Gods Exist.

Gods exist as numbers exist and formulae exist and narratives exist.”

Adam Voight 

Just to clarify: I think the original post is making the claim that ontologically, God falls into Popper’s category of “Thirdness” or the “Third World”. Religion is extremely adaptive; even the greatest critics of religion can see that and have said it in many ways. I even think that fictional literature falls into the same category, although it is nowhere near as adaptive as religion. I’m also critical of the “meme virus” theory of religion for reasons I won’t go into here, but even in this theory, religion fall into the same category of beings. The objects of faith are on my view not viruses, but they and numbers are memes. It would require a long detour through the philosophy of science and metaphysics to justify and clarify the ancient reverence for the exact sciences and to demarcate them from theology and mythology. I won’t do it here due to constrains on my time, but it’s not that hard for a philosophically literate person to see how this can all be true. 

You could make a case that religion and money are the “cause” of much evil, and this case would also be seen by the reader of the late Heidegger to cast a negative light on mathematical science. While this perspective is a interesting one to ponder, it’s not sufficient to justify practical Luddism or radical mislogy. 

This sort of issue is where a little Aristotle goes a long way.


Reproduction Requires Constraint

**It’s very hard to produce commons if you’re producing offspring who have no alternative but to parasite upon those commons.**


The Construction of Political Orders

How we construct classical liberalism from Anarcho-Capitalism, and Anarcho-Capitalism from Nomocracy, and Nomocracy from Capitalism. You can’t do it any other way you know.

1. Capitalism (property rights) = Voluntary Organization of Production
2. Nomocracy (Rule of Law) = Organic Evolution of Law
3. Anarcho-… (anarchy) A Covenential Prohibition on Government.
…….. Removal of All Political Liberty.
4. Voluntary Contractual Covenants (Formation of a polity )
…….. Removal of Some Liberty on use of Property
5. Mandatory Contractual Covenants (Perpetuation of a Polity)
…….. Example: Removal of Liberty of Association and Disassociation
6. Mandatory Contractual Covenants for the Production of Commons (Government).
…….. Removal of Anarchic Prohibition in exchange for the construction of commons.


(Reminder: A Covenant is a Constitution without provision for government.)


Against Racism and Multiculturalism


I always advocate aristocratic egalitarianism and aristocratic tribalism: the responsibility of aristocracy of every tribe to work with the aristocracy of every tribe to construct a moral world. My ambition is the organized suppression of the immoral, and the organized spread of aristocratic egalitarianism wherever moral man is to be found.

I do not tolerate either racism, or the multiculturalism of the corporate state – but instead, the re-nationalization of liberty and prosperity and the advancement of all moral families, tribes and peoples. Bring truth, trust, rule of law and capital to people, not people to capital and law.

Failure to compete is a problem of the inadequacy of the self to be corrected, not one of the other to be constrained.

Punish the wicked.


Response to Kier Martland on Whig Theory of History


I love you for this post. Really.

The greeks lost writing for 600 years after the sea peoples.

Europe fell into ignorance after the fall of rome, and the despotic, forced introduction of submissive Christianity.

The world fell into verbal-mysticism, pseudo-science, and pseudo-rationalism starting with Marx, justified by the great war, and continuing until about 1995 – when again, science attempted to rescue us from pseudo-science, verbal-mysticism, and pseudo-rationalism.

The list of civilizations – social orders of institutions, property rights, languages, rituals, traditions, myths, and norms – that have disappeared is somewhere around fifty depending upon whom you refer to – and most all of them are gone and without western efforts at uncovering them – forgotten.

I think though, that whig history is still the best theory of history, because it is the most scientific explanation of history: we evolve, we adapt, or we perish – if we do not perish then we are virtuous.

Now, my response to your argument though, is quite different: why is it that civilizations fail to persist? What do they do wrong? What have we done wrong since the enlightenment that has allowed us material wealth, while committing suicide – while culturally regressing from high arts to mere vulgarity and consumption? Why are we vulnerable to whatever it is we are vulnerable?

Why did the greeks, the Romans, the Habsburgs, the Germans, and now the Anglos fall? Why was Europa easy to conquer with mysticism under rome? Why are we so comfortable with science – when no other culture appears to be? Why were we so easy to fall victim to cosmopolitan pseudo-sicence, and pseudo-philosophy, german psuedo-rationalitiy, and the anglo fallacy that all men wish to join the aristocracy?

The whig theory of history is true under the conditions that we followed throughout our history. The question is, and I think you’re posing it well, why then, at certain periods in our history, do we regress rather than continue the whig theory of history?

The answer is I think fairly simple.

(BTW: In deference to John Kersey: my position is that there is nothing good in the bible whatsoever, that is not better in the western canon than in the levantine tradition. The church formed a weak federal state selling a mystical snake oil, but it was the weak federal state and the church’s incentives as a weak federal state as opposition to the monarchy that allowed it to create value. The church could burn every reference to the levant and all its consequences, draw entirely from western people as statesmen, scholars, care-givers, generals, artists, and scientists, and beginning with natural law achieve the same ends without appealing to tyrannical authority. History well written, would be one of natural law, and misguided well intentioned fools in the church. Our god is constructed of demonstrated character of men who bring about whig history through virtuous acts. We need no other. And there is no better.)


