Curt Doolittle

Category: Politics, Power, and Governance

  • DEMAND FOR AUTHORITY (DECIDABILITY) FROM INSTITUTIONS BY REGION OVER TIME Some i

    DEMAND FOR AUTHORITY (DECIDABILITY) FROM INSTITUTIONS BY REGION OVER TIME

    Some institutional network of decidability must provide people with decidability given the available institutions versus the available means of production. That intersection sophistication of institutions vs Trusthworthiness of those institutions, v available means of production determined demand for institutions and decidability under those institutions. This is rather obvious but I wasn’t able to put together the German incentive until now. Fukuyama only gets the recent not the ancient and medieval and late modern.

    =====

    From discussion with “Teacher” Alhaji Dada

    OK. I see what you mean. I see. I just have to translate it from the intellectuals justification to what it was that they were justifying….

    So the Germans haven’t been far out of aristocracy, they had developed the first professional bureaucracies, in Europe, and had them before democracy, so that they never rebelled against the aristocracy, and trust their government – and still (unfortunately) do.

    The French rebelled against aristocracy and church, and were already the most backward government in Europe by the time of the revolution. They still retain self righteousness of the ‘liberty equality fraternity’ and the fantasy that they led the world with the revolution rather than they were the rebellion against modernity.

    The English rebelled against France and Spain in particular, the church in general, and the continent in general and did not have the fracture or diversity of the French, so they retained internal trust. The empire gave them the resource (commerce) curse, and when the empire collapsed they followed the Spanish into fantasy-preservation without the resources for it and lost their industrial base as well. So they profit by becoming a virtue signal and financial center while their continue their collapse.

    The Americans rebelled against the aristocracy but not the church, although the church was terribly weak (protestant) without the catholic institutions, land ownership, and political infrastructure, and and could retain the English (Scandinavian) raiding (pirate) culture because they were expansionary at all times.

    So the “Demand for Authority” took very different routes across the Atlantic continent and european plain given the different trust-paths to modernity.

    But, as you’ve said this tendency is ANCIENT, and as Candice Mary is trying to get across to me, the maternalism – heaviest in France because of the original Venus cult’s influence – less so in Germany, non-existent in the slavic lands, but still dominating and dominant the south, …. that demand is constant over time. So we have lower trust south all around (maternal), with demand for family, church, and hierarchy. While we have the germans, germanic Scandinavians (west), Finnio-russian Scandinavians, and then the slavs, and southern slavs, each retaining…. ok. I get it.

    And that demand never changed because it was a constant in old (south eastern) Europe in antiquity since they had the least admixture from the north, were most similar to greek (llyrian), had much migration (Scythian), and were ruled by old europeans (byzantines), then by ottomans (muslims), so they never had the northern influences other than during Austro-hungarians.

    ok. ok. I can start to see how this works now. (Why is it that you, more than anyone, point me in the right direction when I am off?) thank you.

    (Thinking: Damn …. DEMAND FOR AUTHORITY (A SET OF INSTITUTIONS) + DEMAND FOR TRUST (FROM A SET OF INSTIUTUTIONS) + Degree of paternalism from raiding, and then from trade, vs demand for maternalism as resistance, vs settled-landed mixed demand. yep. demand for trusted authority from the set of available institutions given the means of available production.)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-17 18:46:00 UTC

  • “Who is driving social Marxism across the globe, and why?”— THE CORRECT ANSWER

    —“Who is driving social Marxism across the globe, and why?”—

    THE CORRECT ANSWER

    —”Who is driving social Marxism across the globe, and why?”—-

    If you mean Cultural Marxism, then that… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=279796262617271&id=100017606988153

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-17 18:16:15 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1030518685193134080

  • My answer to Who is driving social Marxism across the globe, and why?

    My answer to Who is driving social Marxism across the globe, and why? https://www.quora.com/Who-is-driving-social-Marxism-across-the-globe-and-why/answer/Curt-Doolittle?srid=u4Qv

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-17 18:14:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1030518122493685760

  • My answer to Who is driving social Marxism across the globe, and why?

    My answer to Who is driving social Marxism across the globe, and why? https://www.quora.com/Who-is-driving-social-Marxism-across-the-globe-and-why/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=ad7f5d9f

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-17 18:13:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1030518102843371521

  • UNIVERSITIES ARE HOMOGENOUS AND LIBERAL (except in the only degrees that matter)

    UNIVERSITIES ARE HOMOGENOUS AND LIBERAL
    (except in the only degrees that matter)
    (via Hicks)

    https://www.nas.org/articles/homogenous_political_affiliations_of_elite_liberal

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-17 17:33:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1030507827650080768

  • “Who is driving social Marxism across the globe, and why?”— THE CORRECT ANSWER

    —“Who is driving social Marxism across the globe, and why?”—

    THE CORRECT ANSWER

    —”Who is driving social Marxism across the globe, and why?”—-

    If you mean Cultural Marxism, then that was the third generational failure of the Ashkenazi Jews:

    1 – Labor Communism (Marx), Generation 1

    2 – State Socialism (Trotsky/Lenin/Mao/(Many), Generation 2

    3 – Academic Cultural Marxism (The Frankfurt School: Adorno et al.). Generation 3

    4 – But upon the failure of all three the French supplied Postmodernism (Derrida, Foucault), and all the university, media, and state actors that had over-invested in the three generational failures of marxism converted to postmodernism.

