Author: Curt Doolittle

  • Q&A: “Why Are People ‘Triggered’ By Doolittle?”

    [I] have been openly attacking the Mises Institute’s propagandizing of rothbardianism for two years now. And they have no response to my criticisms (they can’t have one really – they can only adapt to them.) People invest their self worth in these ideologies to the point which they are not competing institutional solutions but hats to hang one’s self worth upon. It’s only logical that they defend their priors by non rational, non-empirical, largely symbolic and emotional means. The great thing about Rothbard is that despite being mostly wrong, he’s partly right, and what he’s right about is relatively easy for amateurs to understand. If people understood my arguments they would grok that I’m completing the ANCAP project by converting it from pseudoscience and kantian rationalism to a scientific argument that’s uniform across biology, morality, philosophy, law, politics and economics. Which, just in terms of explanatory power is pretty hard to criticize. But if the end result is preservation of investment, preservation of self image, rejection of the effort and time needed to improve one’s knowledge and a justification of non-contribution to the commons for the because one is rejected by the mainstream culture, then that’s an excuse for one’s behavior not a pursuit of a moral good, a sustainable political order, or an scientific truth about cooperation among men. Cheers

    —“Keep on Curt, Your attempt to create theory of everything in social sciences will be attacked by all sides. People cant even understand difference between man and female reproductive strategies and that is basic for understanding human nature and human state of affairs.”—Matej Lovrić

  • Q&A: “Why Don’t You Debate The Rothbardians, Or [Insert Name Here]?”

    (very important ideas in the longer answer)QUICK ANSWER: [A]ny time. Any day. It’s because they’re afraid of me. Just as they’re becoming increasingly afraid of everyone else given the catastrophic failure of their ideology. Hans has said I am ‘too combative’ which is true – because one of the marxist techniques is to rely upon your good manners and lack of hostility to conduct loading, framing, overloading, suggestion, gossip, shaming and rallying. So I attack dishonestly in their arguments – even when they have no idea that they’re engaging in unconscious dishonesty (fallacy). LONG ANSWER: [L]ook, I’m trying to CORRECT the enlightenment: Not just the jewish, but ALL of it: French, Anglo, American, German and Jewish.

    • The French literary catholicism
    • The Anglo classical liberal
    • The German Kantian rationalist
    • The Jewish Pseudoscientific Hermeneutic

