Curt Doolittle

Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response

  • Q&A: “Why Are People ‘Triggered’ By Doolittle?”

    [I] have been openly attacking the Mises Institute’s propagandizing of rothbardianism for two years now. And they have no response to my criticisms (they can’t have one really – they can only adapt to them.) People invest their self worth in these ideologies to the point which they are not competing institutional solutions but hats to hang one’s self worth upon. It’s only logical that they defend their priors by non rational, non-empirical, largely symbolic and emotional means. The great thing about Rothbard is that despite being mostly wrong, he’s partly right, and what he’s right about is relatively easy for amateurs to understand. If people understood my arguments they would grok that I’m completing the ANCAP project by converting it from pseudoscience and kantian rationalism to a scientific argument that’s uniform across biology, morality, philosophy, law, politics and economics. Which, just in terms of explanatory power is pretty hard to criticize. But if the end result is preservation of investment, preservation of self image, rejection of the effort and time needed to improve one’s knowledge and a justification of non-contribution to the commons for the because one is rejected by the mainstream culture, then that’s an excuse for one’s behavior not a pursuit of a moral good, a sustainable political order, or an scientific truth about cooperation among men. Cheers

    —“Keep on Curt, Your attempt to create theory of everything in social sciences will be attacked by all sides. People cant even understand difference between man and female reproductive strategies and that is basic for understanding human nature and human state of affairs.”—Matej Lovrić

  • Q&A: “Why Are People ‘Triggered’ By Doolittle?”

    [I] have been openly attacking the Mises Institute’s propagandizing of rothbardianism for two years now. And they have no response to my criticisms (they can’t have one really – they can only adapt to them.) People invest their self worth in these ideologies to the point which they are not competing institutional solutions but hats to hang one’s self worth upon. It’s only logical that they defend their priors by non rational, non-empirical, largely symbolic and emotional means. The great thing about Rothbard is that despite being mostly wrong, he’s partly right, and what he’s right about is relatively easy for amateurs to understand. If people understood my arguments they would grok that I’m completing the ANCAP project by converting it from pseudoscience and kantian rationalism to a scientific argument that’s uniform across biology, morality, philosophy, law, politics and economics. Which, just in terms of explanatory power is pretty hard to criticize. But if the end result is preservation of investment, preservation of self image, rejection of the effort and time needed to improve one’s knowledge and a justification of non-contribution to the commons for the because one is rejected by the mainstream culture, then that’s an excuse for one’s behavior not a pursuit of a moral good, a sustainable political order, or an scientific truth about cooperation among men. Cheers

    —“Keep on Curt, Your attempt to create theory of everything in social sciences will be attacked by all sides. People cant even understand difference between man and female reproductive strategies and that is basic for understanding human nature and human state of affairs.”—Matej Lovrić

  • Q&A: “Why Don’t You Debate The Rothbardians, Or [Insert Name Here]?”

    (very important ideas in the longer answer)QUICK ANSWER: [A]ny time. Any day. It’s because they’re afraid of me. Just as they’re becoming increasingly afraid of everyone else given the catastrophic failure of their ideology. Hans has said I am ‘too combative’ which is true – because one of the marxist techniques is to rely upon your good manners and lack of hostility to conduct loading, framing, overloading, suggestion, gossip, shaming and rallying. So I attack dishonestly in their arguments – even when they have no idea that they’re engaging in unconscious dishonesty (fallacy). LONG ANSWER: [L]ook, I’m trying to CORRECT the enlightenment: Not just the jewish, but ALL of it: French, Anglo, American, German and Jewish.

    • The French literary catholicism
    • The Anglo classical liberal
    • The German Kantian rationalist
    • The Jewish Pseudoscientific Hermeneutic