    Postmodernism states that there is no truth, no science, no reason, only power, and as such, by use of ideology, propaganda, academy, and media, the ‘Revolution’ against meritocracy (western civilization) can be achieved by the power of words and voting instead of by ideas, science, reason, and achievement.

    It’s worth noting that The French (always europe’s enemy) had the most authoritarian government in Europe prior to its revolution, the most authoritarian after the revolution, and remains the most authoritarian in Europe today. With Rousseau providing the authoritarian arguments. Arguments that were first copied by the (timid) Germans, then the Rebellious Ashkenazis (Marxists). And horridly implemented by the Soviets, the Maoists, and the Cambodians. And still the cause of South American and Indian poverty.

    5 – If we look at the chief propagandists in the west, it’s single women, immigrants, the lower middle class, lower class, underclass, and American jews. As always since American jews are superior competitors in verbal presentation, they provide a disproportionate influence in Entertainment, Entertainment Media, News, Pseudosciences, and Propaganda. (This is easily measured by random sampling of authors of daily propaganda.)

    Note: Read Paul Fussel’s “Class” for an improvement on marxist class theory. It’s Fussel’s categories I refer to, because they roughly reflect (a) occupational hierarchy, (b) IQ hierarchy, and as such, they match the data.

    “Defectors”

    One thing I did not expect was that while the majority of white americans are of german decent (not english), the germans are MUCH LESS likely to serve the country in the military, and the burden is HEAVILY born by the Anglo – Scotts-Irish demographics. Likewise, the Germans and the Puritans of New England are more likely to ‘defect’ into marxism, socialism, postmodernism, and the Scandinavians of the north central even more likely to defect.

    Note: a friend counsels that the ‘defect’ has been on the continent forever, and goes back to Heraclitus. So the ‘defect’ we see in German Americans, if not all but anglo-scots-iris (southerners). And therefore the question is, what is this defect, and how do we name it operationally?

    (Really)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-17 14:16:00 UTC

  • photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_152793348650897/39282969_279722852624612_154275

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_152793348650897/39282969_279722852624612_154275

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_152793348650897/39282969_279722852624612_1542758244202577920_o_279722845957946.jpg POLITICAL ARGUMENT: THE CORRECT ANSWER (AND A PAINFUL TRUTH)

    (dysgenia requires theft and deceit)

    —-“How can you present facts in a political conversation without sounding biased? (https://www.quora.com/How-can-you-present-facts-in-a-political-conversation-without-sounding-biased)?”—-

    By **explaining both sides **and demonstrating that your argument remains superior in some way or other, or explaining that the other’s argument relies upon **falsehood or theft **…. which is what you should always do anyway.

    **Truth** is a bias, it is just a decidable bias instead of a preferential one.

    **Theft** (involuntary transfer) and moralizing (using guilt as means of forcing involuntary transfer) is decidable, and not a bias.

    Demonstrate that an argument is either **false** or causes i**nvoluntary transfer** (imposition of costs upon the demonstrated investments of others) and you have covered the two decision criteria that are not open to opinion.

    The sophist will attempt to argue for a good. A **preference** or a **good** is subjective. Anything that is not false or involuntary (directly or indirectly) is a candidate good. That something is a candidate good does not mean one can engage in **falsehood, ridicule, shaming, rallying, and involuntary transfer** in order to achieve that candidate good.

    It is very difficult to argue against **Truth and Voluntary Exchange**, using advocacy of **Falsehood, Shaming, and Thef**t. Explaining to people they are engaged in falsehood, coercion, and attempted theft produces humiliation. But it wins the argument.

    It just so happens that the **majority of arguments **in favor of preferences and candidate goods are made by falsehoods, shaming and theft, rather than truths and voluntary exchanges.

    **All political differences **are determined reducible to preferences for **dysgenic** (irresponsible reproduction) that forces the costs of one’s decisions on the polity, and **eugenic** (responsible reproduction) that forces one to bear the costs of one’s decisions. The reason being that the female and underclass incentive is dysgenic (The Equalitarian Herd), and the male and middle and upper class incentive is eugenic (The Meritocratic Packs). With the general outcome being the military and entrepreneurial class aligning with the working, middle, and upper middle classes, while the priestly, academic, and political classes aligning with the underclasses. In other words, **the immoral top and bottom against the moral middle.**

    Since **dysgenia depends upon theft**, it is usually argued falsely, which is why **marxism** (pseudoscience) and **postmodernism** (pseudo-rationalism), and **feminism** (pseudo-moralism) were invented to circumvent Darwin (biological evolution), Spencer (social evolution), and Nietzsche (moral evolution).

