Curt Doolittle

Category: Politics, Power, and Governance

  • LIBERTY IN OUR LIFETIMES! Aristocratic Egalitarianism + Propertarianism + Operat

    LIBERTY IN OUR LIFETIMES!

    Aristocratic Egalitarianism + Propertarianism + Operationalism (Praxeology/Ethical Realism)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-08 04:49:00 UTC

  • Obtaining Liberty In Our Lifetime

    LIBERTY IN OUR LIFETIME [A]phoristic arguments, programmatic as they may be, are ideologically utilitarian, and place limited burden on the speaker. They teach the intuition through use and repetition, better than verbose and detailed arguments. Conservatives (aristocratic egalitarians) understand this. Or at least intuit it. That is why they win the moral battle for votes, despite inferior intellectuals, and arational arguments. One may not see it, but look at how fast the work I have done, just since December, is spreading across the internet. My terminology alone is working its way into dialog. Thanks to the internet, we live in a new order, with new distribution channels. In the current order, the market for information is not controlled by the paradigm of the prior generation. One need not seek approval or permission from the establishment – only provide the market with product it demands. One can sell an idea, or, one can create demand for an idea. One can attempt to create demand for inadequate libertarianism, or one can satisfy demand for an adequate libertarianism. Liberty that satisfies demand. Liberty in our lifetimes. Aristocratic Egalitarianism. Aristocracy (liberty) of the willing.

    Ayelam Valentine Agaliba Anything that can be shown apriori can be demonstrated or translated empirically with higher confidence but not everything that is empirical can be demonstrated apriori. Curt Doolittle —“Anything that can be shown apriori can be demonstrated or translated empirically with higher confidence but not everything that is empirical can be demonstrated apriori.”— Wow. I… I really want to kiss you for that quote. But I think you would object. So I’ll just thank you profusely. lol

  • Obtaining Liberty In Our Lifetime

    LIBERTY IN OUR LIFETIME [A]phoristic arguments, programmatic as they may be, are ideologically utilitarian, and place limited burden on the speaker. They teach the intuition through use and repetition, better than verbose and detailed arguments. Conservatives (aristocratic egalitarians) understand this. Or at least intuit it. That is why they win the moral battle for votes, despite inferior intellectuals, and arational arguments. One may not see it, but look at how fast the work I have done, just since December, is spreading across the internet. My terminology alone is working its way into dialog. Thanks to the internet, we live in a new order, with new distribution channels. In the current order, the market for information is not controlled by the paradigm of the prior generation. One need not seek approval or permission from the establishment – only provide the market with product it demands. One can sell an idea, or, one can create demand for an idea. One can attempt to create demand for inadequate libertarianism, or one can satisfy demand for an adequate libertarianism. Liberty that satisfies demand. Liberty in our lifetimes. Aristocratic Egalitarianism. Aristocracy (liberty) of the willing.

    Ayelam Valentine Agaliba Anything that can be shown apriori can be demonstrated or translated empirically with higher confidence but not everything that is empirical can be demonstrated apriori. Curt Doolittle —“Anything that can be shown apriori can be demonstrated or translated empirically with higher confidence but not everything that is empirical can be demonstrated apriori.”— Wow. I… I really want to kiss you for that quote. But I think you would object. So I’ll just thank you profusely. lol

  • (TRIBE) NOT IDEOLOGY (GOVERNMENT) IS MOVING THE WORLD. Or let me put it this way

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fareed-zakaria-identity-not-ideology-is-moving-the-world/2014/07/03/631ff338-02d7-11e4-8572-4b1b969b6322_story.htmlIDENTITY (TRIBE) NOT IDEOLOGY (GOVERNMENT) IS MOVING THE WORLD.

    Or let me put it this way first:

    Tribalism is more important than ideology, since we’ve all adopted some form of consumer capitalism.

    Or let me put it this way second:

    The nonsense that america is an ‘idea’ (an ideology) is dead, and likewise, america’s tribes are asserting themselves in reaction to the death of ideology.

    A friend reminded me tonight that The Big Sort continues, and that americans are moving into culturally and tribally oriented areas. Meanwhile, we are also reproducing into castes on a scale that has never been possible before.

    The old political order of the nation state cum-heterogeneous empire, cannot survive this change. so we will either see more empire (tyranny) or more tribalism (city states). I prefer the latter, obviously.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-05 15:27:00 UTC

  • If we had as few as 100 guys making propertarian arguments in media, the way rus

    If we had as few as 100 guys making propertarian arguments in media, the way russians make propagandism, and rothbardians manufacture nonsense, we could effect the political debate.

    People are not really all that stupid. Propertarianism allows us to make very clear arguments. It may take a few repetitions for those arguments to ring true. But they will.