    I’m trying to correct all of them. Including the fallacy that Mises is an Austrian empirical christian classical liberal and libertarian rather than a Ukrainian Jewish Pseudoscientific Cosmopolitan libertine who was born in predominantly Jewish Ukraine and happened to go to Vienna for School. But why so much emphasis on correcting the cosmopolitans? Because they have little real concept of government, no concept of commons, no concept of natural law. But they have a well developed application of using money, finance, banking, and economics as a means of constructing a social order. ***When you combine banking with rule of law you have the basis of an amoral social science: a means of arguing amorally rather than morally.*** You see. It’s not that the cosmopolitans had a particular insight. It’s all the cosmopolitans had to work with. Its their internal system of government writ large: create a law(that one cannot fail to adhere to), justify it pseudo-scientifically (or religiously), propagate it widely (verbal, written, print, media propaganda), and use ostracization (gossip, rally, shame)defectors, and heroize (heap undue praise) on advocates. You can see from this list of attributes that this reflects the origins of both Mises’ and Rothbard’s works – as well as the better work of Georg Simmel’s on “The Philosophy of Money” which I tend to prefer, and pair with Popper’s “Sources of Knowledge and Ignorance”, and Hayek’s “Use of Information in Society”, and his “Law, Legislation and Liberty”, as well as his chapters on Traditional Knowledge **The Humeian and Smithian argument does the same between states. But the Cosmopolitan argument does so Amorally*** (meaning without moral reference, vs immoral which means violation of moral prohibitions, and moral which means by adhering to moral prohibitions on involuntary imposition of costs.) And you see, that’s the magic right there. Jewish law may be a parasitic group evolutionary strategy (objectively immoral), it may be polymoral (objectively immoral), and it may be constructed from scripture (babylonian and Egyptian appropriation). But besides being written down, and internally consistent, and rather complete in its coverage, the organizing principles of diasporic judaism of the ghetto, bazaar, steppe and desert peoples is i)separatism, ii)law and iii)communal banking/insurance. Just as the organizing principles of western man are i)martial universalism, ii)law, and iii)production. Money and credit are more ‘precise’ forms of ‘instrumental measurement of individual behavior’ than are property and production and reputation. And that right there is pretty profound. Conversely, land is illiquid and production time consuming, and requires armies to hold it. This is very different from money and ledgers. So as a new technology that was ADDITIVE to the aristocratic landed order, especially since the forced destruction of our own diasporic capitalists, the Knights Templar (in one of the great crimes of history second only to the forcible christianization of Europe under Justinian), the diasporic jewish people had been conducting a research program into management of political order by law, money and credit instead of by law, land and production. (And an eugenic reproduction program as great as westerners had been conducting in their different order). ( Note: EVOLUTION OF ORDERS: Tribe, Religion(universal – ostracization vs inclusion), Law(particular – punishment vs avoidance), Credit(individual – consumption vs hardship), (Truth????) ) And that’s why I emphasize this unification of a) the anglo empirical and truthful discourse under rule of law and a market for commons (b) the german martial patriarchal hierarchy of duty land holding man (c) the jewish unification of morality, credit and law – as the best of each culture’s research program without the errors, immoralities, and various fallacious constructions of each. So we can now reconstruct our civic order, by combining our ancient traditions of property rights, our medieval market government, our enlightenment understanding of rule of law, our new understanding money, credit, and economics as a more granular application of law, and our understanding of biology, to unite into a single consistent framework the disciplines of biology, morality, law, philosophy, economics, politics, into a single unified system that is constructed amorally and therefore universally, and which provides decidability in all questions of conflict. And that is pretty cool. So the reason I pick on the cosmopolitans is because of their propagandizing of falsehoods and pseudosciences. While at the same time I try to reform all three enlightenments. It’s not that I don’t make use of these men’s work. It’s that it’s only half right, and half wrong, and it’s useless as half wrong. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine. * The Frankfurt School https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School

  • Q&A: “Why Don’t You Debate The Rothbardians, Or [Insert Name Here]?”

    (very important ideas in the longer answer)QUICK ANSWER: [A]ny time. Any day. It’s because they’re afraid of me. Just as they’re becoming increasingly afraid of everyone else given the catastrophic failure of their ideology. Hans has said I am ‘too combative’ which is true – because one of the marxist techniques is to rely upon your good manners and lack of hostility to conduct loading, framing, overloading, suggestion, gossip, shaming and rallying. So I attack dishonestly in their arguments – even when they have no idea that they’re engaging in unconscious dishonesty (fallacy). LONG ANSWER: [L]ook, I’m trying to CORRECT the enlightenment: Not just the jewish, but ALL of it: French, Anglo, American, German and Jewish.