    **Marxism, Postmodernism, Feminism: They needed an elaborate set of lies.**POLITICAL ARGUMENT: THE CORRECT ANSWER (AND A PAINFUL TRUTH)

    (dysgenia requires theft and deceit)

    —-“How can you present facts in a political conversation without sounding biased? (https://www.quora.com/How-can-you-present-facts-in-a-political-conversation-without-sounding-biased)?”—-

    By **explaining both sides **and demonstrating that your argument remains superior in some way or other, or explaining that the other’s argument relies upon **falsehood or theft **…. which is what you should always do anyway.

    **Truth** is a bias, it is just a decidable bias instead of a preferential one.

    **Theft** (involuntary transfer) and moralizing (using guilt as means of forcing involuntary transfer) is decidable, and not a bias.

    Demonstrate that an argument is either **false** or causes i**nvoluntary transfer** (imposition of costs upon the demonstrated investments of others) and you have covered the two decision criteria that are not open to opinion.

    The sophist will attempt to argue for a good. A **preference** or a **good** is subjective. Anything that is not false or involuntary (directly or indirectly) is a candidate good. That something is a candidate good does not mean one can engage in **falsehood, ridicule, shaming, rallying, and involuntary transfer** in order to achieve that candidate good.

    It is very difficult to argue against **Truth and Voluntary Exchange**, using advocacy of **Falsehood, Shaming, and Thef**t. Explaining to people they are engaged in falsehood, coercion, and attempted theft produces humiliation. But it wins the argument.

    It just so happens that the **majority of arguments **in favor of preferences and candidate goods are made by falsehoods, shaming and theft, rather than truths and voluntary exchanges.

    **All political differences **are determined reducible to preferences for **dysgenic** (irresponsible reproduction) that forces the costs of one’s decisions on the polity, and **eugenic** (responsible reproduction) that forces one to bear the costs of one’s decisions. The reason being that the female and underclass incentive is dysgenic (The Equalitarian Herd), and the male and middle and upper class incentive is eugenic (The Meritocratic Packs). With the general outcome being the military and entrepreneurial class aligning with the working, middle, and upper middle classes, while the priestly, academic, and political classes aligning with the underclasses. In other words, **the immoral top and bottom against the moral middle.**

    Since **dysgenia depends upon theft**, it is usually argued falsely, which is why **marxism** (pseudoscience) and **postmodernism** (pseudo-rationalism), and **feminism** (pseudo-moralism) were invented to circumvent Darwin (biological evolution), Spencer (social evolution), and Nietzsche (moral evolution).

    **Marxism, Postmodernism, Feminism: They needed an elaborate set of lies.**

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-17 12:20:00 UTC

  • photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_dJ9jhts2Ng/39282969_279722852624612_15427582442

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_dJ9jhts2Ng/39282969_279722852624612_15427582442

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_dJ9jhts2Ng/39282969_279722852624612_1542758244202577920_o_279722845957946.jpg POLITICAL ARGUMENT: THE CORRECT ANSWER (AND A PAINFUL TRUTH)

    (dysgenia requires theft and deceit)

    —-“How can you present facts in a political conversation without sounding biased? (https://www.quora.com/How-can-you-present-facts-in-a-political-conversation-without-sounding-biased)?”—-

    By **explaining both sides **and demonstrating that your argument remains superior in some way or other, or explaining that the other’s argument relies upon **falsehood or theft **…. which is what you should always do anyway.

    **Truth** is a bias, it is just a decidable bias instead of a preferential one.

    **Theft** (involuntary transfer) and moralizing (using guilt as means of forcing involuntary transfer) is decidable, and not a bias.

    Demonstrate that an argument is either **false** or causes i**nvoluntary transfer** (imposition of costs upon the demonstrated investments of others) and you have covered the two decision criteria that are not open to opinion.

    The sophist will attempt to argue for a good. A **preference** or a **good** is subjective. Anything that is not false or involuntary (directly or indirectly) is a candidate good. That something is a candidate good does not mean one can engage in **falsehood, ridicule, shaming, rallying, and involuntary transfer** in order to achieve that candidate good.

    It is very difficult to argue against **Truth and Voluntary Exchange**, using advocacy of **Falsehood, Shaming, and Thef**t. Explaining to people they are engaged in falsehood, coercion, and attempted theft produces humiliation. But it wins the argument.

    It just so happens that the **majority of arguments **in favor of preferences and candidate goods are made by falsehoods, shaming and theft, rather than truths and voluntary exchanges.

