ON RADICALISM, ARISTOCRACY, AND PAGANISM, (read this) (and prepare for “ouch” mo

ON RADICALISM, ARISTOCRACY, AND PAGANISM,

(read this) (and prepare for “ouch” moments)

—“Hi Curt. I’ve been following you for a long time. Your radical ideas inspired me to change my own life. I wanted to tell you I think you’re probably one of if not the best voices out there for young men. I was wondering what inspired your change from a more libertarian scientific worldview to a much more revolutionary pagan worldview like you have now.”— Dagon

Well you know, this kind of thing matters to me a lot. It always makes my day. And If I can help young men then that is as good or better as being remembered in the history of thought.

ON RADICAL REVOLUTIONARY

There are a couple of things that turned me into a revolutionary.

The constant lying by leftist politicians via the media. The constant lying by the media. The fact that I was very well read by the time I got to university, and that I felt that most professors were lying or propagandizing. That when I went into the business world, I worked for three companies that lied aggressively to customers (all jewish fwiw). Then when I worked with at least moderately observant christians it was the opposite.

But it was how I was treated in divorce from a woman who cheated on me, and child support – which I can understand for a year or so but not more so. And I certainly don’t think children or women have a right to previous standards of living. or community property. omg.

Then how courts said I had to hire people by anything other than merit. And that it was illegal to try to discover people’s merit via testing. And then how women have excessive rights in the work place, and that there is no means of defense against it. And that between false unemployment claims, and false sexual harassment claims, and then the all out impossible requirement that CEO’s understand and are accountable for everything their employees do (the impossible), but employees, bureaucrats, (the irs), police, judges, and politicians are not accountable for anything they do.

Then how the courts simply punish the hell out of poor white guys, homeowners, and minivan-mom-drivers who are easy targets, but leave us victims of all sorts of criminals because of costs of imprisoning them.

Then how immigration was used as genocide against my people. I remember what life was like and how it changed, and I know the difference between homogenous and heterogeneous communities and what happens: a reduction in ‘precision’ which accumulates in a reduction of everything that makes a high trust polity possible.

Then how my people were enslaved through fiat money and incrementally exterminated. It is one thing to use upward redistribution to increase the quality of a polity, and it is another to increase downward in redistribution to reduce the quality of the polity. At least the aryan method of upward redistribution produces transcendence in every possible method. But the jewish (levantine) method of downward redistribution produces regression and dysgenia.

Then how every merger and acquisition lawyer and venture capitalist would tell me how to do something immoral in business – and that the better the law firm the more corrupting and immoral the legal advice. Compare that to the two ‘very christian’ female lawyers that would not help me defend against them by advocating feminist equalitarianism among share holders. I felt the world had gone mad.

Then how during the divorce, when I was going in for cancer surgery, the court didn’t care and forced me to settle or delay my surgery until after a trial.

Then how my ex-wife’s lawyer could use art and artifice through the courts to harass me in ways you cannot imagine to the point where I simply needed to leave the country in order to build a business.

And how, during the recession why are landlord contracts given higher weight than other price contracts, when they have only debt service, and why is that debt service more important than other commitments when in fact, it’s all simply credit money (time). Why are creditors treated unequally, and not only unequally but the reverse of risk?

The final blow was two fold 1) when obama criminalized me and thousands of others if we didn’t file a retroactive report on our overseas holdings. Holdings I had paid taxes on. When it was my only defense against the abuse of the courts by my ex-wife’s attorney to harass and blackmail me. And 2) when I had misunderstood a date of the sale of a business and thought the s-corp to c-corp change was done prior to the sale rather than after. While the IRS owed me a quarter of a million dollars refund because of the difference, they froze every asset I had on the globe and nearly destroyed by business and stranded me in a third world country without any money. Yet they told me I had no right of judicial defense unless I would go through a single court in person in california. I ask what was the maximum they could imagine I owed the IRS if I was wrong, and they said no more than 125k, (even though they owed me 250k), I said if they unfroze my assets or simply took 125k, I would send them the 125K, and then, we could correct the paperwork later. But no. So some lower middle class bimbo ex-bill collector can destroy my life without judicial review. And then disappeared for four weeks of government christmas holiday, leaving me no ability to act. Thankfully I had loan due from a small business of 50k, and that carried me for the three months it took to correct it. The truth is none of our irs collections make any difference. Our use of fiat money means that the timeliness of such payments is all but irrelevant. It’s all just power playing on the part of the govt and the bureaucracy.

I left that experience with a lot less hair and an absolute determination to overthrow the current order and restore the constitution of natural law under which no discretionary action is possible without juridical defense, and where the citizen not the government is given the full benefit of the doubt.