    • The French literary catholicism
    • The Anglo classical liberal
    • The German Kantian rationalist
    • The Jewish Pseudoscientific Hermeneutic

    I’m trying to correct all of them. Including the fallacy that Mises is an Austrian empirical christian classical liberal and libertarian rather than a Ukrainian Jewish Pseudoscientific Cosmopolitan libertine who was born in predominantly Jewish Ukraine and happened to go to Vienna for School. But why so much emphasis on correcting the cosmopolitans? Because they have little real concept of government, no concept of commons, no concept of natural law. But they have a well developed application of using money, finance, banking, and economics as a means of constructing a social order. ***When you combine banking with rule of law you have the basis of an amoral social science: a means of arguing amorally rather than morally.*** You see. It’s not that the cosmopolitans had a particular insight. It’s all the cosmopolitans had to work with. Its their internal system of government writ large: create a law(that one cannot fail to adhere to), justify it pseudo-scientifically (or religiously), propagate it widely (verbal, written, print, media propaganda), and use ostracization (gossip, rally, shame)defectors, and heroize (heap undue praise) on advocates. You can see from this list of attributes that this reflects the origins of both Mises’ and Rothbard’s works – as well as the better work of Georg Simmel’s on “The Philosophy of Money” which I tend to prefer, and pair with Popper’s “Sources of Knowledge and Ignorance”, and Hayek’s “Use of Information in Society”, and his “Law, Legislation and Liberty”, as well as his chapters on Traditional Knowledge **The Humeian and Smithian argument does the same between states. But the Cosmopolitan argument does so Amorally*** (meaning without moral reference, vs immoral which means violation of moral prohibitions, and moral which means by adhering to moral prohibitions on involuntary imposition of costs.) And you see, that’s the magic right there. Jewish law may be a parasitic group evolutionary strategy (objectively immoral), it may be polymoral (objectively immoral), and it may be constructed from scripture (babylonian and Egyptian appropriation). But besides being written down, and internally consistent, and rather complete in its coverage, the organizing principles of diasporic judaism of the ghetto, bazaar, steppe and desert peoples is i)separatism, ii)law and iii)communal banking/insurance. Just as the organizing principles of western man are i)martial universalism, ii)law, and iii)production. Money and credit are more ‘precise’ forms of ‘instrumental measurement of individual behavior’ than are property and production and reputation. And that right there is pretty profound. Conversely, land is illiquid and production time consuming, and requires armies to hold it. This is very different from money and ledgers. So as a new technology that was ADDITIVE to the aristocratic landed order, especially since the forced destruction of our own diasporic capitalists, the Knights Templar (in one of the great crimes of history second only to the forcible christianization of Europe under Justinian), the diasporic jewish people had been conducting a research program into management of political order by law, money and credit instead of by law, land and production. (And an eugenic reproduction program as great as westerners had been conducting in their different order). ( Note: EVOLUTION OF ORDERS: Tribe, Religion(universal – ostracization vs inclusion), Law(particular – punishment vs avoidance), Credit(individual – consumption vs hardship), (Truth????) ) And that’s why I emphasize this unification of a) the anglo empirical and truthful discourse under rule of law and a market for commons (b) the german martial patriarchal hierarchy of duty land holding man (c) the jewish unification of morality, credit and law – as the best of each culture’s research program without the errors, immoralities, and various fallacious constructions of each. So we can now reconstruct our civic order, by combining our ancient traditions of property rights, our medieval market government, our enlightenment understanding of rule of law, our new understanding money, credit, and economics as a more granular application of law, and our understanding of biology, to unite into a single consistent framework the disciplines of biology, morality, law, philosophy, economics, politics, into a single unified system that is constructed amorally and therefore universally, and which provides decidability in all questions of conflict. And that is pretty cool. So the reason I pick on the cosmopolitans is because of their propagandizing of falsehoods and pseudosciences. While at the same time I try to reform all three enlightenments. It’s not that I don’t make use of these men’s work. It’s that it’s only half right, and half wrong, and it’s useless as half wrong. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine. * The Frankfurt School https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School

  • Why So Much Time And Effort On Anti-Racism? Self Correction.

