Curt Doolittle

Category: Civilization, History, and Anthropology

  • Which Groups Tend To Be More Marginalized, Religious Or Ethnic?

    —-”Which groups tend to be more marginalized, religious or ethnic?”—-

    The correct if unpleasant answer.

    1. All groups that cannot, do not, or slowly integrate and compete are marginalized (disciplined). And furthermore, they should be, until they integrate so thoroughly that the marginalization (discipline for non conformity) does not exist, because the cost of their integration does not exist.
    2. Groups disrespect(discipline, outcast, or boycott,) competition with (against) their traditions, norms, status, and laws. And there is good reason to do so: they are paying a high cost of integrating underdeveloped peoples – without any benefit of doing so.
    3. Any group that is marginalized (disciplined, disrespected, outcast, boycotted) must have a reason for invading (moving to) a society that disciplines them. The question is, if the traditions, institutions, norms, status signals, and laws, are more desirable in the culture that they are invading, then therefore the traditions, institutions, norms, and status signals that they bring with them are de-facto ‘bad’.
    4. So, when in Rome do as Romans do, or do not go to Rome.
    5. Ergo, it depends on whether the invader (disciplined, marginalized) group is genetically problematic (ethnic) because they have an larger undomesticated under, working, or middle class, that forces the host group to bear the costs of their lack of genetic domestication – or whether they are cultural competitors (religious) that forces the host group to bear the cost of training the underdeveloped norms and traditions. Or whether they are commercial competitors, which most groups seem to tolerate as a benefit at the cost of some status signal loss. Or whether they are institutional competitors, bringing with them a competing law. Or whether they are military competitors, which all groups despise.
    6. It is possible to force all of the above costs on a host people: Genetic, Cultural, Commercial, Institutional(law), and Military.

    That’s the answer. Groups are marginalized (disrespected, disciplined, outcast, boycotted) because they should be.

    So the groups that are more marginalized (disciplined) than the others are the groups that are most costly to integrate.

    And therefore “the most costly groups are those with the greatest cumulative set of costs: in the combination of genetic, cultural, commercial, institutional, and military.

    (NOTE: Ergo why Islam is so costly and so universally resisted. It’s dysgenic, culturally primitive, low trust, commercially weak, imposes competing laws, is intellectually regressive and entirely anti-intellectual, and was spread entirely by violence, at the cost of destroying the four great civilizations of the ancient world, as well, as costing 500M deaths. Islam has a simple strategy which is to breed at the bottom – the inverse of the great civilizations: far west and far east.)

    https://www.quora.com/Which-groups-tend-to-be-more-marginalized-religious-or-ethnic

  • Which Groups Tend To Be More Marginalized, Religious Or Ethnic?

    —-”Which groups tend to be more marginalized, religious or ethnic?”—-

    The correct if unpleasant answer.

    1. All groups that cannot, do not, or slowly integrate and compete are marginalized (disciplined). And furthermore, they should be, until they integrate so thoroughly that the marginalization (discipline for non conformity) does not exist, because the cost of their integration does not exist.
    2. Groups disrespect(discipline, outcast, or boycott,) competition with (against) their traditions, norms, status, and laws. And there is good reason to do so: they are paying a high cost of integrating underdeveloped peoples – without any benefit of doing so.
    3. Any group that is marginalized (disciplined, disrespected, outcast, boycotted) must have a reason for invading (moving to) a society that disciplines them. The question is, if the traditions, institutions, norms, status signals, and laws, are more desirable in the culture that they are invading, then therefore the traditions, institutions, norms, and status signals that they bring with them are de-facto ‘bad’.
    4. So, when in Rome do as Romans do, or do not go to Rome.
    5. Ergo, it depends on whether the invader (disciplined, marginalized) group is genetically problematic (ethnic) because they have an larger undomesticated under, working, or middle class, that forces the host group to bear the costs of their lack of genetic domestication – or whether they are cultural competitors (religious) that forces the host group to bear the cost of training the underdeveloped norms and traditions. Or whether they are commercial competitors, which most groups seem to tolerate as a benefit at the cost of some status signal loss. Or whether they are institutional competitors, bringing with them a competing law. Or whether they are military competitors, which all groups despise.
    6. It is possible to force all of the above costs on a host people: Genetic, Cultural, Commercial, Institutional(law), and Military.