    I’m trying to correct all of them. Including the fallacy that Mises is an Austrian empirical christian classical liberal and libertarian rather than a Ukrainian Jewish Pseudoscientific Cosmopolitan libertine who was born in predominantly Jewish Ukraine and happened to go to Vienna for School. But why so much emphasis on correcting the cosmopolitans? Because they have little real concept of government, no concept of commons, no concept of natural law. But they have a well developed application of using money, finance, banking, and economics as a means of constructing a social order. ***When you combine banking with rule of law you have the basis of an amoral social science: a means of arguing amorally rather than morally.*** You see. It’s not that the cosmopolitans had a particular insight. It’s all the cosmopolitans had to work with. Its their internal system of government writ large: create a law(that one cannot fail to adhere to), justify it pseudo-scientifically (or religiously), propagate it widely (verbal, written, print, media propaganda), and use ostracization (gossip, rally, shame)defectors, and heroize (heap undue praise) on advocates. You can see from this list of attributes that this reflects the origins of both Mises’ and Rothbard’s works – as well as the better work of Georg Simmel’s on “The Philosophy of Money” which I tend to prefer, and pair with Popper’s “Sources of Knowledge and Ignorance”, and Hayek’s “Use of Information in Society”, and his “Law, Legislation and Liberty”, as well as his chapters on Traditional Knowledge **The Humeian and Smithian argument does the same between states. But the Cosmopolitan argument does so Amorally*** (meaning without moral reference, vs immoral which means violation of moral prohibitions, and moral which means by adhering to moral prohibitions on involuntary imposition of costs.) And you see, that’s the magic right there. Jewish law may be a parasitic group evolutionary strategy (objectively immoral), it may be polymoral (objectively immoral), and it may be constructed from scripture (babylonian and Egyptian appropriation). But besides being written down, and internally consistent, and rather complete in its coverage, the organizing principles of diasporic judaism of the ghetto, bazaar, steppe and desert peoples is i)separatism, ii)law and iii)communal banking/insurance. Just as the organizing principles of western man are i)martial universalism, ii)law, and iii)production. Money and credit are more ‘precise’ forms of ‘instrumental measurement of individual behavior’ than are property and production and reputation. And that right there is pretty profound. Conversely, land is illiquid and production time consuming, and requires armies to hold it. This is very different from money and ledgers. So as a new technology that was ADDITIVE to the aristocratic landed order, especially since the forced destruction of our own diasporic capitalists, the Knights Templar (in one of the great crimes of history second only to the forcible christianization of Europe under Justinian), the diasporic jewish people had been conducting a research program into management of political order by law, money and credit instead of by law, land and production. (And an eugenic reproduction program as great as westerners had been conducting in their different order). ( Note: EVOLUTION OF ORDERS: Tribe, Religion(universal – ostracization vs inclusion), Law(particular – punishment vs avoidance), Credit(individual – consumption vs hardship), (Truth????) ) And that’s why I emphasize this unification of a) the anglo empirical and truthful discourse under rule of law and a market for commons (b) the german martial patriarchal hierarchy of duty land holding man (c) the jewish unification of morality, credit and law – as the best of each culture’s research program without the errors, immoralities, and various fallacious constructions of each. So we can now reconstruct our civic order, by combining our ancient traditions of property rights, our medieval market government, our enlightenment understanding of rule of law, our new understanding money, credit, and economics as a more granular application of law, and our understanding of biology, to unite into a single consistent framework the disciplines of biology, morality, law, philosophy, economics, politics, into a single unified system that is constructed amorally and therefore universally, and which provides decidability in all questions of conflict. And that is pretty cool. So the reason I pick on the cosmopolitans is because of their propagandizing of falsehoods and pseudosciences. While at the same time I try to reform all three enlightenments. It’s not that I don’t make use of these men’s work. It’s that it’s only half right, and half wrong, and it’s useless as half wrong. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine. * The Frankfurt School https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School

  • Q&A: “Why Don’t You Debate The Rothbardians, Or [Insert Name Here]?”

    (very important ideas in the longer answer)QUICK ANSWER: [A]ny time. Any day. It’s because they’re afraid of me. Just as they’re becoming increasingly afraid of everyone else given the catastrophic failure of their ideology. Hans has said I am ‘too combative’ which is true – because one of the marxist techniques is to rely upon your good manners and lack of hostility to conduct loading, framing, overloading, suggestion, gossip, shaming and rallying. So I attack dishonestly in their arguments – even when they have no idea that they’re engaging in unconscious dishonesty (fallacy). LONG ANSWER: [L]ook, I’m trying to CORRECT the enlightenment: Not just the jewish, but ALL of it: French, Anglo, American, German and Jewish.

    • The French literary catholicism
    • The Anglo classical liberal
    • The German Kantian rationalist
    • The Jewish Pseudoscientific Hermeneutic

