Curt Doolittle

Category: Civilization, History, and Anthropology

  • WHY MUSLIM ‘PRETENSE OF INTERPERSONAL AND SOCIAL PACIFISM’ If we did as you sugg

    WHY MUSLIM ‘PRETENSE OF INTERPERSONAL AND SOCIAL PACIFISM’
    If we did as you suggest we would be still as poor and ignorant as the MENA instead of having dragged the entire world out of ignorance, superstition, poverty, hard labor, starvation, disease, suffering, and early death. We did it. We did it because you don’t realize what you’re saying is that you want to avoid work, avoid competition, avoid the conflict that comes from competition, avoid the inequality that results from successful competition, and avoide the prosperity that results, and the education in aristotelian empiricism and european science, economics, politics and law that would be required to have that prosperity.

    Reply addressees: @ForTheLifeofTr1 @Nefertiiti

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-13 16:43:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635320598304890894

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635315424270381058

  • THE MIDDLE EAST PAST AND FUTURE The middle east (MENA) was the product of four f

    THE MIDDLE EAST PAST AND FUTURE
    The middle east (MENA) was the product of four forces that ceased to be useful when the muslims conquered constantinople, ending byzantium, and forcing the European age of sail that ended the silk road, the value of flood river irrigation, and the utility as a nexus of the four continents, with the transport, commercial and financial revolution just as surely as european capture of petrochemicals created the industrial revolution and ended the utility of farming.

    Ancient World Benefits:
    1. Four contients (trade)
    2. Flood river valleys (food)
    3. The Silk Road (trade)
    4. Resulting population (energy)
    Became a resource curse.

    In other words, while an early advantage, the ME fell into the resource curse. The arab expansion destroyed the great civilizations of the ancient world and the dynamic between them, so despite the multiple attemps fo the persians to resurrect learning, fundamentalism had effectively ended the middle east’s potential by 800 despite it taking to 1000 to manifest, and the 19th century to die.

    The arab expansion and islam were as bad locally as islam was for every primitive people it spread to. We cannot even resurrect persian civilzation now. And NW indian civilization is lost. China is trying to stop it’s spread and I suspect will succeed. Russian, European, and expecially subsaharan african civilization are still vunlerable.

    Each iteration of abrahamic cult of deceit is just a drug of increasing power of addiction: judaism christianity islam and their repetition in the marxist to woke to new-islamist sequence are all the same strategy of providing an alternative to the stress of indo european civilizations and east asian civilizations which require self regulation, responsibility, and trust that appears impossible to the family, clan, tribe and cult nature of the middle east, that prevents the formation of economy and nationalism which requires abandoning of fundamentalism. however the fundamental problem of the MENA world is with an average IQ of 84, it’s not possible to form a modern industrial civilzation with mass employment. So if MENA could not transform to 18th century technology and society how can it transform to 21st? It can’t. That is what the west discovered in our attempt to finish the modernization of the middle east, bringing about the end of our experment with neo-conservatism, and our hope to end world poverty. It can’t be done. 🙁

    Reply addressees: @ForTheLifeofTr1

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-13 16:38:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635319483429527569

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635304286325452801

  • THE MIDDLE EAST PAST AND FUTURE The middle east (MENA) was the product of four f

    THE MIDDLE EAST PAST AND FUTURE
    The middle east (MENA) was the product of four forces that ceased to be useful when the muslims conquered constantinople, ending byzantium, and forcing the European age of sail that ended the silk road, the value of flood river irrigation, and the utility as a nexus of the four continents, with the transport, commercial and financial revolution just as surely as european capture of petrochemicals created the industrial revolution and ended the utility of farming.

    Ancient World Benefits:
    1. Four contients (trade)
    2. Flood river valleys (food)
    3. The Silk Road (trade)
    4. Resulting population (energy)
    Became a resource curse.

    In other words, while an early advantage, the ME fell into the resource curse. The arab expansion destroyed the great civilizations of the ancient world and the dynamic between them, so despite the multiple attemps fo the persians to resurrect learning, fundamentalism had effectively ended the middle east’s potential by 800 despite it taking to 1000 to manifest, and the 19th century to die.

    The arab expansion and islam were as bad locally as islam was for every primitive people it spread to. We cannot even resurrect persian civilzation now. And NW indian civilization is lost. China is trying to stop it’s spread and I suspect will succeed. Russian, European, and expecially subsaharan african civilization are still vunlerable.

    Each iteration of abrahamic cult of deceit is just a drug of increasing power of addiction: judaism christianity islam and their repetition in the marxist to woke to new-islamist sequence are all the same strategy of providing an alternative to the stress of indo european civilizations and east asian civilizations which require self regulation, responsibility, and trust that appears impossible to the family, clan, tribe and cult nature of the middle east, that prevents the formation of economy and nationalism which requires abandoning of fundamentalism. however the fundamental problem of the MENA world is with an average IQ of 84, it’s not possible to form a modern industrial civilzation with mass employment. So if MENA could not transform to 18th century technology and society how can it transform to 21st? It can’t. That is what the west discovered in our attempt to finish the modernization of the middle east, bringing about the end of our experment with neo-conservatism, and our hope to end world poverty. It can’t be done. 🙁

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-13 16:38:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635319483714740227

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635304286325452801

  • The COMPETITION to NOT BE LEFT BEHIND as industrialization spread around the wor

    The COMPETITION to NOT BE LEFT BEHIND as industrialization spread around the word, causing vast opporunity and reformation led to the same conflicts that agrarainism, bronze, and iron did before. There is nothing new here. Nothing special. The only difference was that the european age of sail once the muslims closed the ports in Byzantium discovered new opportunities that had never been possible before, at the same time as the polticial, financial, administrative, scientific, and technological asymmetry that made europeans more competitive.
    Until 1940’s the world’s wealth was dependent upon monopoly control of resources, and expecially labor, and land. That ended. The USA has been trying to continue that transformation. And it turns out that the internet was more effective at it than evertyhing else we had done.

