Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response

  • THE GREAT TRANSFORMATION: THE PEOPLE WORKING ON ENDING THE CENTURY OF ‘PSEUDOSCI

    THE GREAT TRANSFORMATION: THE PEOPLE WORKING ON ENDING THE CENTURY OF ‘PSEUDOSCIENCE’, ‘PSEUDORATIONALISM’, ‘PSEUDO-LEGISLATION’, AND ‘LYING’ :

    – ?? Gaad Saad (psychology/falsehood) ??

    – Jordan Peterson (psychology/falsehood/stoicism)(not happy to be on this list I assume)

    – Stephen Hicks (ethics) (who I doubt likes being in this list)

    – Jonathan Haidt (morality)(also doubt likes being on this list)

    – Curt Doolittle (law, testimony, and epistemology)

    – Nassim Taleb (fragility, innumeracy, pseudoscience) (first mover)

    – Kevin Macdonald (group evolutionary theory-jewish)(first mover)

    – Ricardo Duchesne (group evolutionary strategy -western)

    Now, I think i’ve painted the whole picture because I choose to work only with incentives (operations) but everyone is contributing to it in his own frame of reference. Together we are revising the world.

    We are seeing the following changes:

    (a) the transition from theory to operationalism. (profound)

    (b) the end of the competitive luxury of universalism. (expected)

    (c) the end of the era of cosmopolitan pseudoscience.

    (d) the end of the puritan (anglo) enlightenment fallacy.

    (e) the completion of the western european program (truth).

    (f) the reconstruction of what we used to call ‘stoicism’. (surprising)

    (g) the end of the academy (surprising)

    Dr Jordan B Peterson, Professor of Psychology might not understand he is reconstructing stoicism in scientific rather than original terms. He may. He may not.

    I was not aware that I was reconstructing the stoic intuition of natural law.

    Popper was not aware that his program was incomplete – overly simplistic.

    Hayek understood he had discovered that like physics, the model for the social sciences is best explained by information (changes instate) rather than electromagnetism, physical force, or the will of the gods.

    There is a reason science was a byproduct of western LAW. The logic of the law consists of MORE DIMENSIONS than it’s predecessors EMPIRICISM, RATIONALISM, LOGIC, and MATHEMATICS.

    We all SENSE this in one way or another. And together we are approaching the completion of the western program: TRUTH, after 2500 years, and multiple failures.

    But like our ancestors we sensed something in the distance. And step by step we are about to cross the threshold of a very different future – one as different as empiricism from rationalism, rationalism from reason, and reason from mysticism, and mysticism from anthropomorphism

    And I am certain the returns on the OPERATIONAL (existential) era of truth, over the era of empirical truth, will be as great as the returns on empirical truth over mysticism and rationalism.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-01 11:21:00 UTC

  • Q&A: WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON HANS HERMANN HOPPE? (possibly important to libert

    Q&A: WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON HANS HERMANN HOPPE?

    (possibly important to libertarians)

    —“Would you position Hoppe as a bourgeoise intellectual still? I’ve seen Josh mention this a couple times but through the things Hoppe promotes, his clear classicism and advocating of the recognition of “natural social elites” I get the feeling he’s got some of that martial, anti-liberal stuff going on.”—-

    I see him as trying to bridge ‘religious’ jewish ‘rights’ from religious law with sovereign martial demands and natural law. And he failed. It cannot be done without violence. He starts from argumentation and non-contradiction rather than possessions and non-retaliation. And that premise is why he fails.

    —“It’s interesting. I saw you closer to a post-classical liberal at first but when I read Hoppe’s Aristocracy/Monarchy/Democracy essay I sort of found out Hoppe himself tries to position his philosophy as aristocratic but he can not escape from his Rothbardianism, sadly”—

    yep. I advocate the aristocracy of sovereign men who grant liberty, freedom, and subsidy to weaker men, women, and children in the lower classes for personal,familial, tribal, cultural profit and status.

    —“Hoppe just sort of expects this to form by itself. It’s sad. It’s sad because he’s brilliant”—

    It is. It frustrates me no end. He was so close. He loves rothbard as a mentor but it was rothbard who ruined his potential.