    I don’t know how long it will take to get 100 people capable of at least reciting propertarian arguments as talking points, because while the basic ideas are very simple, the number of nonsense arguments put out by progressives, rothbardians, classical liberals, and well meaning fools is hard to defeat.

    But staying on message works. It’s just time and effort once you have the message.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-05 15:11:00 UTC

  • WANT TO SECEDE AND JOIN SWITZERLAND (which would be brilliant for them) THE LIST

    http://www.blick.ch/news/ausland/umfrage-zu-staatenwechsel-80-prozent-der-schwaben-wollen-schweizer-werden-id2962950.htmlBAVARIANS WANT TO SECEDE AND JOIN SWITZERLAND

    (which would be brilliant for them)

    THE LIST (Where I can at least believe that there is a chance of majority support)

    Bavaria

    Venice

    Basques

    Catalonia

    Scotland

    Northern Ireland

    Texas (The team I root for)

    Six Californias

    Canada (everyone, just to get away from Quebec which drags down the country.)

    Kurdistan (turkey/kurds)

    Azerbaijan (Iran/Azerbaijanis)

    (The entire middle east really, whe be selective…)

    (Most of Africa from what I gather, but cannot comprehend)

    (Too many to list in India and Pakistan)

    Mongolia (china/mongolians)

    Tibet (china/tibetans)

    Xinjiang (china/Ughurs)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-05 08:40:00 UTC

  • WORST PRESIDENT -> LAST PRESIDENT? It would be very nice, given that Obama is th

    WORST PRESIDENT -> LAST PRESIDENT?

    It would be very nice, given that Obama is the worst president, if we could also make him the last president. And maybe the invasion and conquest we are experiencing from Latin America is the catalyst.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-05 01:43:00 UTC

  • Central Arguments : Defeating Three Red Queens

    (worth repeating)

    [M]ost of my arguments consist of various permutations that point out the fallacies of the libertarian, classical liberal, and progressive canons that do not account for the three genetic problems of (a) outbreeding and extension of kinship trust, (b) minimum pareto distribution of verbal intelligence, and (c) reduced genetic testosterone and therefore impulsivity, in the construction of a polity capable of the voluntary organization of production, and a sufficient velocity of exchange, such that we produce the constant innovation necessary to stay ahead of both the (i) genetic red queen, the (ii) malthusian red queen, and (iii) the technological red queen – and how those three red queens must be defeated in order to preserve economic prosperity that allows us to have whatever nonsensical social order we choose.

  • Central Arguments : Defeating Three Red Queens

    (worth repeating)

    [M]ost of my arguments consist of various permutations that point out the fallacies of the libertarian, classical liberal, and progressive canons that do not account for the three genetic problems of (a) outbreeding and extension of kinship trust, (b) minimum pareto distribution of verbal intelligence, and (c) reduced genetic testosterone and therefore impulsivity, in the construction of a polity capable of the voluntary organization of production, and a sufficient velocity of exchange, such that we produce the constant innovation necessary to stay ahead of both the (i) genetic red queen, the (ii) malthusian red queen, and (iii) the technological red queen – and how those three red queens must be defeated in order to preserve economic prosperity that allows us to have whatever nonsensical social order we choose.

  • Aristocracy and Tribalism, vs Democracy and Racism

    [D]amn it. I do not think of people’s race except in descriptive terms, the same way I point out the color of a shirt, car or house when describing it. There are great men. If I have to think of the person’s race to determine if they are great men, then they aren’t. Either a man carries his water or he doesn’t. His race doesn’t matter. If he makes it matter, then unfortunately I have to make it matter too. One of the reasons that I find Aristocracy so appealing, is that it’s appealing to EVERY TRIBE out there. It’s GOOD FOR ALL tribes. It doesn’t matter if this tribe or that tribe has better or worse individuals. What matters is that aristocracy can construct the educational and commercial order necessary for that tribe to participate in the global economy. The only reason race is a problem, is the denial of it, and the fantasy that all our tribes are equal. They aren’t any more equal than families are equal or classes are equal. We’re just not equal in our traits. But we are equal in the market where we are anonymous and invisible to one another, and equal in our interests in helping one another. [A]ristocracy around the world is the same. It’s the bottom 3/4 of any tribe that is materially different, and its in their interests and possibly in mankind’s interest to be genetically different. The only reason to desire large numbers is to conquer people or colonize people according to your favorite biases. I can’t for the life of me understand how the world would not be better constructed of 5M person city states rather than 1 billion person empire-states, except that big states can conduct bigger wars. If the head of tribe/state X race Y talks to the head of tribe/state A race B get together it probably will work out just fine if they want to conduct a trade. But the minute tribe C tries to increase its dominion nothing good comes out of it except war.