    [A]LL, My job is to come up with a solution. You either help me do that or you don’t. Bitching about other races and groups with competing strategies is just masturbation. I love my race and my kin and my culture because all men must love their tribe for it to persist in the great climb to godhood. But I see a world of aristocracies: of small nation states – extended tribes – trying to raise their gene pools – their kin – into godhood. This is my vision of the world. I am against multi-culturalism as a form of polylogism – the logically impossible, legally undecidable, and the means by which we increase demand for authority. It is counter rational, It is pseudoscientific. It is a lie. Plain and simple. There is a limited value to cultural assimilation of invention, and cultural assimilation of the best most aristocratic genes. Everything else is pollution of the genetic, normative, and material economies. It’s not subjective opinion but fact. So sorry if I am not a racist in the sense that I hate others. I merely seek an institutional solution whereupon on group CANNOT PREY UPON another, and must survive by merit only. I am not even so much of a separatist as requiring full assimilation in exchange for benefitting from a superior commons. It doesn’t help me or us if you whine about others. It helps if you get up and demonstrate, or punish, or even kill those who allow others to conquer us. But it does nothing to criticize others for wanting a better life at our expense. The state is a for profit self-serving enterprise at the expense of the families it preys upon. It is time to kill a lot of people. Those in the Academy, State, Media complex. Thank goodness rope is cheap, and guillotines are efficient. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    —“There is little honor in picking on the weak and inferior, but there is still less in allowing them to be established as the standard of value, to accomplish the total inversion of virtues. It is not their enablers alone, who merit ridicule and criticism, though they do merit the lion’s share”—Eli Harman

  • Why So Much Time And Effort On Anti-Racism? Self Correction.

    [A]LL, My job is to come up with a solution. You either help me do that or you don’t. Bitching about other races and groups with competing strategies is just masturbation. I love my race and my kin and my culture because all men must love their tribe for it to persist in the great climb to godhood. But I see a world of aristocracies: of small nation states – extended tribes – trying to raise their gene pools – their kin – into godhood. This is my vision of the world. I am against multi-culturalism as a form of polylogism – the logically impossible, legally undecidable, and the means by which we increase demand for authority. It is counter rational, It is pseudoscientific. It is a lie. Plain and simple. There is a limited value to cultural assimilation of invention, and cultural assimilation of the best most aristocratic genes. Everything else is pollution of the genetic, normative, and material economies. It’s not subjective opinion but fact. So sorry if I am not a racist in the sense that I hate others. I merely seek an institutional solution whereupon on group CANNOT PREY UPON another, and must survive by merit only. I am not even so much of a separatist as requiring full assimilation in exchange for benefitting from a superior commons. It doesn’t help me or us if you whine about others. It helps if you get up and demonstrate, or punish, or even kill those who allow others to conquer us. But it does nothing to criticize others for wanting a better life at our expense. The state is a for profit self-serving enterprise at the expense of the families it preys upon. It is time to kill a lot of people. Those in the Academy, State, Media complex. Thank goodness rope is cheap, and guillotines are efficient. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    —“There is little honor in picking on the weak and inferior, but there is still less in allowing them to be established as the standard of value, to accomplish the total inversion of virtues. It is not their enablers alone, who merit ridicule and criticism, though they do merit the lion’s share”—Eli Harman

  • The Great Liars And The Great Lies.