    I’m trying to correct all of them. Including the fallacy that Mises is an Austrian empirical christian classical liberal and libertarian rather than a Ukrainian Jewish Pseudoscientific Cosmopolitan libertine who was born in predominantly Jewish Ukraine and happened to go to Vienna for School. But why so much emphasis on correcting the cosmopolitans? Because they have little real concept of government, no concept of commons, no concept of natural law. But they have a well developed application of using money, finance, banking, and economics as a means of constructing a social order. ***When you combine banking with rule of law you have the basis of an amoral social science: a means of arguing amorally rather than morally.*** You see. It’s not that the cosmopolitans had a particular insight. It’s all the cosmopolitans had to work with. Its their internal system of government writ large: create a law(that one cannot fail to adhere to), justify it pseudo-scientifically (or religiously), propagate it widely (verbal, written, print, media propaganda), and use ostracization (gossip, rally, shame)defectors, and heroize (heap undue praise) on advocates. You can see from this list of attributes that this reflects the origins of both Mises’ and Rothbard’s works – as well as the better work of Georg Simmel’s on “The Philosophy of Money” which I tend to prefer, and pair with Popper’s “Sources of Knowledge and Ignorance”, and Hayek’s “Use of Information in Society”, and his “Law, Legislation and Liberty”, as well as his chapters on Traditional Knowledge **The Humeian and Smithian argument does the same between states. But the Cosmopolitan argument does so Amorally*** (meaning without moral reference, vs immoral which means violation of moral prohibitions, and moral which means by adhering to moral prohibitions on involuntary imposition of costs.) And you see, that’s the magic right there. Jewish law may be a parasitic group evolutionary strategy (objectively immoral), it may be polymoral (objectively immoral), and it may be constructed from scripture (babylonian and Egyptian appropriation). But besides being written down, and internally consistent, and rather complete in its coverage, the organizing principles of diasporic judaism of the ghetto, bazaar, steppe and desert peoples is i)separatism, ii)law and iii)communal banking/insurance. Just as the organizing principles of western man are i)martial universalism, ii)law, and iii)production. Money and credit are more ‘precise’ forms of ‘instrumental measurement of individual behavior’ than are property and production and reputation. And that right there is pretty profound. Conversely, land is illiquid and production time consuming, and requires armies to hold it. This is very different from money and ledgers. So as a new technology that was ADDITIVE to the aristocratic landed order, especially since the forced destruction of our own diasporic capitalists, the Knights Templar (in one of the great crimes of history second only to the forcible christianization of Europe under Justinian), the diasporic jewish people had been conducting a research program into management of political order by law, money and credit instead of by law, land and production. (And an eugenic reproduction program as great as westerners had been conducting in their different order). ( Note: EVOLUTION OF ORDERS: Tribe, Religion(universal – ostracization vs inclusion), Law(particular – punishment vs avoidance), Credit(individual – consumption vs hardship), (Truth????) ) And that’s why I emphasize this unification of a) the anglo empirical and truthful discourse under rule of law and a market for commons (b) the german martial patriarchal hierarchy of duty land holding man (c) the jewish unification of morality, credit and law – as the best of each culture’s research program without the errors, immoralities, and various fallacious constructions of each. So we can now reconstruct our civic order, by combining our ancient traditions of property rights, our medieval market government, our enlightenment understanding of rule of law, our new understanding money, credit, and economics as a more granular application of law, and our understanding of biology, to unite into a single consistent framework the disciplines of biology, morality, law, philosophy, economics, politics, into a single unified system that is constructed amorally and therefore universally, and which provides decidability in all questions of conflict. And that is pretty cool. So the reason I pick on the cosmopolitans is because of their propagandizing of falsehoods and pseudosciences. While at the same time I try to reform all three enlightenments. It’s not that I don’t make use of these men’s work. It’s that it’s only half right, and half wrong, and it’s useless as half wrong. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine. * The Frankfurt School https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School

  • Liberalism Isn’t Intellectual – It’s An Excuse For An Impulse

    —“Liberalism isn’t intellectual. It is merely the rabbit’s r-selected Reproductive Strategy, intellectualized in humans who exhibit it instinctually. Its only purpose is to exploit a resource excess in our society. This information kills Liberals, if you point it out to them, because it strips Liberalism of any intellectual justification, leaving it as merely a conglomeration of r-selected urges that K-selected humans oppose instinctually. This work is what we were waiting for, and it will alter our political debates forever.”—Anon Conservative.

    [I]n other words “all human language is negotiation on behalf of our reproductive strategies.” Humans start out rather androgenous, and we grow either male or female – from a lighter to a stronger version of each, in a spectrum from one end to the other. From r to k. From solipsistic to autistic.

  • Liberalism Isn’t Intellectual – It’s An Excuse For An Impulse

    —“Liberalism isn’t intellectual. It is merely the rabbit’s r-selected Reproductive Strategy, intellectualized in humans who exhibit it instinctually. Its only purpose is to exploit a resource excess in our society. This information kills Liberals, if you point it out to them, because it strips Liberalism of any intellectual justification, leaving it as merely a conglomeration of r-selected urges that K-selected humans oppose instinctually. This work is what we were waiting for, and it will alter our political debates forever.”—Anon Conservative.

    [I]n other words “all human language is negotiation on behalf of our reproductive strategies.” Humans start out rather androgenous, and we grow either male or female – from a lighter to a stronger version of each, in a spectrum from one end to the other. From r to k. From solipsistic to autistic.

