaging resistance.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-03 13:38:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179752626751250432

    Reply addressees: @SufficientlyWh1 @StefanMolyneux

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179751619858239489

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @SufficientlyWh1 @StefanMolyneux Rome was destroyed from within as much as from without by the same means marxism feminism postmodernism are doing to the modern world:Undermining Truth before Face this time with pseudoscience, sophism, and denial, and last time with Judaism, Christianity, and Islam and invasion.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1179751619858239489

    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @SufficientlyWh1 @StefanMolyneux Rome was destroyed from within as much as from without by the same means marxism feminism postmodernism are doing to the modern world:Undermining Truth before Face this time with pseudoscience, sophism, and denial, and last time with Judaism, Christianity, and Islam and invasion.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1179751619858239489