    —“Where does he get close? I reckon where he advocates for institutions to preserve liberty (covenants) but there, apart from sort-of advocating (violent) enforcement of voluntary commons I don’t see where he almost figures it out”—

    I think it’s in DGTF that he comes across the operationalists and intuitionists and dismisses them. He didn’t make the connection between the intuitionists, operationalists, and mises praxeology.

    I think it’s at that point that he had the opportunity to understand but failed. He basically was applying argumentation ethics from the marxists (cosmopolitan jews) and was sort of a hammer looking for a nail. In the end, I see rothbard as a corrupting influence on Hoppe’s early promise, just as I see him as a corrupting influence on everyone else that he influenced.

    Hoppe’s justificationary ‘excuses’ are all nonsense. But his deductions from property are flawless. Unfortunately he is (absurdly) proud of his errors, and under-appreciates his achievements.

    And I have offended him enough with my arrogance that there is no way to reconcile and rescue his legacy from the bin of intellectual history.

    If instead, we look at the operationalist problem in social science as a sequence from Weber->Mises->Rothbard->Hoppe->Doolittle, we solved the logic of the social sciences and completed the scientific method in a century – despite the failure of the entire philosophical academy.

    I can’t show that without his help because the problem is too difficult for people to invest in learning without an incentive to do so by a perceived authority.

    I didn’t change what Hoppe deduced from property rights. I change the chain of causality that it depended upon by abandoning his jewish legal pseudo-rationalsm and german kantian justificationism, and replacing it with critical empiricism: SCIENCE. And I did so by restoring the basis of the experience of liberty, to the creation of sovereignty by the aristocracy, through the organized application of violence to prevent the alternatives. Jewish-tradition libertarians beg for the pretense of Sovereignty. Anglo-Saxon sovereignty is a choice made possible by the reciprocal insurance of warriors against the creation of a superior of any kind among peers.

    From this perspective we should be heroes in history. But without Hoppe’s assistance I do not have a way to convert the indoctrinated, true believers, and to rescue Hoppe from his rationalism.

    His achievements, his wonderful organization, and his name will end with him otherwise.

    I owe him so much. I asked him repeatedly for help. I told him first when I’d solved the problem. But I am just an arrogant american to him. And what he fails to grasp is that I a descendent from a long line of the norman martial class who sees the academy as an infested swamp, doing yeoman’s labor among the bricklayers of intellectual history.

    I do not need to act as a bourgeoise beggar for liberty. Because I understand liberty is the consequence of sovereignty, and sovereignty is obtained by violence used to deny all others any alternative.

    Sovereignty at one end of the spectrum and tyranny at the other. Sovereignty consists in a distributed dictatorship of sovereign men.

    And liberty is had only by their permission.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-01 10:16:00 UTC

  • FWIW. love you man. youre for real. a genuine moral man. keep hope alive

    FWIW. love you man. youre for real. a genuine moral man. keep hope alive.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-01 04:23:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/804179054186397696

    Reply addressees: @jeffreyatucker @grimsithe

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/804167002973761538


    IN REPLY TO:

    @jeffreytucker

    @curtdoolittle @grimsithe I really don’t think you want to embrace what’s about to happen Curt.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/804167002973761538

  • Tucker is a good person and I have affection for him. Not everyone is ready. The

    Tucker is a good person and I have affection for him. Not everyone is ready. They must lose hope in error first.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-01 01:46:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/804139682569265152

    Reply addressees: @grimsithe @jeffreyatucker

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/804116030335369216


    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/804116030335369216

  • “These boomer critics don’t even know what the alt right aesthetics are. Not tha

    —“These boomer critics don’t even know what the alt right aesthetics are. Not that I mind their confusion lasting up until the very moment they become the subjects of some pyrotechnic performance art.”— Carlos Clark


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-30 19:42:00 UTC

  • OMFG. Is there anyone who gives a sh-t what porn you watch? All exposure of acco

    OMFG. Is there anyone who gives a sh-t what porn you watch? All exposure of accounts will do is make it socially acceptable to talk about your taste in porn, and for the alt right to pepper ‘cucks’ and ‘sjws’ who complain with green frogs.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-30 18:03:00 UTC

  • minutes that is. not porn. lol

    minutes that is. not porn. lol


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-30 16:25:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/803998389801197568

