Author: Curt Doolittle

  • SMARTPHONE QUESTION You know, I’m not really an apple fanboy, but I use apple eq

    SMARTPHONE QUESTION

    You know, I’m not really an apple fanboy, but I use apple equipment because everything works together fairly flawlessly, and I can count on it and count on not having to toy with it.

    I have used iPhones as a late adopter, staying one generation behind (which has usually been beneficial given some of the problems.)

    But seeing the iPhone 6, I’m just having trouble justifying buying it compared to the Galaxy s5. The S5 has a much better camera, a much better screen, and all around better numbers. I can get my favorite wallet-case (Incipio Stowaway) for it as well, meaning that I still don’t need to carry a wallet, just my phone with cash, credit card and ID inside it.

    Sorry if I have to ask this, but If I left the iphone, what would I be giving up by doing so? (Serious answers pls)

    Thanks


    Source date (UTC): 2014-09-12 11:38:00 UTC

  • READ : MOLDBUG’S JOURNEY FROM LIBERTARIANISM TO THE DARK SIDE

    http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/02/from-mises-to-carlyle-my-sick-journey.htmlRECOMMENDED READ : MOLDBUG’S JOURNEY FROM LIBERTARIANISM TO THE DARK SIDE


    Source date (UTC): 2014-09-12 11:36:00 UTC

  • RADICAL NOT CONSERVATIVE Or, why I am and am not a conservative at the same time

    RADICAL NOT CONSERVATIVE

    Or, why I am and am not a conservative at the same time. 🙂

    My position is radical, not conservative. I’m not advocating retention of the status quo (the definition of conservatism), nor am I asking to return to the past. But insisting that we adopt institutions suitable to our people’s competitive needs, which are also as it turns out, man’s evolutionary needs – because of the uniqueness of our civilization.

    Yes, we can learn from our past, in that we can learn what caused our success – resistance to the concentration of power (division of power), the division of labor, testimonial truth, and the common law.

    Truth is inseparable from calculation, and calculation inseparable from action, and given the necessity and utility of action, all else is justification and deception in pursuit of competition within the existing genetic, geography, family, economic, and political structure. Or more clearly: while it is possible to calculate verbally, it is also possible to lie and deceive verbally. Where it is not so possible to lie and deceive operationally (calculatively).

    The cost of this difference is meaning. The problem is, when we say meaning, how much of this is justification to the self, or justification to others? Is not all philosophy and argument merely political?

    Until I started focusing on Neo-Reaction instead of the fallacies of libertine-libertarianism, I did not perhaps understand the full import of what I am doing. Is meaning merely a feeble attempt to connect the intuitive with the calculative? Can we instead of separating our mental activity into intuition and reason (verbalism), can we separate it into perception, intuition, calculation, and justification? Is reason but justification?

    If this is true then human intellectual history is upside down.

    I am not there yet, but getting closer.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-09-12 11:04:00 UTC

  • IS PHILOSOPHY A PROTOCOL FOR JUSTIFICATION? AND IS PHILOSOPHY A FORM OF CALCULAT

    IS PHILOSOPHY A PROTOCOL FOR JUSTIFICATION? AND IS PHILOSOPHY A FORM OF CALCULATION?

    I am fairly certain that calculation in the wider sense – that which is necessary for action – precedes verbalism necessary for philosophy, and I am unsure that philosophy as currently stated is calculative and necessary, or whether it is merely justificationary.

    In other words, is philosophy a form of calculating, or is calculating a form of philosophy? And I am increasingly convinced the former.

    We may require philosophy to categorize and describe such things but we do not require philosophy to act, nor to act morally, where morally is defined as prohibiting free riding in-group and prohibiting imposed costs in and out-group. We did these things prior to philosophy, and they exist independent of philosophy.