    That’s the answer. Groups are marginalized (disrespected, disciplined, outcast, boycotted) because they should be.

    So the groups that are more marginalized (disciplined) than the others are the groups that are most costly to integrate.

    And therefore “the most costly groups are those with the greatest cumulative set of costs: in the combination of genetic, cultural, commercial, institutional, and military.

    (NOTE: Ergo why Islam is so costly and so universally resisted. It’s dysgenic, culturally primitive, low trust, commercially weak, imposes competing laws, is intellectually regressive and entirely anti-intellectual, and was spread entirely by violence, at the cost of destroying the four great civilizations of the ancient world, as well, as costing 500M deaths. Islam has a simple strategy which is to breed at the bottom – the inverse of the great civilizations: far west and far east.)

    https://www.quora.com/Which-groups-tend-to-be-more-marginalized-religious-or-ethnic

  • WHITES UNCOMFORTABLE WITH ACCUSATIONS OF RACISM? (NO) Because when a white perso

    https://www.quora.com/Do-white-people-feel-uncomfortable-when-they-hear-non-whites-mention-the-word-racist-around-them/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=e2593b68&srid=u4QvARE WHITES UNCOMFORTABLE WITH ACCUSATIONS OF RACISM? (NO)

    Because when a white person is called a racist, they understand

    (a) **they are being alienated by the threat of violence **

    (b)** they are being alienated so that others can achieve self image by denigrating others, **

    (c) **they are aware that only european whites and east asians have succeeded in building high trust polities.**

    (d)** they are aware the critics are just hateful and envious.

    **“No man is a hero to his debtors.”**

    **And the whole world is our debtor.**

    *We dragged makinkind one civilization at a time out of ignorance, superstition, poverty, starvation, hard labor, child mortality, early death, disease, tyranny, the vicissitudes of nature, and the uncertainty of a universe hostile to human life, and they resisted, kicking and screaming all the while. All these people are doing is kicking and screaming at being dragged out of their ancestral childhoods.*

    A parent must never take the words of his teenagers seriously, any more than europeans must take the words of the underclasses seriously.Updated Mar 22, 2018, 8:37 PM

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-22 20:37:00 UTC

  • My answer to Why do you think genetically and ethnically speaking Egyptians (The

    My answer to Why do you think genetically and ethnically speaking Egyptians (They are usually grouped separately) a… https://www.quora.com/Why-do-you-think-genetically-and-ethnically-speaking-Egyptians-They-are-usually-grouped-separately-are-so-distinct-and-separate-from-Berbers-and-other-groups-surrounding-Egypt/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=4c709fd1

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-22 01:26:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/976631070765600769

  • GENETIC COMPOSITION OF EGYPTIANS (HINT: You want to have either Phoenician, Pers

    GENETIC COMPOSITION OF EGYPTIANS

    (HINT: You want to have either Phoenician, Persian, or North Caucasian Genetics. The people who got there first did so for a reason.)

    There are two major admixture events that affected north africa.

    In historical order, Egyptians consist of about 45% late east africans, 45% South caucasians, and 10% Phoenicians.

    The last major migration out of africa was about 25000 years ago. Africa is best thought of as three or four separate “continents” due to its size and geography. The mediterranean, the desert, the ‘green band’ from west africa to ethiopia/Yemen, the inhospitable south, and the south/southeast coast.

    The civilization that developed on the trade route between ethiopia and yemen gave birth to that major migration. That migration “E”, spread north and then west into north africa.

