Curt Doolittle

Category: Civilization, History, and Anthropology

  • Historically, groups that lose correspondence with reality are conquered by thos

    Historically, groups that lose correspondence with reality are conquered by those that do not. Simulation = Opium.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-06-02 06:15:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/738252706243063808

    Reply addressees: @ezraklein @elonmusk

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/738249718208335872

    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/738249718208335872

  • WORTH REPEATING (read this as a lament that the anglos foolishly truncated the g

    WORTH REPEATING

    (read this as a lament that the anglos foolishly truncated the german evolution into empire and the full maturity of german thought.)

    ***It’s that as intellectual work, excuse-making (the german rationalist model) and social engineering (the anglo legal model) are for different purposes: reinforcing the existing behaviors (germans) as a means of territorial defense, and colonizing new people (anglos) as a means of expanding commercial empires. Anglos and Romans dominated the world with Law and accounting, insured by arms. Germany never got to her empire phase because the Anglos and Russians (foolishly) stopped her. But if it had happened, then germans would have had to make the same transition from a philosophy of justification (how we should be) to a philosophy of law (we can be anything but what we must not be).

    Once you understand this difference between justificationary reinforcement of existing ideas and operational transformation to new ideas, you’ll understand the difference between german domestic philosophy and anglo roman imperial philosophy and why germans use new-Christianity rationalism and anglos use rule of law.***

    Source date (UTC): 2016-06-02 06:02:00 UTC

  • ELEGANTLY STATED —“The great pull of the German justificationary arts & letter

    ELEGANTLY STATED

    —“The great pull of the German justificationary arts & letters is evident, perhaps most so on Germans ourselves. They have thus achieved their aspired historical function (in Curt’s terms, Nietzsche/Wagner etc. are not pushing objective arguments, but aim to inspire/rally around ideals).

    And yet our ascendancy to empire was cut short, therefore no corresponding corpus filosofico in terms of running the thing, resolving legal disputes, governance etc. There’s no Confucius to our Yüe Fei, no Shogun to our Emperor, no workout scheme to our pre-session pump-up video.

    But there are traces of what might eventually have spawned a German empirico-legalistic school: the medieval town codes, or the historical beginnings of what would become Austrian economics come to mind; Hanseatic statutes, possibly.

    Thing is, those solely romantically inclined have little need for that missing corpus, while those naturally duty-bound, quiet (unheroic) and industrious (the vast majority of Germans in my estimation) don’t even have the vocabulary to begin to articulate what they’re missing. Cheers mates”— Benjamin Lange

    Source date (UTC): 2016-06-02 06:00:00 UTC

  • Look at USA’s birth rates by race, class, and age, and guess. Then look at every

    Look at USA’s birth rates by race, class, and age, and guess. Then look at every other country.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-06-01 06:38:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/737896069137321984

    Reply addressees: @mfckrx

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/737894976986701825

    IN REPLY TO:

    @mfckr_

    @curtdoolittle How/why do women reproduce with dysgenic bias?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/737894976986701825

  • WE USED MARRIAGE AND PROPERTY TO CIVILIZE BOTH GENDERS (ponder the importance of

    WE USED MARRIAGE AND PROPERTY TO CIVILIZE BOTH GENDERS

    (ponder the importance of this a bit)

    ***Women only DON’T reproduce dysgenically and persist poverty when we create institutions to prevent un-meritocratic reproduction as severe as those that prevent un-meritocratic consumption by male violence.***

    It has been as difficult to civilize women as it has been to civilize men. And we did both largely through the institution of marriage, property, and the common law, and aggressively persecuting unmeritocratic dysgeneic reproduction as well as unmeritocratic unproductive violence.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-06-01 03:27:00 UTC

  • There is nothing irrational about groupishness, tribalism or nationalism. Its un

    There is nothing irrational about groupishness, tribalism or nationalism. Its universalism that’s the outlier.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-31 16:07:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/737676820594741251

    Reply addressees: @business @StephanieBodoni

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/737644987131822080

    IN REPLY TO:

    @business

    Facebook, Twitter, Google and Microsoft pledge to tackle online hate speech in less than 24 hours https://t.co/RoQAIaLfvg

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/737644987131822080

  • Athens indeed gets the credit for what were often spartan victories. And that is

    Athens indeed gets the credit for what were often spartan victories. And that is because navies (hamiltonian ethics) are more rewarding than armies (jeffersonian ethics).