    [T]he Great Liars **They Mastered The Art of the Great Lie**

    • Version 1
    • Version 2

    In both the ancient and modern world, they told lies for women and slaves. The Bigger The Lie The More Outrageous The More Effective At Using Words To Disconnect Imagination From Reality – that is the purpose of the great lies: to use altruism of the group to disconnect imagination from reality. Women are more easily affected by both the incentive of altruistic submissiveness and more resistant to truth – much more so – and therefore are the easiest means of replication of great lies. If enough women can be converted, then by means of their constant gossip, rallying and shaming, they will teach children, rebel against men, shame realists, and expand the lie to weak men, bad men, Women are not only unequal, but they are ready vessels for the collection and distribution of imaginary falsehoods. This is just history now not suspicion. The fall of the west has been achieved through the grant of political power to women who of their nature are less likely to grasp reality, and more desirous of fantasy. In the ancient world they spread the lie first to women and slaves. In the modern world they inspired women to free slaves in an attempt to obtain political power themselves. They repeated the effort of freeing the slaves at the expense of civil war, and obtained political power. And within one generation used it to incrementally undermine the west. The Great Liars, The Great Lies, and The Folly of Women. The fist time it is a fluke, accident or interpretation. The second time it is a strategy composed of a simple tactics: use women and weak men to create and distribute a great lie that destroys the virtue of the west: the people who tell the truth, and the truth’s correspondence with reality. And the great liars even destroyed science and rule of law. What shall be the penalty for this great crime of the Christian and Postmodern Worlds? What is our means of restitution? Perhaps “2000 years of silence”? The Truth Is Enough. Enough to Cure Russia. Enough To Restore The West. Science is the Discipline of Truth Telling. Law is the Forum for Demanding It. We Must Use Law To End The Lies. And With It The Destruction Of The Liars. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Great Liars And The Great Lies.

    [T]he Great Liars **They Mastered The Art of the Great Lie**

    • Version 1
    • Version 2

    In both the ancient and modern world, they told lies for women and slaves. The Bigger The Lie The More Outrageous The More Effective At Using Words To Disconnect Imagination From Reality – that is the purpose of the great lies: to use altruism of the group to disconnect imagination from reality. Women are more easily affected by both the incentive of altruistic submissiveness and more resistant to truth – much more so – and therefore are the easiest means of replication of great lies. If enough women can be converted, then by means of their constant gossip, rallying and shaming, they will teach children, rebel against men, shame realists, and expand the lie to weak men, bad men, Women are not only unequal, but they are ready vessels for the collection and distribution of imaginary falsehoods. This is just history now not suspicion. The fall of the west has been achieved through the grant of political power to women who of their nature are less likely to grasp reality, and more desirous of fantasy. In the ancient world they spread the lie first to women and slaves. In the modern world they inspired women to free slaves in an attempt to obtain political power themselves. They repeated the effort of freeing the slaves at the expense of civil war, and obtained political power. And within one generation used it to incrementally undermine the west. The Great Liars, The Great Lies, and The Folly of Women. The fist time it is a fluke, accident or interpretation. The second time it is a strategy composed of a simple tactics: use women and weak men to create and distribute a great lie that destroys the virtue of the west: the people who tell the truth, and the truth’s correspondence with reality. And the great liars even destroyed science and rule of law. What shall be the penalty for this great crime of the Christian and Postmodern Worlds? What is our means of restitution? Perhaps “2000 years of silence”? The Truth Is Enough. Enough to Cure Russia. Enough To Restore The West. Science is the Discipline of Truth Telling. Law is the Forum for Demanding It. We Must Use Law To End The Lies. And With It The Destruction Of The Liars. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Dear Academy: No. A Liberal Education Is Not A Good Thing. It’s A Bad Thing.