    There was an admixture event between west eurasians (Caucasians “J1″) and these peoples. Current admixture (E+J1) is about even between the two. (An interesting nit is that it’s possible north africans domesticated cattle separately. )

    I am not sure of the admixture relationship between the Phoenicians and Berbers, although I am certain there are people in the world who know that. It’s not an area that I have studied. As I understand it the Phoenicians (east mediterraneans) contributed about ten percent to the current distribution.

    So between Red Sea origins, north African expansion, conquest by or integration with, south caucasians (people with black hair), and conquest by/integration with the Phoenicians (as well as some mixture because of the usual mediterranean trade), I think we understand most of the genetic history of North Africans.

    The Arab conquest of North Africa that destroyed North African, Egyptian, and Levantine civilizations left less genetic impression on these peoples than one would think.

    In my understanding, there has been negligible crossover between subsaharan africans and north africans because the desert and distance has been prohibitive.

    The Roman defeat of Carthage (west phoenicians) was a catastrophe for mankind just as the battle between Sparta and Athens, and between Germany(ie: sparta) and england(ie:athens) were catastrophes. We never seem to learn from history that the farmer-army and merchant-navy require each other to compete successfully.

    The Arab conquest was far worse however (as it was everywhere in the world), because islam is the last civilization to adjust to the end of the Abrahamic Dark Age and the Restoration of Science (the enlightenment) and the most resistant to it – and even if we are lucky, it will take another one to two hundred years of progress to bring north africa out of its current condition.

    Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-21 21:29:00 UTC

  • Mar 21, 2018, 9:26 PM

    https://www.quora.com/Why-do-you-think-genetically-and-ethnically-speaking-Egyptians-They-are-usually-grouped-separately-are-so-distinct-and-separate-from-Berbers-and-other-groups-surrounding-Egypt/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=4c709fd1&srid=u4QvUpdated Mar 21, 2018, 9:26 PM

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-21 21:26:00 UTC

  • WHY SOME CIVILIZATIONS FAIL If you have been following me for a long enough time

    WHY SOME CIVILIZATIONS FAIL

    If you have been following me for a long enough time now that you should be able to observe that I am making a very technical argument that feels, and intuits, to be horrible or excessive to those trained in consensus, cooperation at all costs, literature and philosophy rather than physics, economics, and calculation.

    In my understanding the ‘sympathetic’ properties of traditional argument are a form of mothering and tolerance that can be and has been, exploited under most if not all religions – the assumption of the value of the preservation of attempts at reconciliation of differences.

    But, there is only value in seeking cooperation if and only if we are in fact seeking cooperation, and doing so truthfully. Because otherwise it is not an attempt at truth or trade but deception, boycott, or parasitism.

    I have, as did nietzsche, (and have the chinese thru different means) come to understand that this was a profound mistake. There is a limit to the extension of kinship love to non kin and that limit is determined by the willingness to speak truthfully regardless of the impact on the status (dominance/competence) hierarchy.

    And the end result of tolerance is dysgenic, and the benefits of civilization gradually lost. It is fairly common knowledge that the even given that islam was spread by the sword and destroyed the great knowlege producing civilizations, the rather rapid failure of islamic civilizaiton esp after 1200 was due to its underclass utility and its consequential stagnation by overemphasis on tolerance rather than encouraging, rewarding, competition, and the social reward of heroism. Combined with inbreeding, and inbreeding with slaves (which is about the inverse of american blacks and whites) this produced first predation, then peace, then stagnation. The only reason for the conquests was a vast number of excess males, just as we are seeing today. And that is the cause of all disorder: an excess of males with no sexual market value because the economy is too primitive to provide them with opportunity. The only result under that model is the STEM family (extended tribal family) wherein people of low productivity pool their resources. This causes inbreeding, and reinforces not only familialism, and tribalism, but the low trust endemic in the islamic world (which muslims are incognizant of).

    Families will evolve to be dysfunctional if we do not have the competition between mother’s foolish exhaustive tolerance, and father’s limits, brother’s competition and alliance and sister’s competition and satisfaction.

