To flip this around, a man of 20 without a woman, and a woman of 18 without children are a threat to civilization. It’s only marriage and children that bring us common interest instead of self interest. Ergo if you aren’t married with children are you an adult who should have any… https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1800585860410417586
Source date (UTC): 2024-06-11 17:53:03 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1800587061625225589
like I said, there has been gene flow back and forth, but genes don’t imagine and they don’t lie. I can recite off the top of my head the evolutionary migration paths out of africa. and even the evolutionary path from southern africa.
When we say ‘out of africa’ we mean homo…
Source date (UTC): 2024-06-07 13:58:41 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1799078531114381372
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1799074252181897286
–“Patton was a staunch anti-communist and saw the Soviet Union as a greater threat to the United States and the Western world than Nazi Germany. He believed that after defeating Germany, the U.S. should have turned its attention to confronting the Soviet Union and preventing the…
Source date (UTC): 2024-06-07 04:51:09 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798940739331899542
Reply addressees: @ANewMythology @AiddenToops
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798937311042003418
Ok. I’m off a call.
A less quick answer.
There are no examples in history where these circumstances exist that has not led to internal conflict.
There are no examples in history where these external conditions haven’t lead to external conflict.
Pick which one you think will happen first.
If the external happens first it will delay the internal.
If the internal happens first it will immediately cause the external.
The civil war in the USA will likely be an incremental escalation of local violence to a patter of violence to a breakdown in transport, trade, communications, and government.
I have worked on this problem for a very long time.
The dates vary but by 2032 it’s almost a certainty.
How long, how serious, and what happens after is all random.
Reply addressees: @AiddenToops
Source date (UTC): 2024-06-07 02:24:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798903947811495937
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798900657954451682
house to house violence that is random like the syrian ivil war not like the american civil war.
Source date (UTC): 2024-06-07 02:15:17 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798901514146070641
Reply addressees: @AiddenToops
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798900657954451682
Q: CURT: “WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THE WORLD AFFAIRS?”
I would need a more specific question otherwise the answer might not interest you. In general the industrial revolution was quite powerful, the first world wars ended the monarchies, and the second ended the empires. The Americans did not finish off the chinese communists or the Russian communists, so the Americans left two groups seeking to preserve empires. Western technological advantage has been mediated by global trade. Americans can no longer afford to police the world pattern of finance and trade, so the three civilizational empires are seeking restoration: Russia, China, and Iran as a caliphate. These three groups are harmful to their people but they have maintained enough power, that they see an opportunity for expansion as the USA withdraws and europe’s population collapses along with their economies. At the same time the success of the postwar neo-marxists has succeeded in sewing discord in western countries -particularly the USA, that in the absence of monarchies has no means of repressing those seditions. As such the world is returning to a conflict of civilizations, a decline in trade routes, a decline in globalism, and a rather scary decline in world standards of living. The USA is very close to a civil war which we should expect by 2032, and the only question is whether that civil war or a world war happens first. Which will be the end of empires as a continuation of the unfinished world wars, or the end of nation states, national sovereignty, human rights, free trade, and the western production of the current state of prosperity.
Everything else happening in the world is just ‘noise’ as that process proceeds to it’s deterministic conclusion.
Cheers
CD
Source date (UTC): 2024-06-07 00:06:44 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798869161449259008
Coloring reflects latitude, with people ligther the farther north.
Whiteness is a relatively recent adaptation, within the past 20k years.
Europeans and east asians diverged from south eurasians around 40K years ago.
South eurasians diverge from africans sometime before that. I don’t know how early it started, but likely by 60k years ago.
Out of africa repeatedly from 100-60k years ago.
Africa continued divergence from old africans since then.
Reply addressees: @SmileyElmore
Source date (UTC): 2024-06-06 23:57:45 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798866904045764608
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798865937145471286
INCENTIVES: THE FIRST WORLD WAR’S PROPONENTS
Strategic Intersets
The proponents feared that if the Allies were defeated, the balance of power in Europe would shift in favor of the Central Powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary, and the Ottoman Empire). This shift could threaten U.S. interests and influence globally. By supporting the Allies, the U.S. could help shape the post-war world order in a way that favored democratic values and American strategic interests.
Economic Interests
Financial Stakes: American businesses and banks had significant financial investments in the success of the Allied powers. The U.S. had extended large loans to Britain and France, and the victory of these countries was crucial for ensuring the repayment of these loans. A defeat of the Allies would likely result in financial losses for American investors and could have severe economic repercussions domestically (History Hit).
Trade and Commerce: The war had already disrupted international trade routes, and American businesses were concerned about the long-term impacts on global trade. By entering the war, the U.S. could protect its commercial interests and ensure that it remained a dominant player in international trade after the war
Source date (UTC): 2024-06-06 23:53:54 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798865935153119234
OUT OF AFRICA AND BACK AND FORTH
Alternative theories are nonsense on stilts. Yes, there was back and forth gene flow. There was back and forth gene flow between previous generations of man. But the what’s called ‘the whole kit’ emerged in east africa, spread across into then-green saudi peninsula, but settled in the then-dry persian gulf and it’s many rivers and marshes – the optimum ground for mankind. And then spread out following the coastal route. Because once you have fishing you’re never going to starve. Conversely, if you migrate for large game up the rivers whether the Tigris and Euphrates or the Indus, you will find game that has no experience with humans and the returns on that game, especially given the furs, skins, and bones, were better than those of the fish in the sea. So yes there has always been back and forth gene flow, and yes some of the backward gene flow was contributory because it’s easier to isolate and speciate outside of africa than in it – if you have the ‘full kit’ of technologies necessary to survive in numbers outside of africa.
Source date (UTC): 2024-06-06 23:37:38 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798861839742464000
RT @SaitouHajime00: A future historian documenting the 20th century destruction of western civilization will come to the same conclusions.…
Source date (UTC): 2024-06-06 23:35:02 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1798861184583581960