    Reply addressees: @ForTheLifeofTr1

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-13 16:06:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635311419758444546

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635307669413330944

  • The COMPETITION to NOT BE LEFT BEHIND as industrialization spread around the wor

    The COMPETITION to NOT BE LEFT BEHIND as industrialization spread around the word, causing vast opporunity and reformation led to the same conflicts that agrarainism, bronze, and iron did before. There is nothing new here. Nothing special. The only difference was that the european age of sail once the muslims closed the ports in Byzantium discovered new opportunities that had never been possible before, at the same time as the polticial, financial, administrative, scientific, and technological asymmetry that made europeans more competitive.
    Until 1940’s the world’s wealth was dependent upon monopoly control of resources, and expecially labor, and land. That ended. The USA has been trying to continue that transformation. And it turns out that the internet was more effective at it than evertyhing else we had done.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-13 16:06:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635311419921924097

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635307669413330944

  • WE DON’T HAVE TO AGREE ON MEANS – ONLY ENDS We don’t have to agree on everything

    WE DON’T HAVE TO AGREE ON MEANS – ONLY ENDS
    We don’t have to agree on everything. Hanson and has built a career from stating western civ begins with the Greeks. So have most historians. Gimbutas, Anthony, Mallory, Duchesne, and I, all make the argument it’s the steppe. Is that a material difference? Not really. Because we agree on the resulting properties of the west. Aristotle and Epicurus understood gravity existed, and Newton and Einstein increased the precision but still didn’t solve it. Smith, Hayek and I all recognized informal capital, and incrementally advanced it’s understanding. Mises, Rothbard, Hayek, Hoppe and I solved social science in four generations. We don’t need to think the same. We just need to head in roughly the same direction. Knowledge accumulates. Democracy is for herds. Markets are for men.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-13 15:57:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635309060626030592

  • WE DON’T HAVE TO AGREE ON MEANS – ONLY ENDS We don’t have to agree on everything

    WE DON’T HAVE TO AGREE ON MEANS – ONLY ENDS
    We don’t have to agree on everything. Hanson and has built a career from stating western civ begins with the Greeks. So have most historians. Gimbutas, Anthony, Mallory, Duchesne, and I, all make the argument it’s the steppe. Is that a material difference? Not really. Because we agree on the resulting properties of the west. Aristotle and Epicurus understood gravity existed, and Newton and Einstein increased the precision but still didn’t solve it. Smith, Hayek and I all recognized informal capital, and incrementally advanced it’s understanding. Mises, Rothbard, Hayek, Hoppe and I solved social science in four generations. We don’t need to think the same. We just need to head in roughly the same direction. Knowledge accumulates. Democracy is for herds. Markets are for men.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-13 15:57:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635309060755996674

  • The problem for the west is hyper-expansion. (aryanism) The west over expands, a

    The problem for the west is hyper-expansion. (aryanism)
    The west over expands, and then collapses becasue it’s only possible (so far) for europeans to practice europeanism. The degree to which is genetic vs cultural isn’t settled yet but it’s likely equally interdependent.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-13 15:43:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635305612425965568

    Reply addressees: @ForTheLifeofTr1

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635303608328781825

  • IN CIVILIZATION, FIRST DOESN’T MATTER, FAST DOES Turns out being ‘first’ was due

    IN CIVILIZATION, FIRST DOESN’T MATTER, FAST DOES
    Turns out being ‘first’ was due to geography and made no difference. Instead fastest regardless of geography made the difference.

    The west evolved faster than all the rest combined in the Bronze, Iron, and Steel ages. And the west alone, didn’t exhaust agrarianism by 800, and begin the process of stagnation (India, China) or decline (Islam).

    China should have surpassed Europe simply because rice is a better caloric crop than wheat, flood rivers better farming than temperate fields, and larger populations are more capable of production. Had china traveled to the Americas AND not had another attack from the north and northwest, they might have taken the new world. But, China is not adventurous or heroic and there is just as much chance the primitivism of the American coast was as unpleasant as the primitivism of the African coast.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-13 15:29:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635301958742409217

  • IN CIVILIZATION, FIRST DOESN’T MATTER, FAST DOES Turns out being ‘first’ was due

    IN CIVILIZATION, FIRST DOESN’T MATTER, FAST DOES
    Turns out being ‘first’ was due to geography and made no difference. Instead fastest regardless of geography made the difference.

    The west evolved faster than all the rest combined in the Bronze, Iron, and Steel ages. And the west alone, didn’t exhaust agrarianism by 800, and begin the process of stagnation (India, China) or decline (Islam).

    China should have surpassed Europe simply because rice is a better caloric crop than wheat, flood rivers better farming than temperate fields, and larger populations are more capable of production. Had china traveled to the Americas AND not had another attack from the north and northwest, they might have taken the new world. But, China is not adventurous or heroic and there is just as much chance the primitivism of the American coast was as unpleasant as the primitivism of the African coast.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-13 15:29:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635301958855565313