    This same principle applies to nations and civilizations, and those that took the maternal path (islam, africa) and those that took the paternal path (aryan and modern europe, east asia) progressed rapidly and everyone else DECLINED. The same thing that happened in Islam happened in west africa. From dominance to decline in fairly short order.

    So in argumentative technique, I have used for many years, and I am open about using, never letting the evil people have the last word, but (a) returning any ridiucule, ralllyin or shaming (b) restating the central argument (c) criticizing them for not making such an argument, and then (d) staying with it until they are exhausted. This is somewhat like putting a child in room and ignoring him, except we cannot put these particular chlidren in a room, or beat and slap those particular teens and adults. Instead, we merely exaust every opportunity that they have for gratification for their behavior.

    I had to learn that my people were wrong. Most of us have to. The reason being that most of us and most of our people, and nearly all of our ancestors have been wrong. Not only wrong, but in many cases destructive.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-21 08:44:00 UTC

  • Why Do You Think Genetically And Ethnically Speaking Egyptians (they Are Usually Grouped Separately) Are So Distinct And Separate From Berbers And Other Groups Surrounding Egypt?

    There are two major admixture events that affected north africa.

    1. In historical order, Egyptians consist of about 45% late east africans, 45% South caucasians, and 10% Phoenicians.
    2. The last major migration out of africa was about 25000 years ago. Africa is best thought of as three or four separate “continents” due to its size and geography. The mediterranean, the desert, the ‘green band’ from west africa to ethiopia/Yemen, the inhospitable south, and the south/southeast coast.
    3. The civilization that developed on the trade route between ethiopia and yemen gave birth to that major migration. That migration “E”, spread north and then west into north africa.
    4. There was an admixture event between west eurasians (Caucasians “J1″) and these peoples. Current admixture (E+J1) is about even between the two. (An interesting nit is that it’s possible north africans domesticated cattle separately. ) I am not sure of the admixture relationship between the Phoenicians and Berbers, although I am certain there are people in the world who know that. It’s not an area that I have studied. As I understand it the Phoenicians (east mediterraneans) contributed about ten percent to the current distribution. So between Red Sea origins, north African expansion, conquest by or integration with, south caucasians (people with black hair), and conquest by/integration with the Phoenicians (as well as some mixture because of the usual mediterranean trade), I think we understand most of the genetic history of North Africans.
    5. The Arab conquest of North Africa that destroyed North African, Egyptian, and Levantine civilizations left less genetic impression on these peoples than one would think.
    6. In my understanding, there has been negligible crossover between subsaharan africans and north africans because the desert and distance has been prohibitive.
    7. The Roman defeat of Carthage (west phoenicians) was a catastrophe for mankind just as the battle between Sparta and Athens, and between Germany(ie: sparta) and england(ie:athens) were catastrophes. We never seem to learn from history that the farmer-army and merchant-navy require each other to compete successfully
    8. The Arab conquest was far worse however (as it was everywhere in the world), because islam is the last civilization to adjust to the end of the Abrahamic Dark Age and the Restoration of Science (the enlightenment) and the most resistant to it – and even if we are lucky, it will take another one to two hundred years of progress to bring north africa out of its current condition.

    Cheers

    https://www.quora.com/Why-do-you-think-genetically-and-ethnically-speaking-Egyptians-They-are-usually-grouped-separately-are-so-distinct-and-separate-from-Berbers-and-other-groups-surrounding-Egypt

  • Why Do People In Russia And Ukraine Have Asian Looking Eyes Even Though They Are White?

    Um, just to add tidbits for those fascinated by genetic heritage:

    Finnic peoples appear to have evolved around the Obskaya Gulf region (northern Russia near the arctic circle) as all of us seem to have evolved near waterways.

    It appears that they were invaded by (enslaved by, fought with) asiatic siberians in recent prehistory.

    We don’t think of it today, but the ‘eskimos’ (Inuit/Siberian/Arctic peoples) around the arctic circle were aggressive warriors and were successful at exterminating multiple tribal groups – including most of their predecessors in the new world.