    Furthermore, how do we account for the use of philosophy for the purpose of deception and obscurantism in the french, german and jewish schools, the use of mysticism in most other cultures, or the past (Kant) and current (progressives,postmoderns, libertarians) use of moral philosophy to restate christianity in non mystical terms. In other words, calculation (demonstrated action as well) does not allow us to make such framing and loading, while language does, and it is quite possible to use language to err, lie, obscure, frame, load and overload.

    This gets quite deep in distinguishing between demonstrable actions stated as operations and analogies as used in philosophy and reason. And I want to stay on track. But it is useful to at least point out that I am approaching problems descriptively via action, and treating language as largely justificationary. That shouldn’t be a big leap really.

    Philosophy is necessary to justify to the self or others, but it is not necessary for action. Hopefully that makes sense. I may be engaging in philosophical discourse but that is very different from planning and acting.) I work with operationalism precisely because it is insulated from the various sins of rationalism. That is why science and even psychology have adopted Operationalism.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-09-12 08:33:00 UTC

  • NEO-REACTION (RESTORATION OF ARISTOCRACY) Even though I’ve spent the past month

    NEO-REACTION (RESTORATION OF ARISTOCRACY)

    Even though I’ve spent the past month almost entirely on the business, for the past few days I’ve been trying to write a restatement of Neo-Reaction (The Dark Enlightenment) in Propertarian language. There are a lot of introductory pieces on NeoReaction out there, but they’re all fairly weak. It’s much easier to write a “Neo Reaction for Dummies” with Propertarianism. But I am trying to cover all the subjects (there are not that many really), and turn their (Mostly Mencius’) ideas away from the poetic into the analytic.

    THREE CULTURAL AXIS

    1) Mencius picked up on Rothbard’s correct attribution of puritanism to the postmodern condition, but not that Rothbard tried to avoid admitting the cosmopolitan influence (the jews), or that the Cathedral constitutes a conspiracy between the three axis: (a) anglo secular restatement of christianity, (b) the jewish combination of socialism, libertine-libertarianism, and Neo-Conservatism,and (c) the continental influence of the germans and the french, as equally anti-enlightenment attempts to preserve authoritarian orders.

    THREE PERSUASIVE AXIS

    2) No one in the movement seems to have grasped either Johnson’s insight that there exist only three means of persuasion (force, payment, moral persuasion), or my insight, that social classes organize around specializations in these forms of persuasion – and that this is why neo-reaction has been articulated in three different forms, mirroring the three forms of the jewish attack on aristocracy: socialism, libertine-libertarianism, and Neo-conservatism. I think I can add value by explaining this relationship to the movement.

    REASON

    They (again, mostly Mencius) have correctly identified the failure of Reason, but they have not equally identified the solution to the problem of reason as Calculability (or, in my work, what I call Operationalism) nor the corresponding solution as one of simply speaking the truth. This I can understand because while I intuited the problem very early on, I was only able to solve it finally over the past year and a half. I think it took me twelve or fourteen years from initial intuition to full articulation.

    More to do.

    Interesting stuff.

    Curt


    Source date (UTC): 2014-09-11 08:36:00 UTC

  • me skeptical

    http://www.businessinsider.com/future-human-evolution-2014-9Color me skeptical…


    Source date (UTC): 2014-09-10 20:19:00 UTC

  • not corrected for generations. Sigh

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/pew-politics-is-a-white-mans-world/article/2552870Data not corrected for generations. Sigh.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-09-10 20:15:00 UTC

  • THE CONDUCT OF EASTERN EUROPEAN FOURTH GENERATION WAR There is a limited but fai

    THE CONDUCT OF EASTERN EUROPEAN FOURTH GENERATION WAR

    There is a limited but fairly extensive literature on infantry tactics – the kind of things ordinary soldiers need to do in 20th century armies. In that literature, the primary objective has been to get the US military to abandon pre-vietnam military structures in favor of higher reliance on skilled and equipped infantry, and less on complex weapons systems.