  • Scientific Method In Everything

    Seek out combat: Intellectual, romantic, social, economic, and physical. Not to win, but to improve until you can no longer find a way to lose. Love the fight. Revel in it. It’s your heritage. Celebrate it. Heroes all – whether words, heart, work, money, stick, spear, sword or rifle. He who fights regardless of rank is a brother in arms.

    Famous household phrase I’d hear, “that’s okay, at least I’ll die trying.” Anecdotal. Nostalgic. Usually it was spoken in reference to a physical contest (street scuffle) and rebuffing an opponents boastful challenge.— William Benge

    Also pick intellectual fights with people with similar belief structure using arguments you do not agree with… great for hashing out third ways and new perspectives.–Delian

  • Scientific Method In Everything

    Seek out combat: Intellectual, romantic, social, economic, and physical. Not to win, but to improve until you can no longer find a way to lose. Love the fight. Revel in it. It’s your heritage. Celebrate it. Heroes all – whether words, heart, work, money, stick, spear, sword or rifle. He who fights regardless of rank is a brother in arms.

    Famous household phrase I’d hear, “that’s okay, at least I’ll die trying.” Anecdotal. Nostalgic. Usually it was spoken in reference to a physical contest (street scuffle) and rebuffing an opponents boastful challenge.— William Benge

    Also pick intellectual fights with people with similar belief structure using arguments you do not agree with… great for hashing out third ways and new perspectives.–Delian

  • The Secret Of Their Half Truths – Some Groups are Just Really Really Good Liars

    OMG. Appealing to altruism is an act of suggesting future shaming – of shaming pre-shaming… That’s why it works. They tell a half truth and suggest the rest. Some groups are just really, really, really good liars. They have weaponized lying in order to take advantage of altruism. damn. Gypsies and Desert Arabs: set up camp near by, remain mobile, with little or no fixed assets, and conduct raids, then return to camp. Other groups conduct theft by redirection: incentive to break norms. Other groups conduct theft by obscurant fraud: financialization. Some groups conduct theft by ‘farming’ a population (statists and such) Scary when you just reduce human behavior to productive or parasitic.

  • The Secret Of Their Half Truths – Some Groups are Just Really Really Good Liars

    OMG. Appealing to altruism is an act of suggesting future shaming – of shaming pre-shaming… That’s why it works. They tell a half truth and suggest the rest. Some groups are just really, really, really good liars. They have weaponized lying in order to take advantage of altruism. damn. Gypsies and Desert Arabs: set up camp near by, remain mobile, with little or no fixed assets, and conduct raids, then return to camp. Other groups conduct theft by redirection: incentive to break norms. Other groups conduct theft by obscurant fraud: financialization. Some groups conduct theft by ‘farming’ a population (statists and such) Scary when you just reduce human behavior to productive or parasitic.

  • I Figured it Out. The Method Of Lying In The Religious and Pseudoscientific Eras

    [I] think it was 2013 that I questioned whether I had to solve the problem of Truth or not. And I was pretty stressed about it. But I just felt like I couldn’t put an end to postmodern deceit unless I did so. So reluctantly I started working on it. And it took me a while. It was fairly hard. Easier thanks to the work on critical rationalism and the current state of the foundation of mathematics. Then, once there, I asked myself, if I could end lying. In January of this year (2015) I posted this on my web site: “If You Can Name a Thing, You Can Kill A Thing”. Meaning that things have ‘true names’ (operational names). And if you know its true name you can defeat it. I wasn’t sure I could solve the technique by which the monotheistic and cosmopolitan lies were constructed. But I did. And now I understand why they had to close the Stoic Schools: they make you impervious to the technique of using half truths to conduct pre-shaming, and to invoke altruistic responses as substitutes rather than skepticism. In other words, liars take advantage of a social cognitive bias. And through repetition convince us that a convenient lie is necessary when it is not. I’ve also begun to understand why western traditionalists think god is the subject of spirituality rather than an excuse to make use of spirituality for totalitarian purposes against the genetic interests of a people. So I know how to kill that too. I thought this would take me longer than a year. In a year I will have religion so deconstructed that I will match the precision of my deconstruction of morality. I will unify religion along with every other discipline. I am confident now. I can do it. RE:http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/01/04/if-you-can-name-a-thing-you-can-kill-a-thing/