So instead of trying to simply produce the missing ‘bible of western civilization’: natural law, I developed a broader plan, and I’ve been working toward that plan, every single waking hour of every single day. And the opportunity to execute that plan is coming closer every day. And I am nothing if not painfully thorough, painfully disciplined, and painfully committed to that plan.

So that incremental unjust tyranny is the reason I became a hostile revolutionary with endless conviction.

ON OPTIMISITIC LIBERTARIANISM VS PESSIMISTIC SOVEREIGNTY

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 competent (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.

ON PAGANISM

First, my view of ‘paganism’ would be this: that it is quite possible to study the history (or legend) of our existing heroes (Alexander, Aristotle, Caesar, Newton, Shakespeare, Washington, Jesus ) and then to build statues and temples to visit, and subconsciously converse with our mental images of them. And by doing so create investments and therefore value, in the values, virtues, and behaviors we associate with them. And that this is a purely scientific process that in fact functions as we desire it to for the same reason imagining conversations with other people you know very well do. And we get a psychic reward for having done such things. This does in fact train us to behave as we desire to. And through synchronicity of many people doing the same, bring about the influence on ourselves, families and society by our numbers, that we wish we could bring about if we had the power and influence of our heroes. So this is my view of paganism. It is a purely scientific ‘spiritual’ (psychological) method of self training and personal and social transformation. Metaphysically, we do, by such practices, and such synchronicity, produce social consequences the same way that markets indirectly produce social consequences. We do not agree or conspire directly but indirectly. That we think this is or requires some sort of magic is nonsense. It merely requires practice like any other discipline. (I can imagine myself talking to any number of historical figures. it’s not difficult. We all do it.)

And, furthermore, I can understand prohibiting such temples, statues, symbols that were antagonistic to the polity. After all, churches, temples, statues, and symbols are method of claiming territory on behalf of a group’s evolutionary strategy. So preventing such claims is necessary, not only desirable.

Second, as far as I know, “Religion” and “Education” constitute a false dichotomy. There is no difference between them. These are the properties of Religion(normative and personal skills) and Education (Commercial Skills). In other words, Religion for peoples who have not yet entered the market because they are subsistence farmers, and Education for people who have entered the market because they are no longer subsistence farmers.

We need these forms of eduction:

– Festival(feast) – Trust through celebration

– Sport (competition) – Trust through teamwork

– Ritual(sacredness) – Trust through self constraint

– Virtues(ethics) – Universal and Normative Success

– Mindfulness(self) – Psychological insulation from consequences of informational scarcity in a market/society)

– Crafts(trade) – method of providing reciprocal value to the tribe so it is possible to survive in it.

All of these rituals deprive us of selfishness and make it possible to succeed in all aspects of society.

So in my perspective Religion is an anti market education system and taught cheaply to people who do not have market influences to shape their ethics, and Education as we understand it evolved to Transition people into market ethics so that they would succeed and understand market ethics (meritocracy), and how they differ from subsistence ethics (equality). And that this separation was rational given that it is very cheap to teach people by lying and allegory and equality, and it is more expensive to teach people by history and calculation, and meritocracy.

The problem being that none of us are subsistence farmers, and all of us live in the market and have no other choice any longer to return to the fields. The territorial value of the individually farmable earth was maximized long ago.

So as far as I understand it religion is just a cheap way to enslave people by teaching them sufficient information to survive as agrarians and pastoralists but not enough information, nor the right information, to survive in a market society where we cannot judge our actions by whether they are equal to that of others, but by whether they facilitate exchange with others to whom we are increasingly and eternally unequal.

If you can understand this, and are intellectually honest, you will likely – with some great discomfort – come to accept that all attempts to preserve ‘religion’ in the sense of the mythical and supernatural is actually extremely destructive to mankind. And the reason the door is still open for the Abrahamic deceptions via abrahamic religions, Abrahamic pesudo-rationalisms (continental philosophy), and Abrahamic pseudosciences (Boazian Anthropology, Freudian psychology, Darwinian Denial, IQ Denial, Class Denial, Gender Denial, Race Denial, Merit Denial, Marxist Socialist economic denial, postmodern truth denial) is that we have failed to close the door on our tolerance for lying.

My very simple reasoning:

*I place a higher value on truth, reason, and the elimination of error, despite the higher cost, than I place on meaningfulness, intuition, and the identification of opportunities despite the lower cost.*

In other words, I see cheap intuitionism as an immoral discount on expensive reason, and a means of justifying suggestion and indoctrination rather than rational choice and learning. So I see abrahamism as one of the worst and most immoral inventions in all of human history. And the cause of the dark age, and the cause of the islamic cancer that spread during it – including the loss of the great civilizations of the ancient world forever. And the Abrahamic-marxist-postmodernist cancer that still spreads today.