    Moreover, since 1990, the literature has been advocating means of fighting insurgents, and now islamists, who use decentralized “4gw” (Fourth generation warfare). Meaning, the fourth generation signifies the nation states’ loss of their near-monopoly on combat forces, returning to modes of conflict common in pre-modern times. Or as we anti-statists would argue, the post-state era is upon us because militias with machine guns and RPG’s selecting targets of opportunity can effectively crush any concentration of armed forces. Modern economies are fragile and the nation state cannot survive long term insurrections.

    The problem with the literature is that it does not address how to ACT like a 4GW opponent – only how to defend against them. When I read these manuals, they seem very antique. They are manuals for soldiers not warriors. In the sense that soldiers patrol territories, in order to create order, while warriors conduct raids in order to destabilize economy, infrastructure, and daily life.

    If you are an eastern european, you need to have a few nuclear weapons to keep Russia at bay (Russia being the most concentrated civilization of white people, and reliant on concentration of forces), and a very inexpensive military, which consists of a militia that can readily get access to RPG’s and AK47’s and warm clothing and rations. Ukraine would benefit from the regimental system, wherein good leaders could recruit talent, and the central government would only need to ensure that they had access to USA-style national guard armories. This is an inexpensive and unstoppable form of military order on the swiss model.

    All of that boils down to a mixture of the swiss and american reserve models, with more frequent training for the men in the american model, and a reliance on infantry tactics and militia in the swiss model. Ukraine is a larger territory and supply lines for the militia are more challenging. However, a decentralized militia, skilled in 4gw themselves, rather than the US/NATO 3gw, attacking not in concentration, but against weakness would make eastern europeans nearly impervious to Russian conquest – just as Afghanistan was.

    The problem is, that the manual for conducting such a military does not exist, and must be written. Strangely enough, the Islamists are writing it for us. And it is a much more bloody form of warfare, more suited to the warriors, personal grievances and close relations of regiments than the slave labor and cautious patrolling of NATO military training.

    I do not need more work to do unfortunately. I have enough of it. I have enough for two of me, and one more project is more than I can manage.

    NOTE: The swiss strategy is to make attempts to occupy or conquer Switzerland extremely costly in men and machines. They rely upon an almost entirely militial military. Professional soldiers constitute about 5 percent of military personnel and the rest are male conscripts 19 to 34 (but in some cases up to 50) years old. The soldiers keep their own equipment, including all personally assigned weapons, at home. Military service is compulsory for all male Swiss citizens, and women serve voluntarily. About two-thirds of young Swiss men are found suitable for service, while alternative service exists for those found unsuitable. Annually, approximately 20,000 persons are trained in basic training for a duration from 18 to 21 weeks.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-09-10 16:10:00 UTC

  • WHIG HISTORY AND WHIG MORALITY —The historian Piers Brendon asserts that Burke

    WHIG HISTORY AND WHIG MORALITY

    —The historian Piers Brendon asserts that Burke laid the moral foundations for the British Empire, epitomized in the trial of Warren Hastings, that was ultimately to be its undoing: when Burke stated that “The British Empire must be governed on a plan of freedom, for it will be governed by no other”, this was “…an ideological bacillus that would prove fatal. It was Edmund Burke’s paternalistic doctrine that colonial government was a trust. Colonial Government was to be so exercised for the benefit of subject people that they would eventually attain their birthright—freedom”. As a consequence of this opinion, Burke objected to the opium trade, which he called a “smuggling adventure” and condemned “the great Disgrace of the British character in India”.—


    Source date (UTC): 2014-09-09 20:03:00 UTC

  • THANKS FOR MY FRIENDS Just have had some wonderful messages from friends over th

    THANKS FOR MY FRIENDS

    Just have had some wonderful messages from friends over the past few days, and I thank god every day for both the extra time I seem to have been gifted, and the wonderful people I get to share this planet with – particularly in the liberty movement.

    Love you all.

    Thanks again.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-09-09 20:00:00 UTC