ON CONVERSION FROM OPTIMISTIC LIBERTARIANISM TO PESSIMISTIC SOVEREIGNTY (answer

ON CONVERSION FROM OPTIMISTIC LIBERTARIANISM TO PESSIMISTIC SOVEREIGNTY

(answer two for dagon)

The Anglo classical liberalism of the enlightenment was profoundly optimistic about both British future, their responsibility, and the nature of man. All the enlightenment thinkers were optimistic – other than the germans. They were cautious. They handled their caution by secularizing religion and retaining the conflation of christianity, where the anglo world had deflated (separated) religion(family and polity) and law(commerce and science) into their usual markets.

But as the world wars hit us, we lost our convictions. The marxists, bolsheviks, and socialists were rallying our people against us with the promise of achievable wealth and equality, and inverting the social order in ways that the Church attempted but never could have imagined with promise of life after death, and at least the protection from the aristocracy by the church – and where the aristocracy would have exterminated more aggressively than Henry the 8th the monasteries, and thereby freed up vast capital held frozen by the backwardness of the church. (And where we will shortly have to exterminate the church-of-state we call secular anti-aristocratic-family socialism.)

I am, by nature, a libertarian. I hate conflict. I like cooperation. I like people to be happy. I am overly generous by nature – which I should add, has not been good for me. My great joys have been creating successful companies and watching people prosper in them.

But as I have learned through experience at all levels of society from my personal, to professional, to entrepreneurial, to financial, to economic, and to political – and now philosophical, I have come to understand a few very key issues.

1) Our genes drive us so all political persuasion/discourse is meaningless.

2) No one can be converted away from their genetic strategy. Many men can be because we form a hierarchy that is interdependent and so middle and lower men require middle and upper men to form an ‘army’. Women CAN be marginally converted to meritocracy, if all required to be married to bear children or vote. But otherwise vote anti-meritocratically (equalitarian) and in effect ‘marry the state’ thereby destroying the compromise between male and female reproductive strategies that we call the family: the smallest possible tribe in which men and women are both alphas.

3) Majoritarian democracy forces the policy of persuasion which is meaningless, and therefore forces all of us to lie cheat in public policy rather than to use the houses of government as a means for exchange between peoples with very different interests.

4) Aristocracy(meritocracy) is incompatible with democracy since there are always fewer competent than incompetent (Pareto rule). The end result of Democracy is authoritarian communism. As such the minority strategy of opposing the aristocracy via enfranchisement with the larger middle class was used by the larger lower classes against the middle and upper. And the end result is the destruction of western civilization by the combination of abrahamic religion and democratic equality.

5) The Abrahamic program from its origin by the jews (resistance to the aristocracy), the christians (undermining the aristocracy), and the muslims (openly conquering the aristocracy) , to the marxists (openly revolting against the aristocracy by promise of more returns) to the postmoderns (openly revolting against the aristocracy by poisoning the informational commons and the basis for meritocracy:merit not only of self but of family) – this program has been intentionally composed in both the ancient (Constantine thru Justinian) and in the modern (marx thru Derrida) as a method of destroying the aristocracy.

6) The destruction of the aristocracy in Greece, Persia, the Levant, North Africa, and India was complete, leaving only Europe and east Asia standing. The attempt by the marxists and postmoderns has succeeded in Germany, France, and Russia. It has succeeded in Canada and Australia. But because of our dependence on the martial class in America and Britain, it has had a greater difficulty here. So the problem is that (a) the prosecutions by the romans and the nazis was not severe and complete enough to save western civlization. What has been interesting is Putin’s prosecution of them, which is why (had he not flinched in Ukraine) he was and is setting the example for the west. Whereas china has no qualms at all about suppression. The fundamental problem most of the world faces, is that other than china we are not suppressing islam as we need to: totally. Which is why I want to suppress all abrahamism totally by suppressing all false speech in public.

So as I have learned that discourse is fruitless I have ended my interest in voluntaryism in favor of natural law and markets in everything, which solve the problem of differences in interests by the competition between total positive market and total negative law.

And as I have learned how the abrahamists have used the art of suggestion using overloading, conflation and fictionalism, against eugenic meritocracy, truth, and aristocracy, I have changed my focus on private property to the entire suite of capital (property in toto), and changed my bias toward unregulated speech, to demand for warranty of due diligence against false and immoral speech.

This results in basically ‘Fascism of Markets including Truth and Morality in Actions, Display, and Speech – thereby making other than meritocracy impossible to survive.

Curt Doolittle

The Philosophy of Aristocracy

The Propertarian Institute

Kiev, Ukraine