And so I don’t accept the *fallacy of special pleading* that ‘meaningfulness’ or ‘accessibility’ are any more important than the hard work of truth. I mean, we teach expensive literacy, mathematics, sciences, economics, and history. And we in the past taught expensive vocabulary, grammar, logic, and rhetoric. Why is it that we cannot also teach expensive testimonialism: natural law and the logic of cooperation? Why can’t we teach history as a series of biographical narratives of the people who made the great insights and transformations in each of those fields? Even if you want to preserve the Buddha and Jesus why cannot they be stated in historical terms and studied for their innovations, rather than continuing their justification by abrahamic deception?

You know, there isn’t any reason. Because any other reason requires lying and teaching lying.

Now, it is true that Aesop’s fables, and fairy tales, and legends that have been with us for hundreds if not thousands of years are valuable to children. It is true that heroes of the greek myths are merely superheroes. This is a simple mythos of the hearth and home – not a mythos of the polity.

And yes it uses anthropomorphism to simplify the communication to children the same way cartoons simplify the richness of human subtle expression so that children can grasp the more obvious communication. But why can we not directly transition into the teaching of virtues for children(grammar age). The transition into comparisons (logic age), and transition into self authoring ( rhetoric age )?

You know, there isn’t any reason. Because any other reason requires lying and thereby teaching lying.

The greek dark age after the bronze age collapse (1177bc), included the loss of writing and of memories of history. So the greeks had to invent via homer, a new history and a new group evolutionary strategy: resistance of the tyranny of the east. And they had to invent their gods.

We are not in that position. by all evidence in all of history, western man has defeated his own limitations, taken a seat among his ancient gods, and there is more to learn from the memories of real men and real achievements than there is from characters we would have to invent in order to equal them. There is greater glory in the study of our ancestors than in the study of any of the gods – all of whom are far worse than any man every thought to be.

In fact let me say this: the reason to invent gods is because your family, your clan, your people are shit failures in history. And any attempt to create such gods is merely to try to avoid the truth that your people are shit failures in history. It’s nothing but inventing a heritage you do not have. So it is better to find a realistic hero to learn from or a portfolio of real heroes and seek to change that history than remain the consequence of it.

So I am anti-falsehood. And I am pro education. And I do not mean the current education system that is abrahamic in teaching deceit. But the time of ‘religion’ in the old sense is gone. The time of ‘Moral’ education is present. And there is no special pleading for the means of teaching morality. because the lightest test of morality is truth, the next fraud, the next theft, and the next harm, and the next murder, and the next evil: intention of harm for no purpose other than harm.

I think almost all intellectuals – at least at the very top of the intellectual pyramid – go through a fairly similar evolutionary process of finding something that they feel is not right, falsifying everything they can in order to find a solution to what they feel is not right, then applying that solution to the intellectual frameworks we live by, then accumulating enough experience that our ‘mythologies’ *can* contain general rules that have survived the tests of the markets for such rules over long periods of history. And that by using this network of myth, we can ‘calculate’ understanding that we cannot calculate by any other means. For the simple reason that the informational density of the temporal narrative, when made mythical (not supernatural) and therefore intertemporal(immortal), allows us to calculate a broader set of very imprecise problems in the very high information density that we call ‘reality’. And that through many of us using these same rules, we function more as a ‘hive mind’ that is unconscious but still ‘calculating’ our success, one human decision serving as a sort of ‘neuron’ in the network of that brain we call ‘society’.

But while I understand that the purpose and value of enduring myths, and the superhuman ability of the gods, demigods, heroes and saints of those myths, is necessary for the purpose of illustration, and that the immortality of those gods and demigods is necessary for the intergenerational transfer and persistence of those myths, the relationship with those gods and demigods can mirror our civilization’s strategy or undermine it.

In the case of western civilization the fact that the gods merely represent a parental extended family with as many different talents as our own; that for every possible person on this earth there is some god that he can appeal to; that our relationship is contractual; that we can outwit or out compete them if we try; that we can earn our places among them by heroism, and that our purpose on this earth is to leave it changed for the better for having lived it, and to be remembered for it. And that we should strive to discipline and deed to develop the virtues that allow us to transcend the animal impulses. Well, that is about as close to a scientific religion as possible.

And as far as I know, the purpose of science is to understand the laws of the universe – and among them men. And that having done so, we then understand the language of the gods. For it is their language that the universe is written in.

Curt Doolittle

The Propertarian Institute

Kiev, Ukraine