Author: Curt Doolittle

  • ARISTOCRATIC EGALITARIAN COVER The men with moral hearts Must be the ones who st

    ARISTOCRATIC EGALITARIAN COVER

    The men with moral hearts

    Must be the ones who start

    To mold a new reality

    To fashion a new art

    Closer to their hearts

    Philosophers and Craftsmen

    Each must do his part

    To draft a new mentality

    To teach a new morality

    Closer to their art

    Engineers and the artists

    Reflect it in their art

    To sew their creativity

    To design a new fidelity

    Closer to our hearts

    If you can be nobility;

    I will draw the charts

    A few score can change destiny.

    And forge a new reality.

    Closer to the hearts

    Closer to our arts

    To mold a new mentality

    Closer to our hearts

    To sew our creativity

    Closer to our arts.

    To forge a new reality.

    Closer to our hearts.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-07 06:20:00 UTC

  • THE OATH OF ONE Pseudoscientific Democratic Humanism and Islamism are equal part

    THE OATH OF ONE

    Pseudoscientific Democratic Humanism and Islamism are equal parts tyranny. Both are predicated upon lies. Both rely upon a priesthood in equally ideological academies, preaching the same content with different myths.

    There is only one source of liberty: Aristocratic Egalitarianism. And there never will exist any other.

    THE OATH OF ONE

    There is but one source of liberty: The Militia;

    One institution for sustaining it: The Law;

    One rule for deciding it: Property;

    One ritual for observing it: Speaking the truth;

    One promise for fulfilling it: Punish the wicked.

    One person required to act upon it: Me.

    One method of acting upon it: violence.

    One one oath to be made: “I accept it.”


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-07 06:07:00 UTC

  • THE PARABLE OF THE BULLS The Old Bull and the Young Bull are standing on the hil

    THE PARABLE OF THE BULLS

    The Old Bull and the Young Bull are standing on the hill top, high above the herd of cows. The Old Bull slowly schools the Young Bull into his role, responsibilities and rights.

    Old Bull: “And our job is to reproduce and keep the herd healthy.”

    Young Bull: “How exactly does that work?”

    Old Bull: “Well, you can go down there, to the herd, and screw _any_ cow you want, at any time. That’s what I’m talking about.”

    The Young Bull who is visibly excited, can’t contain himself any longer and bursts out, “Well, let’s go run down there and screw a couple cows right now!”

    The Old Bull shakes his grizzled head and turns slowly to the Young Bull.

    In his deepest, calmest voice, he says, “How about we WALK down there instead. And then screw them ALL”.

    ———

    James Santagata ‘s advice on patience, planning, conservation of energy, and conquering your market completely.

    Priceless.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-07 04:43:00 UTC

  • So how do I post select facebook updates to my twitter page?

    So how do I post select facebook updates to my twitter page?


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-07 04:19:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-06 22:45:00 UTC

  • Yeah. What he said

    Yeah. What he said.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-06 21:29:00 UTC

  • OK. So book, theory, web site, help files, report specifications, product manage

    OK. So book, theory, web site, help files, report specifications, product management, pitch deck, versus dark winter days, an increase in my allergies, and the holidays.

    Sigh. I’m gonna die..lol


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-06 15:33:00 UTC

  • The difference between Propertarianism/Operationalism/Testimonial truth, versus

    The difference between Propertarianism/Operationalism/Testimonial truth, versus say, even critical rationalism, is that your opinion on any particular matter doesn’t really matter much. Its just whether you can actually do it: construct a propertarian argument operationally. I mean, **its really freaking hard***. If you can even construct the argument itself you’re probably pretty close to right. It’s not so much whether you can test the argument – like most logical constructions. Its whether you can even put one together. The hell with justifying it – what passes for testing an argument. The question is whether you can even construct one.

    (Same with reverse Russian mathematics.)


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-06 15:19:00 UTC

  • i did beautiful work in philosophy today. it felt spiritually uplifting to see i

    i did beautiful work in philosophy today. it felt spiritually uplifting to see it all come together. So simply. So elegantly. So completely. I was exhausted. the answer is so trivially simple that it is hard to understand how it isn’t obvious. The truth is enough. But when we say that, it I mean truthful speech is enough.

    I can pretend speak the truth, but that is not possible.

    I can speak as a vector for the pretense of the truth.

    speak truthfully, which is possible

    speak incompetently and with error,

    speak as a vector for error and deception,

    And, lastly,

    speak as a deceiver.

    And the problem is, that speaking truthfully is unnatural to man – it is a skill. it’s difficult. And without the assistance of skills, norms and normative langue of truth, that assists us in speaking truthfully, it is nearly impossible for moral man, even if he tries.

    And the incentive for cunning man is so great to display his cunning he rarely grasps that he is himself an immoral man, creator of deception and obscurantism. He fools himself, fools others, and they become vectors for folly.

    Speaking truthfully is an art. Grammar, Rhetoric, and Propertarianism – including operationalism – make it extremely difficult to both speak sensibly and untruthfully at the same time.

    Our problem in government — which after FIVE HARD YEARS OF WORK I have finally got my arms around well enough to write down in simple terms — is that it was originated as a jury that approved or denied proposals submitted as theories. In construction of government, we combined theorist, jury and management, then theorist, jury, management, and staff; and lastly theorists, jury, management, staff, academy and church – all into the same body. And we expect this vast bureaucracy to function in our interests. Worse, we apply the jury system to representation – which must be the worst idea in human history.

    THE PROBLEM IS ACTUALLY EASY TO FIX.

    more later…


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-06 14:59:00 UTC

  • I love my female friends. They are amazing human beings. And they understand the

    I love my female friends. They are amazing human beings. And they understand the point of my arguments – and taunts- is to teach us to understand one another’s motives, so that we can be happier and happier together.

    My message is a simple one: men are contained by the family from perusing their best interests. The marriage is a compromise. And in a government over families, we all have the same interests due to that compromise.

    So under one family one vote, the competition between the genders was conducted outside of the state, and the state served the majority interest: the family.

    But upon achieving enfranchisement women sought increasingly to implement socialism, then to destroy the family, then arguably to dominate men through the female dominance of the electorate.

    But this assumes men will continue demonstrating the behaviour outside the marriage that they demonstrated inside the marriage.

    And this cannot and will not happen.

    Instead the self interest of makes that we se expressed in the rest of the world will be the only logical approach for men to take.

    All revolutions are created by a minority of angry men.

    The western Man will only act to ham in his interest with moral authority.

    And western man is beginning to understand that he has moral authority.

    The pendulum has swung as far as it can.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-06 14:00:00 UTC