Curt Doolittle

Form: Argument

  • My argument is always the same. Separate the feminine/r-selected/herd/dysgenic p

    My argument is always the same. Separate the feminine/r-selected/herd/dysgenic pool from the masculine/k-selected/pack/eugenic pool. We are wealthy enough to afford the production of preferred but DIFFERENT commons, and if the dysgenic herd wants to produce their preferred commons and the eugenic pack wants to produce their preferred commons the only thing preventing both achieving their goals is the current monopoly commons. The solution is to separate (secede) and devolve normative regulation and commons production to the groups and let them speciate. The question MIGHT be race, but it’s not. It’s genetic strategy. The dysgenic and the eugenic. I’m perfectly happy if you folks want to construct india and brazil as long as those of us who want otherwise continue the western tradition of eugenic social order and continuous production of prosperity.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-12 18:41:00 UTC

  • THE COMING CIVIL WAR WILL NOT BE OVER RACE It is, and will be war over SPECIATIO

    THE COMING CIVIL WAR WILL NOT BE OVER RACE

    It is, and will be war over SPECIATION. Whether we will regress into the equalitarian herd, or evolve into hierarchical packs. We are wealthy enough to speciate. Each side wants to produce commons that suit its method of speciation: herd(r), or pack(k). Since this question is not possible to resolve by compromise, our only choice is separation. This means that some significant portion of the ingroup will exit. And this is politically, economically, strategically, and evolutionarily desirable. Unfortunately the herd always fears the pack, and will resist it.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-12 15:46:00 UTC

  • THE FACT THAT I (WE) HAVE BOTH ADVOCATES AND CRITICS IS EVIDENCE OF THE VERACITY

    THE FACT THAT I (WE) HAVE BOTH ADVOCATES AND CRITICS IS EVIDENCE OF THE VERACITY OF THE IDEAS

    —“Hello, I hear you’re a Bad Man with some extreme views. Someone posted screen caps of you. Your position seemed reasonable to me so thought I’d friend request you. We have mutual friends who are in both camps about you: pro and against.”— A New Friend

    Hi. Well, ‘bad man’ is probably due to my online persona which is a little over the top for marketing (and education) purposes.

    The fact that I have pro and against camps is merely evidence of the success of the system of thought generating debate. (one way or another at least men have something worthy of debate).

    The truth is I CANNOT FIND A CRITIC with any argument any longer. All I can find is people who have yet to understand what I argue, or who argue the sufficiency of the solution, or who argue the practicality of the solution. In general – and I am serious – it is extremely unlikely that for the next few generations at least (if ever), anyone will propose a counter argument any more than they will propose one counter to darwin…. 😉

    (Seriously, I have had no critic emerge other than the sufficiency of the argument, to provide a via-positiva solution to satisfy the market demand for a personal philosophy. And it will become very clear over the coming months that what I said would happen, has – that people who want to produce the via positiva around the aesthetic (elite), martial (physical) and the emotional (stoicism), have emerged to satisfy that market demand – meaning we will in fact produce physical, emotional, and intellectual programs with coherent and consistent themes. The fact that we have reached critical mass recently is probably becoming obvious – even if that critical mass has come more so from the personal philosophical side of the movement than the analytical that I produce.)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-12 15:12:00 UTC

  • Ergo the issue is not empire nor monarchy, but ETHNICITY. ie: ethnocentrism is t

    Ergo the issue is not empire nor monarchy, but ETHNICITY. ie: ethnocentrism is the optimum group evolutionary strategy, and trading ethnocentricity for rents at the cost of multicultural conflict is a short term win at long term cost.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-11 16:23:31 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1061655670561431552

    Reply addressees: @Lord_Keynes2

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1061650366213701632

    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/1061650366213701632

  • Empires capture trade routes. Monarchies captured productive land. Both centrali

    Empires capture trade routes. Monarchies captured productive land. Both centralize rents in exchange for increasing local economic velocity. Study of european castle distribution illustrates rather easily the exceptional relationship between martial+judicial and std of living.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-11 16:22:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1061655413962301441

    Reply addressees: @Lord_Keynes2

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1061650366213701632

    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/1061650366213701632

  • WHY ISN’T NEGLIGENT GENOCIDE A CRIME? by Eli Harman If “negligent homicide” is a

    WHY ISN’T NEGLIGENT GENOCIDE A CRIME?

    by Eli Harman

    If “negligent homicide” is a thing? Why not “negligent genocide?”