    **All political differences **are determined reducible to preferences for **dysgenic** (irresponsible reproduction) that forces the costs of one’s decisions on the polity, and **eugenic** (responsible reproduction) that forces one to bear the costs of one’s decisions. The reason being that the female and underclass incentive is dysgenic (The Equalitarian Herd), and the male and middle and upper class incentive is eugenic (The Meritocratic Packs). With the general outcome being the military and entrepreneurial class aligning with the working, middle, and upper middle classes, while the priestly, academic, and political classes aligning with the underclasses. In other words, **the immoral top and bottom against the moral middle.**

    Since **dysgenia depends upon theft**, it is usually argued falsely, which is why **marxism** (pseudoscience) and **postmodernism** (pseudo-rationalism), and **feminism** (pseudo-moralism) were invented to circumvent Darwin (biological evolution), Spencer (social evolution), and Nietzsche (moral evolution).

    **Marxism, Postmodernism, Feminism: They needed an elaborate set of lies.**POLITICAL ARGUMENT: THE CORRECT ANSWER (AND A PAINFUL TRUTH)

    (dysgenia requires theft and deceit)

    —-“How can you present facts in a political conversation without sounding biased? (https://www.quora.com/How-can-you-present-facts-in-a-political-conversation-without-sounding-biased)?”—-

    By **explaining both sides **and demonstrating that your argument remains superior in some way or other, or explaining that the other’s argument relies upon **falsehood or theft **…. which is what you should always do anyway.

    **Truth** is a bias, it is just a decidable bias instead of a preferential one.

    **Theft** (involuntary transfer) and moralizing (using guilt as means of forcing involuntary transfer) is decidable, and not a bias.

    Demonstrate that an argument is either **false** or causes i**nvoluntary transfer** (imposition of costs upon the demonstrated investments of others) and you have covered the two decision criteria that are not open to opinion.

    The sophist will attempt to argue for a good. A **preference** or a **good** is subjective. Anything that is not false or involuntary (directly or indirectly) is a candidate good. That something is a candidate good does not mean one can engage in **falsehood, ridicule, shaming, rallying, and involuntary transfer** in order to achieve that candidate good.

    It is very difficult to argue against **Truth and Voluntary Exchange**, using advocacy of **Falsehood, Shaming, and Thef**t. Explaining to people they are engaged in falsehood, coercion, and attempted theft produces humiliation. But it wins the argument.

    It just so happens that the **majority of arguments **in favor of preferences and candidate goods are made by falsehoods, shaming and theft, rather than truths and voluntary exchanges.

    **All political differences **are determined reducible to preferences for **dysgenic** (irresponsible reproduction) that forces the costs of one’s decisions on the polity, and **eugenic** (responsible reproduction) that forces one to bear the costs of one’s decisions. The reason being that the female and underclass incentive is dysgenic (The Equalitarian Herd), and the male and middle and upper class incentive is eugenic (The Meritocratic Packs). With the general outcome being the military and entrepreneurial class aligning with the working, middle, and upper middle classes, while the priestly, academic, and political classes aligning with the underclasses. In other words, **the immoral top and bottom against the moral middle.**

    Since **dysgenia depends upon theft**, it is usually argued falsely, which is why **marxism** (pseudoscience) and **postmodernism** (pseudo-rationalism), and **feminism** (pseudo-moralism) were invented to circumvent Darwin (biological evolution), Spencer (social evolution), and Nietzsche (moral evolution).

    **Marxism, Postmodernism, Feminism: They needed an elaborate set of lies.**

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-17 12:20:00 UTC

  • photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_152793348650897/39389273_279119466018284_791128

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_152793348650897/39389273_279119466018284_791128

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_152793348650897/39389273_279119466018284_7911288583380533248_o_279119459351618.jpg Joseph SmithThis is why segregation will be ineffective. The inertia of their religion dictates they permanently instigate class warfare explicitly, Egalitarianism/oppression narrative is simply the strategy but not the ideological impetus compelling them, which is power at any price. Segregation only kicks the can down the road. They must be ruled, and brutally.Aug 17, 2018 7:37amEric Danelaw— “They must be ruled, and brutally.”—

    Secession then, is just a means to an end.Aug 17, 2018 9:20amJoseph SmithWe must secede and lick our wounds/gather resources and political will but the ultimate goal must be to rule them. They are a danger to themselves and to us if granted agency. Seems only two options: subjugation and domestication or the bullet.Aug 17, 2018 9:55am

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-16 19:58:00 UTC

  • We are just producing opportunity. An opportunity that doesn’t come around very

    We are just producing opportunity. An opportunity that doesn’t come around very often. The opportunity to change the course of history. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-16 19:01:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1030167736205430784

    Reply addressees: @enlightdark

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1029836654796787713

    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/1029836654796787713