The Reason For Western Rates of Development?


Dragging Germans and Cosmopolitans out of the well of authoritarianism.

For my purposes, Popper and Hayek are just the best thinkers to build upon, because they’re the least wrong. Hoppe isn’t important so much for what he has said but how he has taught us to say anything we wish to say at all. And whether he likes it or not (I don’t much care are this point) my work is a continuation of his – dragging it out of the absurd primitivism of cosmopolitan and german rationalism, kicking and screaming all the way. I think that, as of yesterday, I was able to drag Popper out of the cosmopolitan tradition as well. Laundering him of his cultural habits.


If you haven’t solved morality you need authority. But if you have solved morality you don’t need authority. I solved morality and therefore I don’t need authority: there is no difference in morality and property other than the scope of morality that the community is willing and able to enforce. Conversely, the less morality that people are wiling and able to enforce, the more people will demand for an authoritarian government to either impose an arbitrary moral standard, or impose sufficient order that retaliation for immoral and unethical actions is prohibited.

As such the primary determinant of whether a polity can obtain liberty under rule of law is determined by the difference between the rate of adaptation of the legal code and the rate of change in the accumulated forms of property demonstrated by the populace for use in their reproduction and therefore production.

The reason the west was able to evolve then, faster than all other civilizations, both times that it managed to escape eastern mysticism, is because the rule of law, judges and the jury can produce adaptation faster than other cultural methods of adaptation.

(pretty cool really)

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

de.aristocratia at gmail.com


What is Propertarianism?

–“Propertarianism is a formal logic of morality, ethics and politics – and the necessary basis for a non-arbitrary, value-independent, universal, body of law; upon which any and all political orders can be constructed, and with which all questions of morality, ethics and politics are commensurable and all such propositions decidable.”—


On Ukraine and Prosperity – Liberty, Violence and Rule of Law

In the past two years the hryvnia has lost HALF of its value. Prices on everything are rising, while increases in employee compensation are not.

All economies face this problem. Salaries are stickier than contracts, and contracts are stickier than prices, and prices are stickier than currency. So all changes in demand for currency around the world SLOWLY work through the economy ‘unsticking’ one thing after another. And salaries are at two edged sword: employees expect them to go up when currency loses value, but employees do not expect them to go down when currency gains value.

In our case we have two problems. One, that the dollar is getting more valuable in the world, and two, that the Hryvna is getting less valuable in the world. And our people pay the consequences.

  • We can only fix Ukraine’s problem with credit.
  • We can only obtain credit with legal certainty.
  • We can only obtain legal certainty with rule of law.
  • We can only possess rule of law with judges who obey rule of law.
  • We can only possess judges with the rule of law if we can replace our judges – and for that matter, the entire court staff.
  • We can only replace the judges and the court staff with someone to force them out.
  • We can only force them out if the police to act upon it.
  • We can only expect the police to act upon it if they are also uncorrupt and respect rule of law.
  • We can only have police who are uncorrupt and respect rule of law if we fire them all and re-hire them again with higher standards, higher pay, and higher punishment for corruption – it must be wiser to collect a pension than to accept a bribe of any size.
  • We can only trust that they will be punished and stay honest if we have courts that enforce it.
  • And we can only have courts that will enforce it if we have juries to override the judges.
  • And we can only juries to override the judges if we have people who will act honestly on juries.
  • We will only have people who act honestly on juries once enough Ukrainians understand that all of Ukraine depends upon them and only them:
  • (a) sit a jury and enforce the law, even against friends and family.
  • (b) speak the truth even if it leads to your loss, and require it of others, and punish them if they do not.
  • (c) replace the government by armed violence until all of the above are enacted.

The only freedom logically possible is that which is obtained by a militia at the point of a gun. Everything else is just benevolent permission – not liberty. Ether a people is able to act as a militia (a militia means every living able bodied male) to demand these things of their government, or they aren’t able to act as a militia to demand these things of their government – or replace their government if needed.

You get the government you deserve. All people possess the government that they deserve. Because no government can sustain universal insurrection, because no economy can survive universal insurrection.

Some of us are willing to earn the form government we HOPE to deserve by our actions. The rest simply GET the government that they do deserve by their inaction. We are not yet willing to have the government we work to deserve. Because we are not wiling to evict the entire judiciary and police force – and that is what is required.

A government is by its nature corrupt. There is no exception in the world – because a government is a monopoly, and the incentives for individuals in a monopoly all favor corruption. This is why governments must remain small – it is harder to steal when it is harder to be anonymous. So keep the number of people who of necessity must be corrupt and will be corrupt – to a minimum.

The people must control the government. But if the people are immoral, they will have an immoral and corrupt government. If the people are moral, then they will have a moral government even if the government’s members are of necessity corrupt in one way or another.