    North Russians (Muscovites) are about 25% finnish composition. (If you are still one of those people that think ‘breeds of humans’ are indifferent science has arleady falsified the blank slate, and is in the process of falsifying tribe, subrace, and racial similarities – and we are pretty sure we know the sources of those differences.)

    Every gene study I have seen suggest that the mongol invasion had very little impact on the slavic peoples. Conversely, the slavic slave trade had a significant genetic impact on the Byzantine/Turkic population.

    The region’s major gene exporter was today’s Poland, and Poles, Ukrainians, and southern Russians (who are, contrary to russian ‘historicism’, ethnic and previously linguistic ukrainians) spread throughout the territory. They do not have this Finnic and Siberian admixture.

    Russia found eastern european and baltic countries too difficult to rule becasue they were more developed than ethnic russians. So the soviets moved rural russians who had been serfs (slaves) only one or two generations before, into eastern europe and the baltics as the work force.

    The asiatic population of siberia is trivial. Ethnic russians dominate the population everywhere except tribal areas just as canadians host tribal communities in the north.

    So we do see a bit of asiatic gene expression because of (a) russian relocation programs, (b) mongol invasion, (c) the usual territorial cross breeding, and (d) the mobility created by sail, rail, road, and the russian and soviet empires.

    Cheers

    https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-in-Russia-and-Ukraine-have-Asian-looking-eyes-even-though-they-are-white

  • Why Do You Think Genetically And Ethnically Speaking Egyptians (they Are Usually Grouped Separately) Are So Distinct And Separate From Berbers And Other Groups Surrounding Egypt?

    There are two major admixture events that affected north africa.

    1. In historical order, Egyptians consist of about 45% late east africans, 45% South caucasians, and 10% Phoenicians.
    2. The last major migration out of africa was about 25000 years ago. Africa is best thought of as three or four separate “continents” due to its size and geography. The mediterranean, the desert, the ‘green band’ from west africa to ethiopia/Yemen, the inhospitable south, and the south/southeast coast.
    3. The civilization that developed on the trade route between ethiopia and yemen gave birth to that major migration. That migration “E”, spread north and then west into north africa.
    4. There was an admixture event between west eurasians (Caucasians “J1″) and these peoples. Current admixture (E+J1) is about even between the two. (An interesting nit is that it’s possible north africans domesticated cattle separately. ) I am not sure of the admixture relationship between the Phoenicians and Berbers, although I am certain there are people in the world who know that. It’s not an area that I have studied. As I understand it the Phoenicians (east mediterraneans) contributed about ten percent to the current distribution. So between Red Sea origins, north African expansion, conquest by or integration with, south caucasians (people with black hair), and conquest by/integration with the Phoenicians (as well as some mixture because of the usual mediterranean trade), I think we understand most of the genetic history of North Africans.
    5. The Arab conquest of North Africa that destroyed North African, Egyptian, and Levantine civilizations left less genetic impression on these peoples than one would think.
    6. In my understanding, there has been negligible crossover between subsaharan africans and north africans because the desert and distance has been prohibitive.
    7. The Roman defeat of Carthage (west phoenicians) was a catastrophe for mankind just as the battle between Sparta and Athens, and between Germany(ie: sparta) and england(ie:athens) were catastrophes. We never seem to learn from history that the farmer-army and merchant-navy require each other to compete successfully
    8. The Arab conquest was far worse however (as it was everywhere in the world), because islam is the last civilization to adjust to the end of the Abrahamic Dark Age and the Restoration of Science (the enlightenment) and the most resistant to it – and even if we are lucky, it will take another one to two hundred years of progress to bring north africa out of its current condition.

    Cheers

    https://www.quora.com/Why-do-you-think-genetically-and-ethnically-speaking-Egyptians-They-are-usually-grouped-separately-are-so-distinct-and-separate-from-Berbers-and-other-groups-surrounding-Egypt