    And that western europe (france, italy, and britan) had prosperous navies only because germany held the territories against invasion.

    And that rome was prosperous as a naval and trading power that fought with marines, but failed as an army because the cost of holding land was too great.

    So my position (like most of my positions) relies upon the observation that specialization produces better armies, navies, and prosperity. Just as american entrepreneurship, british banking and finance, italian arts, german engineering, and russian military produce specialties that no one could produce on its own.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-31 09:25:00 UTC

  • I think the victorians represent the high point of NAVAL western civilization(At

    I think the victorians represent the high point of NAVAL western civilization(Athens) while the Prussians represent the high point of MARTIAL western civilization (Sparta), and americans Represent the PRAGMATIC high point of western civilization (Rome).

    I think the problem with Russia is that it never developed a middle class and it’s the middle class that morally organizes society into voluntary trusting orders.

    Which is pretty common knowledge in economics.

    Liberty starts with aristocracy but it is distributed as a mass consumption good by the middle classes. Why? Martial orders are involuntarily constructed by commands (warriors), commercial orders are voluntarily constructed by contracts(merchants), and social orders are competitively constructed from norms(priests/public intellectuals).

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-31 05:18:00 UTC

  • The Failure of Traditionalists

    THE FAILURE OF THE TRADITIONALISTS TO UNDERSTAND OUR OPTIONS. At present we have traditionalists that don’t understand the content of their traditions, only that through mandatory indoctrination and ritual do we behave aristocratically – in the western tradition. The Patriarchy for example, is popular primarily by appeal to traditional (aristocratic) aesthetics. Under the assumption that the church was the originator rather than the recipient and beneficiary of the aristocratic tradition.

    The Traditionalists do the same. But the church is just a temple for the weak side of the aristocracy. It’s not that we don’t need our great temples, and that we don’t need our great artistic achievements, but that My point is not to demean the church or advocate for atheism (individualsm) rather than a civic religion (familialism). Nor is it to deny that commercial empires have been as damaging for western civilization as has been our great wars, and our invasion by christian mysticism. My point is that we can create a civic religion out of truthful content rather than lies. Why? We do not need to appeal to a fantastic utopia that may be the home of false gods. WE MADE THAT UTOPIA EXISTENTIAL BY OUR ANCESTORS ACTIONS. We need no gods. Only heroes. And we have legions of them. COMMENTS
    Monotheistic Religion requires submission and submission is incompatible with sovereignty. And the experience of Liberty requires existential sovereignty.
    I don’t reject natural law. I don’t reject extension of kinship love. I don’t reject prohibition on inbreeding. I don’t reject aristocracy and paternalism. I do reject mysticism. I do reject the great babylonian, egyptian and jewish lies. and most importantly I do reject submission. And furthermore, so does the vast majority of the population. One need not respect or propagate mysticism in order to extend kinship love, reject prohibition on inbreeding, or reject submission. One does need natural law, common law, and civic rituals. No one requires civic rituals that include mysticism. The feeling of spirituality occurs whenever a body of people move, speak, or think in unison. That’s where it comes from: running with the pack. The church as it stands is the enemy of europe and the european peoples. It is not that we do not need a church, nor to to reform the church, it is that the church has failed us since the reformation. And continues to fail us. Why? Because enlightenment and literacy and knowledge make mysticism not only no longer possible, not only unnecessary, but it’s antagonistic to the population. So, how should the church reform?
    John Kersey: Most traditionalists I know also reject the Reformation, being either traditionalist Catholic or Orthodox. The Church did not fail us until it fell victim to secularism. Also, mysticism is not all there is to the church, indeed mysticism has generally been very tightly controlled by the church. Submission is characteristic of some religious beliefs, and is integral to Islam. But it is not the basis of Christianity, which rests not upon compulsion but on a voluntary, free-will relationship between God and man created in His image. That relationship is nothing more than drawing ourselves closer to the essence that made us and that governs and knows our every impulse.
    Curt Doolittle
    Putting aside submission to the will of God, and putting aside the failure to adapt to secularism (science)… Then if you cut all the nonsense out of Christianity what would you teach from the pulpit. My view is that the church can teach from its history without the need for superstition. The catholic encyclopaedia is a pretty good canon.

