Category: Civilization, History, and Anthropology

  • yep. basically italy with mexicans rather than greeks

    yep. basically italy with mexicans rather than greeks


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-09 23:38:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/796497259886235648

    Reply addressees: @Micuhs

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/796390748933341184


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/796390748933341184

  • Spencer was the most popular philosopher in the English speaking world until WW2

    Spencer was the most popular philosopher in the English speaking world until WW2.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-09 22:12:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/796475527808872452

    Reply addressees: @ElenaJi35093090 @shannessian

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/796473875924193281


    IN REPLY TO:

    @suggaabee

    @curtdoolittle @shannessian fun fact Herbert Spencer was the idol of Adolf Hitler.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/796473875924193281

  • You ever hear of Eugenics? Or ask the question what hanging 1% the population pe

    You ever hear of Eugenics? Or ask the question what hanging 1% the population per year for 1000 years achieved


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-09 22:11:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/796475324544483328

    Reply addressees: @ElenaJi35093090 @shannessian

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/796474314556145665


    IN REPLY TO:

    @suggaabee

    @curtdoolittle @shannessian ever heard of social Darwinism ????

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/796474314556145665

  • (Hard for them. My attacks on the various enlightenments are easily interpreted

    (Hard for them. My attacks on the various enlightenments are easily interpreted incorrectly.)


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-09 11:08:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/796308439181983744

    Reply addressees: @DJTWMAR @EchoOwl @StefanMolyneux

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/796307867674345472


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/796307867674345472

  • CULTURAL OBSERVATIONS A few things I like about being in the states: 1-being in

    CULTURAL OBSERVATIONS

    A few things I like about being in the states:

    1-being in the same time zones as ‘the action’.

    2-being able to use my language and vocabulary in other than stunted form.

    3-the playful constant banter of teasing one another to preserve each other’s humility.

    4-most stuff works.

    Things I despise:

    1-the combination of privilege, ignorance, and stupidity.

    2-the complete lack of culture of any kind (thanks to the frankfurt school).

    3-the unsocialized, and undersocialized, loneliness of so many of the people – for no good reason – because of the complete lack of culture.

    4-the ever visible presence of an invasive and predatory state.

    5-the unregulated advertising – most of which borders on criminal, and the ever-present ever-vacuous ‘proletarian’ media personalities.

    Things I don’t care about any longer:

    1-pretense of superior customer service doesn’t matter if you’re served by an alien underclass to uncouth to provide it.

    Things I miss In Ukraine

    1-People, particularly those I am close to.

    2-The architecture of L’viv, the food, the culture.

    2-My little red car, broken down roads, bad signs.

    3-The ‘feel’ of ‘life’ everywhere.

    Things i don’t miss (at the moment)

    1 – the stress of constant difficulty doing anything because of my inability to use the language.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-09 11:00:00 UTC

  • WAIT…. ALONG WITH BREXIT, DID WE JUST SEE ANGLO CIVILIZATION REUNITE WITH GERM

    WAIT…. ALONG WITH BREXIT, DID WE JUST SEE ANGLO CIVILIZATION REUNITE WITH GERMAN?


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-09 02:40:00 UTC

  • “The Middle American Radicals, the MARs”—Sam Francis —“While con­duct­ing ex

    —“The Middle American Radicals, the MARs”—Sam Francis

    —“While con­duct­ing ex­tens­ive sur­veys of white voters in 1971 and again in 1975, War­ren iden­ti­fied a group who de­fied the usu­al par­tis­an and ideo­lo­gic­al di­vi­sions. These voters were not col­lege edu­cated; their in­come fell some­where in the middle or lower-middle range; and they primar­ily held skilled and semi-skilled blue-col­lar jobs or sales and cler­ic­al white-col­lar jobs. At the time, they made up about a quarter of the elect­or­ate. What dis­tin­guished them was their ideo­logy: It was neither con­ven­tion­ally lib­er­al nor con­ven­tion­ally con­ser­vat­ive, but in­stead re­volved around an in­tense con­vic­tion that the middle class was un­der siege from above and be­low.

    War­ren called these voters Middle Amer­ic­an Rad­ic­als, or MARS. “MARS are dis­tinct in the depth of their feel­ing that the middle class has been ser­i­ously neg­lected,” War­ren wrote. They saw “gov­ern­ment as fa­vor­ing both the rich and the poor sim­ul­tan­eously.” Like many on the left, MARS were deeply sus­pi­cious of big busi­ness: Com­pared with the oth­er groups he sur­veyed—lower-in­come whites, middle-in­come whites who went to col­lege, and what War­ren called “af­flu­ents”—MARS were the most likely to be­lieve that cor­por­a­tions had “too much power,” “don’t pay at­ten­tion,” and were “too big.” MARS also backed many lib­er­al prorams: By a large per­cent­age, they favored gov­ern­ment guar­an­tee­ing jobs to every­one; and they sup­por­ted price con­trols, Medi­care, some kind of na­tion­al health in­sur­ance, fed­er­al aid to edu­ca­tion, and So­cial Se­cur­ity.

