Author: Curt Doolittle

  • Chomsky is a mixed bag intellectually, but I like this quotation forwarded to me

    http://www.stephenhicks.org/”Noam Chomsky is a mixed bag intellectually, but I like this quotation forwarded to me by Edward Fox:

    CHOMSKY ON POSTMODERNISM

    “There are lots of things I don’t understand — say, the latest debates over whether neutrinos have mass or the way that Fermat’s last theorem was (apparently) proven recently. But from 50 years in this game, I have learned two things: (1) I can ask friends who work in these areas to explain it to me at a level that I can understand, and they can do so, without particular difficulty; (2) if I’m interested, I can proceed to learn more so that I will come to understand it. Now Derrida, Lacan, Lyotard, Kristeva, etc. — even Foucault, whom I knew and liked, and who was somewhat different from the rest — write things that I also don’t understand, but (1) and (2) don’t hold: no one who says they do understand can explain it to me and I haven’t a clue as to how to proceed to overcome my failures. That leaves one of two possibilities: (a) some new advance in intellectual life has been made, perhaps some sudden genetic mutation, which has created a form of ‘theory’ that is beyond quantum theory, topology, etc., in depth and profundity; or (b) … I won’t spell it out.”


    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-28 01:19:00 UTC

  • (CORE)The Family Shrinks as Property and Wealth Expand

      (However) Primitive matrilineality (endogamous) Community Family (endogamous) Patriarchal Community Family (exogamous) Authoritarian Family Egalitarian Nuclear Family (~catholic) Absolute Nuclear Family (endogamous) (Anglo Saxon) Post-Marital Individual Family (endogamous) (Feminism) The Anglo Saxon Absolute Nuclear Family – no precise inheritance rules, frequent use of wills; – no cohabitation of married children with their parents; – no marriage between the children of brothers. “…think of England as being like this for at least 750 years. We live in small families. We buy and sell houses. … Our parents expect us to leave home for paid work …You try to save up some money from your wages so that you can afford to get married. … You can choose your spouse … It takes a long time to build up some savings from your work and find the right person with whom to settle down, so marriage comes quite lately, possibly in your late twenties.

  • (CORE)The Family Shrinks as Property and Wealth Expand

      (However) Primitive matrilineality (endogamous) Community Family (endogamous) Patriarchal Community Family (exogamous) Authoritarian Family Egalitarian Nuclear Family (~catholic) Absolute Nuclear Family (endogamous) (Anglo Saxon) Post-Marital Individual Family (endogamous) (Feminism) The Anglo Saxon Absolute Nuclear Family – no precise inheritance rules, frequent use of wills; – no cohabitation of married children with their parents; – no marriage between the children of brothers. “…think of England as being like this for at least 750 years. We live in small families. We buy and sell houses. … Our parents expect us to leave home for paid work …You try to save up some money from your wages so that you can afford to get married. … You can choose your spouse … It takes a long time to build up some savings from your work and find the right person with whom to settle down, so marriage comes quite lately, possibly in your late twenties.

  • Ethical Intuitionism Is Correct (I Think) (via Praxeology)

    IF I AM CORRECT, THEN ETHICAL INTUITIONISM IS CORRECT But they authors just didn’t have Mises, Rothbard and Hoppe to help them. (I did.) What Mises, Rothbard and Hoppe didn’t have, was the past twenty years of scientific research to rely upon. And the diverse set of ethical intuitions are not diverse at all. He he he he… It’s awesome. “All rights are reducible to property rights.” True. “All moral and ethical intuitions are reducible to property rights” is true also. The first is a legal statement. The second is a biological one. Libertarians figure it out. Not all of it. But they did it. I just put the cherry on the topping.

  • Ethical Intuitionism Is Correct (I Think) (via Praxeology)

    IF I AM CORRECT, THEN ETHICAL INTUITIONISM IS CORRECT But they authors just didn’t have Mises, Rothbard and Hoppe to help them. (I did.) What Mises, Rothbard and Hoppe didn’t have, was the past twenty years of scientific research to rely upon. And the diverse set of ethical intuitions are not diverse at all. He he he he… It’s awesome. “All rights are reducible to property rights.” True. “All moral and ethical intuitions are reducible to property rights” is true also. The first is a legal statement. The second is a biological one. Libertarians figure it out. Not all of it. But they did it. I just put the cherry on the topping.