    [C]hristopher. It has become increasingly clear to me that a liberal education only performs its upper and upper middle class adult function as part of a triumvirate of the church’s youth and lower class teachings in myth and idealism, and the military’s middle class teenage training in duty, truth and testimony. We practice a hierarchy of religious systems in the west, none of which alone can produce the uniqueness of western man. Western mans differentiation from the rest is caused by our treatment of the beauty of nature as sacred, our martial universalism, heroism, and truthful testimony before the jury, later improved dramatically by chivalry, piety, and idealism by the church, further improved by the prosperity produced by commercial servicing of others under the Saxon North Sea and river trading civilization that we mistakenly call by one of its effects: Germanic Protestantism above the Hanjal line. The church was a contributor but not a cause. So far the academy post Darwin and post separation from the church, seems to have been a net detriment to western civilization. And the principle means by which the academy has been a net negative has been the adoption of the Cosmopolitan Pseudosciences which the 21st century is rapidly overthrowing: Boazian social science, Freudian psychology, Marxist economics, cantorian mathematics, Frankfurt school politics. And the puritanical offshoots of feminist ethics, postmodern propaganda, and philosophy. If Christianity if not monotheism was the first really great lie perpetuated by propagandizing then pseudoscience from the lectern replaced mysticism from the pulpit. First we learn myths, then reason then science. And those who cannot climb that ladder remain at the prior rung. And how can a classical liberal education exist without grammar, rhetoric, philosophy, history, and debate? At present it appears that the empirical science saves us from the liberal reason just as reason saves us from the Christian/Jewish:Egyptian/Babylonian mysticism of the great lie. So, pray tell, what is a liberal education? Because at present the evidence is quite clear that it is a device for teaching pseudoscience largely to women, absent the test of it by the logic of debate under logical laws of grammar and rhetoric that survive comparison with history, for the sole purpose of profiting from the process of selling them pseudoscience? This criticism.damns the academy, damns the incentives of professors and the academy, damns the content they profess, and damns the vast consequences of their teachings: the use of women voters to systematically dismantle rule of law, the great compromise that is the nuclear family, the inter-generational transfer of knowledge using savings and interest, and the second conquest of the west by pseudoscience women, slaves and immigrants – for profit. So completely similar to the first conquest of the west with the first great lie of monotheism by women, slaves, and immigrants. If anything we must damn the academy and the liberal education as nothing more than profiteering from the systematic destruction of western civilization. And I come to this conclusion from the data. Not from introspection, wishful thinking, and the stated ambitions of the academy – that would require rhetorical fallacy contrary to the evidence. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute. Kiev, Ukraine. http://www.theimaginativeconservative.org/…/liberal-educati…

  • Dear Academy: No. A Liberal Education Is Not A Good Thing. It’s A Bad Thing.

    [C]hristopher. It has become increasingly clear to me that a liberal education only performs its upper and upper middle class adult function as part of a triumvirate of the church’s youth and lower class teachings in myth and idealism, and the military’s middle class teenage training in duty, truth and testimony. We practice a hierarchy of religious systems in the west, none of which alone can produce the uniqueness of western man. Western mans differentiation from the rest is caused by our treatment of the beauty of nature as sacred, our martial universalism, heroism, and truthful testimony before the jury, later improved dramatically by chivalry, piety, and idealism by the church, further improved by the prosperity produced by commercial servicing of others under the Saxon North Sea and river trading civilization that we mistakenly call by one of its effects: Germanic Protestantism above the Hanjal line. The church was a contributor but not a cause. So far the academy post Darwin and post separation from the church, seems to have been a net detriment to western civilization. And the principle means by which the academy has been a net negative has been the adoption of the Cosmopolitan Pseudosciences which the 21st century is rapidly overthrowing: Boazian social science, Freudian psychology, Marxist economics, cantorian mathematics, Frankfurt school politics. And the puritanical offshoots of feminist ethics, postmodern propaganda, and philosophy. If Christianity if not monotheism was the first really great lie perpetuated by propagandizing then pseudoscience from the lectern replaced mysticism from the pulpit. First we learn myths, then reason then science. And those who cannot climb that ladder remain at the prior rung. And how can a classical liberal education exist without grammar, rhetoric, philosophy, history, and debate? At present it appears that the empirical science saves us from the liberal reason just as reason saves us from the Christian/Jewish:Egyptian/Babylonian mysticism of the great lie. So, pray tell, what is a liberal education? Because at present the evidence is quite clear that it is a device for teaching pseudoscience largely to women, absent the test of it by the logic of debate under logical laws of grammar and rhetoric that survive comparison with history, for the sole purpose of profiting from the process of selling them pseudoscience? This criticism.damns the academy, damns the incentives of professors and the academy, damns the content they profess, and damns the vast consequences of their teachings: the use of women voters to systematically dismantle rule of law, the great compromise that is the nuclear family, the inter-generational transfer of knowledge using savings and interest, and the second conquest of the west by pseudoscience women, slaves and immigrants – for profit. So completely similar to the first conquest of the west with the first great lie of monotheism by women, slaves, and immigrants. If anything we must damn the academy and the liberal education as nothing more than profiteering from the systematic destruction of western civilization. And I come to this conclusion from the data. Not from introspection, wishful thinking, and the stated ambitions of the academy – that would require rhetorical fallacy contrary to the evidence. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute. Kiev, Ukraine. http://www.theimaginativeconservative.org/…/liberal-educati…