    Reply addressees: @VonMacht

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/803998190966018048


    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/803998190966018048

  • easy. gimme a few

    easy. gimme a few.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-30 16:25:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/803998337997348864

    Reply addressees: @VonMacht

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/803998190966018048


    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/803998190966018048

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-30 11:26:00 UTC

  • TO THE NEW ZEALAND PARLIAMENT ON YOUR LATEST VIRTUE-SIGNALING EXERCISE REGARDING

    TO THE NEW ZEALAND PARLIAMENT ON YOUR LATEST VIRTUE-SIGNALING EXERCISE REGARDING TRUMP.

    We have a word over here on The Right for men who genuflect before women’s emotionalism as if their feelings equate to material change in state. We call these men ‘cucks’. Short for ‘cuckolds’. And for reasons we can’t quite understand, other than perhaps Australians and New Zealanders have no other achievement or export than virtue-signaling, it seems that members of both governments do little more than produce a virtue-signaling economy of cuckoldry. Why? Because the female vote is bought cheaply with the same meaningless emotional currency as women demand and cuckholds sell. Meanwhile the empirical people in the world, in our financial, commercial, and military economies try to produce material benefits faster than the Red Queen of Virtue Signals can tax them, spend to demonstrate virtue signals for women who are consumers of emotions rather than facts.

    This is the reason that democracy is coming to an end. The century of virtue signaling is coming to an end. Because we can no longer produce an unwarranted fraudulent emotional product on the backs of people who create material products, services, and information.

    You are not seeing what you think you’re seeing. What you’re seeing is america implode from its own virtue signaling in the face of the universal adoption of consumer capitalism, the end of the Peace of Westphalia, the end of Anglo dominance of the international network of finance and trade, and and the restoration of non-state warfare by religion, demographics, disinformation, and persistent petty raiding that increases cooperative risk – decreasing trust, increasing demand for an authoritarian state to forestall declines in trust, and the economic consequences of political and economic and social distrust.

    And just to be clear: it was ‘cucks’ chasing female votes with ‘free lunches’ and virtue signals that brought the end to the Westphalian Peace and the restoration of polycentric warfare by both military, economic, demographic, religious, and disinformational means.

    It was women who filled the universities with demand for the Frankfurt schools’ utopian promises, and paid the academy money for anthropological, political, social and economic pseudoscience. Driving up university revenues and impoverishing a generation in old age, so that they could study pseudoscience in large numbers, and vote to expand it.

    Can you look the evidence of history in the face? Or will you deny the truth of granting women access to the same responsibilities as men without the same cognitive biases of men, instead of giving women a separate house of parliament, and requiring reconciliation between men and women of different reproductive interests and cognitive biases? Can you look the evidence of history in the face and accept that the English method of creating houses for each class created a market for exchanges of commons between the classes, and that single-house monopoly government, abandonment of natural law in favor of fashionable majoritarianism, further expanded the monopoly – eroding the market for exchanges between the classes.

    You are just behind the USA. Britain is smaller so it is just catching up to the USA. But the answer is the same: we had more trouble domesticating women’s hyper-consumption than we did men’s violence. That’s why we invented monogamy: as a trade. We have been battling islam since 700AD when they caused the military collapse of mediterranean trade through raids, and incrementally de-civilized North Africa, Spain, and the Balkans just as they are causing raids against us today. And none of those regions has been able to recover in the centuries since.

    So perhaps you should look in the mirror. The world is shifting from the era of a monopoly of pseudoscience, fraud, and lies, to an era of trade once again, between nations and classes and genders.

    Why? Because monopolies are always a bad thing that attract the worst people, and a monopoly producer of virtue signals on the backs of producers that sells signals to useful idiots, granted votes by virtue of existence, rather than by demonstrated success in contributing to the commons in a market for reproduction; a market for goods, services, and information; a market for dispute resolution by natural, judge-discovered common law, and a market for the production of commons between the classes, is just the most sophisticated system of selling religion, snake oil, pyramid schemes, and fraud since the church invented the bureaucratization of preaching and the collecting of tithes.

    The fool is in the mirror.

    (Thus ended the lesson so to speak.)

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-30 09:56:00 UTC