    It’s possible that some misguided fools genuinely believe that a world teeming with “crossbreeds” with no identity and no culture is a good and beautiful thing. I never thought of it that way.

    I always appreciate the historical accomplishments of Western, meaning white, civilization and mourned their possibly inevitable future loss. I say “possibly inevitable” because when I gave my loyalty to individualist principles, similar to Jordan Peterson’s, I didn’t see any way to prevent it. Nothing to do but make that leap and hope for the best.

    But we have all the evidence we need now to banish hope. Not one great, city, nation, or civilization has been improved by the inclusion of dependent, third world, hordes. And everywhere the process has gotten suitably advanced is a total disaster.

    London used to be capital of a great empire. Now it’s the capital of acid attacks. Detroit used to be an unmatched industrial center. Now it’s rotting back into the weeds.

    Multiculturalism doesn’t lead to “Star Trek.” It leads to Brazil or South Africa. But it turns out that preventing that is a simple matter of abandoning unworkable and undesirable individualist principles. If any fools still don’t understand, it’s because they are willfully ignorant. That is not a valid excuse any longer. All the evidence one needs is readily available.

    But some of our would-be genociders are not ignorant, misguided, nor foolish.

    They are deadly serious.

    For them, “Star Trek” was never the point.

    Only the destruction of Western Civilization.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-11 12:55:00 UTC

  • CHRISTIAN (FEDERATED) MONARCHIES (RULE OF LAW KINGS) ARE THE OPTIMUM POLITICAL O

    CHRISTIAN (FEDERATED) MONARCHIES (RULE OF LAW KINGS) ARE THE OPTIMUM POLITICAL ORDER

    @Lord_Keynes2

    Monarchs have a very bad record. They engage in war and conquest, acquire multi-ethnic empires, become cosmopolitans, and then it all falls apart: e.g., Ottoman empire, Russian empire, Austro-Hungarian empire, etc.

    Replying to @Lord_Keynes2

    I notice you aren’t mentioning the german manorial states, the scandinavian, the french polish or italian….

    Replying to @Lord_Keynes2

    Empires capture trade routes. Monarchies captured productive land. Both centralize rents in exchange for increasing local economic velocity. Study of european castle distribution illustrates rather easily the exceptional relationship between martial+judicial and std of living.

    Replying to @Lord_Keynes2

    Ergo the issue is not empire nor monarchy, but ETHNICITY. ie: ethnocentrism is the optimum group evolutionary strategy, and trading ethnocentricity for rents at the cost of multicultural conflict is a short term win at long term cost.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-11 11:25:00 UTC

  • THE EXPERIMENT IS OVER AND THE JURY IS IN The jury is in. Monarchs produce bette

    THE EXPERIMENT IS OVER AND THE JURY IS IN

    The jury is in.

    Monarchs produce better commons. the fewer the people in politics the better. The more powerful the law in resisting the king, a government, or each other, and the more powerful the militia in resisting all above, the better.

    Liberalism in the sense of rule of law won.

    Monarchy in the sense of production of commons won.

    Fascism in the sense of state nationalism, ethnocentrism, state capitalism, and intolerance for competition on other than economic means, won.

    Why? it’s the optimum decision making structure because it is the optimum means of accommodating differences in knowledge and incentives.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-11 10:58:00 UTC

  • So the only question of any merit is, which of the strategies will achieve the n

    So the only question of any merit is, which of the strategies will achieve the necessary ends, and will any of them come at lower cost? Not, ‘there is a low cost I am wiling to bear for this good’.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-08 19:14:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060611495308992512

    Reply addressees: @readomain

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060608670025875462

    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/1060608670025875462

  • Why is this Complicated? Seirously?

    Why is this complicated? Seriously. Disapproval, Shaming, Ridiculing in response to an attempted theft or fraud vs. Disapproval Shaming, Ridiculing in response to covering an attempted theft or fraud. Now, for some reason, it’s floating around, as DSR is a universal vs a particular: in other words, shaming people for a crime rather than for not letting them commit a crime.