    On the oth­er hand, they held very con­ser­vat­ive po­s­i­tions on poverty and race. They were the least likely to agree that whites had any re­spons­ib­il­ity “to make up for wrongs done to blacks in the past,” they were the most crit­ic­al of wel­fare agen­cies, they re­jec­ted ra­cial bus­ing, and they wanted to grant po­lice a “heav­ier hand” to “con­trol crime.” They were also the group most dis­trust­ful of the na­tion­al gov­ern­ment. And in a stand that wasn’t really lib­er­al or con­ser­vat­ive (and that ap­peared, at least on the sur­face, to be in ten­sion with their dis­like of the na­tion­al gov­ern­ment), MARS were more likely than any oth­er group to fa­vor strong lead­er­ship in Wash­ing­ton—to ad­voc­ate for a situ­ation “when one per­son is in charge.”

    If these voters are be­gin­ning to sound fa­mil­i­ar, they should: War­ren’s MARS of the 1970s are the Don­ald Trump sup­port­ers of today. Since at least the late 1960s, these voters have peri­od­ic­ally co­alesced to be­come a force in pres­id­en­tial polit­ics, just as they did this past sum­mer. In 1968 and 1972, they were at the heart of George Wal­lace’s pres­id­en­tial cam­paigns; in 1992 and 1996, many of them backed H. Ross Perot or Pat Buchanan. Over the years, some of their is­sues have changed—il­leg­al im­mig­ra­tion has re­placed ex­pli­citly ra­cist ap­peals—and many of these voters now have ju­ni­or-col­lege de­grees and are as likely to hold white-col­lar as blue-col­lar jobs. But the ba­sic MARS world­view that War­ren out­lined has re­mained sur­pris­ingly in­tact from the 1970s through the present”—


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-08 10:31:00 UTC

  • Q: WHAT IS THE SMALLEST POSSIBLE LIST OF LITERARY (AESTHETIC) ARISTOCRATIC AUTHO

    Q: WHAT IS THE SMALLEST POSSIBLE LIST OF LITERARY (AESTHETIC) ARISTOCRATIC AUTHORS?

    (Whose writings will survive another 1000 years?)

    1) Joseph de Maistre

    2) Julius Evola

    3) Nietzsche

    ???


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-06 15:45:00 UTC

  • WHEN THE PURITAN ANGLOS BECAME JEWS. The Problem Was the Puritan Diaspora After

    WHEN THE PURITAN ANGLOS BECAME JEWS.

    The Problem Was the Puritan Diaspora After The English Civil War.

    It’s actually True though. When the British developed the Empire, especially under Disraeli, they changed from an exploitative but domesticating Aryan and Burkeian Aristocracy, to a completely diasporic parasitic ethic very similar to the Jews.

    THAT’S WHY WE ARE FAILING. FOR THE SAME REASON AS THE JEWS ALWAYS FAIL: THE FAMILY AND COMMONS IS WHAT MATTERS.NOT PROFITS. INVESTMENT NOT CONSUMPTION.

    —“Oh you wise, wise man”—Rob De Geer


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-06 13:19:00 UTC

  • ARE ALL RACES AND TRIBES CAPABLE OF ARISTOCRACY? —“Curt do you think the non-w

    ARE ALL RACES AND TRIBES CAPABLE OF ARISTOCRACY?

    —“Curt do you think the non-whites are capable of the kind of aristocracies you want?”—Maeve Ahlström

    GOOD QUESTION:

    First, Aristocracy is the norm in history. The problem is not aristocracy per se, it is in domesticating a large enough percentage of the underclass, that the upper classes can productively organize the society by means of economic and natural law incentives, rather than lies, mysticism, coercion, bribery, serfdom or slavery.

    In other words, if you want to rule by truth, science, economics, and live in prosperity, rather than some other rule that imposes costs upon your people or your neighbors (including us) then you have no choice but to improve the quality of your stock by preventing harm to it through perpetuation of reproduction of those that inhibit the rest.

    We must remember that the lower classes are more disadvantageous than the upper classes are advantageous.

    So,

    1) it depends upon the size of the underclass

    2) it depends upon the distribution of spatial and verbal skills in upper demographics

    3) it depends upon the presence of some economic resource to fund it.

    4) therefore it should take no less than six or eight generations to make a meaningful difference to a population. And it would take more generations to equal what I assume were our 18th-century distributions

    Otherwise, given that as far as I can tell, all homo-sapiens-sapiens groups have diverged almost entirely by some degree of paedomorphic evolution, I can see no reason why not. We are no different from any other animals. We can be bred well and evolve paedomorphically, or we can breed chaotically and return to (relatively) prior states.

    Conversely, assuming we correct soon, there is no reason we cannot maintain a marginal advantage over all but the Chinese.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Cult of Sovereignty

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Science of Western Civilization

    The Propertarian Institute, Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-06 13:06:00 UTC