  • The Failure of Traditionalists

    THE FAILURE OF THE TRADITIONALISTS TO UNDERSTAND OUR OPTIONS. At present we have traditionalists that don’t understand the content of their traditions, only that through mandatory indoctrination and ritual do we behave aristocratically – in the western tradition. The Patriarchy for example, is popular primarily by appeal to traditional (aristocratic) aesthetics. Under the assumption that the church was the originator rather than the recipient and beneficiary of the aristocratic tradition.

    The Traditionalists do the same. But the church is just a temple for the weak side of the aristocracy. It’s not that we don’t need our great temples, and that we don’t need our great artistic achievements, but that My point is not to demean the church or advocate for atheism (individualsm) rather than a civic religion (familialism). Nor is it to deny that commercial empires have been as damaging for western civilization as has been our great wars, and our invasion by christian mysticism. My point is that we can create a civic religion out of truthful content rather than lies. Why? We do not need to appeal to a fantastic utopia that may be the home of false gods. WE MADE THAT UTOPIA EXISTENTIAL BY OUR ANCESTORS ACTIONS. We need no gods. Only heroes. And we have legions of them. COMMENTS
    Monotheistic Religion requires submission and submission is incompatible with sovereignty. And the experience of Liberty requires existential sovereignty.
    I don’t reject natural law. I don’t reject extension of kinship love. I don’t reject prohibition on inbreeding. I don’t reject aristocracy and paternalism. I do reject mysticism. I do reject the great babylonian, egyptian and jewish lies. and most importantly I do reject submission. And furthermore, so does the vast majority of the population. One need not respect or propagate mysticism in order to extend kinship love, reject prohibition on inbreeding, or reject submission. One does need natural law, common law, and civic rituals. No one requires civic rituals that include mysticism. The feeling of spirituality occurs whenever a body of people move, speak, or think in unison. That’s where it comes from: running with the pack. The church as it stands is the enemy of europe and the european peoples. It is not that we do not need a church, nor to to reform the church, it is that the church has failed us since the reformation. And continues to fail us. Why? Because enlightenment and literacy and knowledge make mysticism not only no longer possible, not only unnecessary, but it’s antagonistic to the population. So, how should the church reform?
    John Kersey: Most traditionalists I know also reject the Reformation, being either traditionalist Catholic or Orthodox. The Church did not fail us until it fell victim to secularism. Also, mysticism is not all there is to the church, indeed mysticism has generally been very tightly controlled by the church. Submission is characteristic of some religious beliefs, and is integral to Islam. But it is not the basis of Christianity, which rests not upon compulsion but on a voluntary, free-will relationship between God and man created in His image. That relationship is nothing more than drawing ourselves closer to the essence that made us and that governs and knows our every impulse.
    Curt Doolittle
    Putting aside submission to the will of God, and putting aside the failure to adapt to secularism (science)… Then if you cut all the nonsense out of Christianity what would you teach from the pulpit. My view is that the church can teach from its history without the need for superstition. The catholic encyclopaedia is a pretty good canon.