  • MOVEMENTS IN EUROPE

    http://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article119933288/Diese-Europaeer-wollen-eine-Abspaltung-vom-Mutterland.htmlSECESSION MOVEMENTS IN EUROPE


    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-27 17:37:00 UTC

  • Lotharingia. It matters

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f54_1337075813Watch Lotharingia.

    It matters.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-27 17:34:00 UTC

  • Dinner at Tarrantino steak house with Johannes Meixner Awesome. 😉

    Dinner at Tarrantino steak house with Johannes Meixner

    Awesome. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-27 11:02:00 UTC

  • The State Is The Enemy Of Civil, Voluntary, Society

      “…a herd of timid and industrious animals of which government is the shepherd…” QUOTE: “It seems that if despotism came to be established in the democratic nations of our day, it would have other characteristics: it would be more extensive and milder, and it would degrade men without tormenting them. … I see an innumerable crowd of like and equal men who revolve on themselves without repose, procuring the small and vulgar pleasures with which they fill their souls. … Above these an immense … power is elevated, which alone takes charge of assuring their enjoyments and watching over their fate. It is absolute, detailed, regular, far-seeing, and mild. It would resemble paternal power if, like that, it had for its object to prepare men for manhood; but on the contrary, it seeks only to keep them fixed irrevocably in childhood; it likes citizens to enjoy themselves provided that they think only of enjoying themselves. It willingly works for their happiness; but it wants to be the unique agent and sole arbiter of that; it provides for their security, foresees and secures their needs, facilitates their pleasures, conducts their principal affairs, directs their industry, regulates their estates, divides their inheritances; can it not take away from them entirely the trouble of thinking and the pain of living? So it is that every day it renders the employment of free will less useful and more rare; it confines the action of the will in a smaller space and little by little steals the very use of it from each citizen. … Thus, after taking each individual by turns in its powerful hands and kneading him as it likes, the sovereign extends its arms over society as a whole; it covers its surface with a network of small, complicated, painstaking, uniform rules through which the most original minds and the most vigorous souls cannot clear a way to surpass the crowd; it does not break wills but it softens them, bends them, and directs them; it rarely forces one to act, but it constantly opposes itself to one’s acting; it does not destroy, it prevents things from being born; it does not tyrannize, it hinders, compromises, enervates, extinguishes, dazes, and finally reduces each nation to being nothing more than … I have always believed that this sort of regulated, mild, and peaceful servitude, whose picture I have just painted, could be combined better than one imagines with some of the external forms of freedom, and that it would not be impossible for it to be established in the very shadow of the sovereignty of the people.” –Alexis de Tocqueville

  • The State Is The Enemy Of Civil, Voluntary, Society

      “…a herd of timid and industrious animals of which government is the shepherd…” QUOTE: “It seems that if despotism came to be established in the democratic nations of our day, it would have other characteristics: it would be more extensive and milder, and it would degrade men without tormenting them. … I see an innumerable crowd of like and equal men who revolve on themselves without repose, procuring the small and vulgar pleasures with which they fill their souls. … Above these an immense … power is elevated, which alone takes charge of assuring their enjoyments and watching over their fate. It is absolute, detailed, regular, far-seeing, and mild. It would resemble paternal power if, like that, it had for its object to prepare men for manhood; but on the contrary, it seeks only to keep them fixed irrevocably in childhood; it likes citizens to enjoy themselves provided that they think only of enjoying themselves. It willingly works for their happiness; but it wants to be the unique agent and sole arbiter of that; it provides for their security, foresees and secures their needs, facilitates their pleasures, conducts their principal affairs, directs their industry, regulates their estates, divides their inheritances; can it not take away from them entirely the trouble of thinking and the pain of living? So it is that every day it renders the employment of free will less useful and more rare; it confines the action of the will in a smaller space and little by little steals the very use of it from each citizen. … Thus, after taking each individual by turns in its powerful hands and kneading him as it likes, the sovereign extends its arms over society as a whole; it covers its surface with a network of small, complicated, painstaking, uniform rules through which the most original minds and the most vigorous souls cannot clear a way to surpass the crowd; it does not break wills but it softens them, bends them, and directs them; it rarely forces one to act, but it constantly opposes itself to one’s acting; it does not destroy, it prevents things from being born; it does not tyrannize, it hinders, compromises, enervates, extinguishes, dazes, and finally reduces each nation to being nothing more than … I have always believed that this sort of regulated, mild, and peaceful servitude, whose picture I have just painted, could be combined better than one imagines with some of the external forms of freedom, and that it would not be impossible for it to be established in the very shadow of the sovereignty of the people.” –Alexis de Tocqueville