But the hard economic facts make political corruption irrelevant – it is judicial and police corruption that prevent the expansion of consumer credit.  The corrupt economy may be large, but that does not affect the individual citizens who merely need CONSUMER CREDIT. The assumption that citizens make is that they could obtain the monies that are siphoned off personally by corrupt government employees wither in the Russian, Ukrainian, Belorussian and asiatic models, or whether they are siphoned off systematically as in the american and european systems, as inflated salaries special benefits, special pensions, absurdly expensive offices, and expensive equipment, or privileges granted to loyal constituents, businesses, organizations and lobbyists. Government people will ALWAYS siphon unearned wealth (corruption). That is what they do. They have no competition other than the militia (armed citizenry) to stop them.

The WEST is just as corrupt as the east – it is just systematized into sophisticated corporeal corruption not private corruption. What differs is that in the west, the citizenry has rule of law and therefore credit. So they live well because of their own private sector economy – even though the public sector is just as corrupt everywhere else.

Ukraine must evict and ban all sitting judges, clerks and administration from the courts, and all do the same for all police officers. The best choice would be to import a few hundred young German, Scandinavia, and English speaking judges to interview, hire, and manage replacement judges. This would immediately, within one year, change the european perspective on Ukraine and credit. Georgia has already shown us how to fix the police.

The problem then is not politicians that prevent us from prosperity WE MUST SOLVE THE RIGHT PROBLEM. The problem that prevents us from prosperity is that we are solving the wrong problem. Politicians are all corrupt. Judges and police who are paid a decent salary are all we need in order to build a prosperous Ukraine.

As always the politicians will seek to siphon it off for their own corrupt use just as they do in the west. Just as they do everywhere. Because politicians are by necessity agents of corruption – even when they dont’ intend to be. They have no means of measuring what is ‘right’ other than ‘what they can get away with’. A child has no means of measuring what is right and wrong without a parent. A business has no measure of whether they efficiently serve the world except if they do not do so at a loss. And a politician’s only measure is what corruption can he get away with without voters, judges, police, and competing politicians to stop him.

Freedom is created by courts and a militia that demands them freedom and courts.

Politicians are just entertainment – they figure out what to do with the profits that they can steal from the people. That’s what politicians do. Ukrainians have never had freedom. Feudal serfs, Soviet Serfs, and now post-soviet cattle to be farmed for the benefit of those in power – in the Russian and Asian model.

But for the ordinary people to have profits they must have credit and for credit they must have rule of law.

And to have rule of law – all able bodied men must take up arms to demand it. A credible threat alone is enough to force it to happen.


Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev Ukraine


Owen Flanagan’s Test of A Philosophical Psychology

A philosophical psychology ought to answer questions such as these:

• What, if anything, are humans like deep down inside beneath the clothes of culture?

• What, if any, features of mind-world interaction, and thus of the human predicament, are universal?

• Is there any end state or goal(s) that all humans seek because they are wired to seek it (or them), or what is different, ought to seek because it is—or, they are—worthy?

• If there is a common natural orientation toward some end state(s), for example, pleasure, friendship, community, truth, beauty, goodness, intellectual contemplation, are these ends mutually consistent? If not, must one choose a single dominant end? Does our nature not only provide the end(s), but also a way of ordering and prioritizing them, as well as a preferred ratio among them that produces some sort of equilibrium?

• How conducive is following our nature to actually producing what we naturally seek, or what is different, sensibly ought to seek? Could it be that not everything we seek—not even pleasant experiences or truth—is good for us?

• What is the relation between our first nature, our given human nature, and our second nature, our cultured nature?

• Does first nature continue in contemporary worlds, in new ecologies, to achieve its original ends? If so, is first nature also well suited to achieving new, culturally discovered, or what is different, created ends

• Is second nature constructed precisely for the achievement of variable, culturally discovered or created ends that first nature is ill-equipped to achieve?

• Do different societies construct/develop second nature in order to enhance first nature and/or to moderate and modify, possibly to eliminate, certain seeds in our first nature that can work against that very (first) nature and/or against our second nature and our cultured ends, which our second nature is intended to help us achieve?

Errors in these questions of the city state or class:

• The Problem Of Universalism: One Ness vs Individual, Family, tribe, race and corporation.(Doolittle) Which is reducible to a hierarchy of desires (needs). And they cannot be equally met.

Eudemonia (Aristotle)


Don’t Confuse Cheating On Your Normative Taxes With Tolerance And Love.

It is irrelevant what you think of other cultures, and the people in them – unless they ignore you, it is only relevant what they think of you. Thinking is no counter to competition. It is merely self-congratulatory discounting to confuse conviction with convenience, and tolerance with letting the boat sink because bailing is someone else’s job.

Tolerance and submission are no more intrinsic goods than violence and domination. The question is only whether one is suppressing parasitism and forcing each other into the market, or one is permitting parasitism and allowing others to escape the transformationary struggle to enter the market.

So before you congratulate yourself on your tolerance and morality you must determine if you are expanding parasitism or suppressing it.

Curt Doolittle ( All – This is the propertarian analysis of the problem – the only answer is what we will obtain in exchange. The only viable material anotehr has to exchange is his adoption of norms and higher trust so that he does not increase transaction costs.)