Curt Doolittle

Form: Argument

  • It does not ask all muslims take responsibility for routing out all those that t

    It does not ask all muslims take responsibility for routing out all those that they suspect of radicalism.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-14 00:18:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/665322887721517058

    Reply addressees: @spulliam @conradhackett

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/665321431631138816

    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/665321431631138816

  • CHIVALRY AND MONOGAMY: THE FEMALE’S PRICE FOR HER LIBERTY A chivalrous man acts

    CHIVALRY AND MONOGAMY: THE FEMALE’S PRICE FOR HER LIBERTY

    A chivalrous man acts chivalrously in exchange for attention, grace, femininity, beauty and courtesy. The difference between the super-predator and the gentlemen-caretaker is merely the incentive provided to behave as such by women. There is no free ride for the female. Either we get attention and respect, or there is no reason to preserve the pretense of civility, and no currency in chivalry. Chivalry was invented by the church as a means of providing social status for service rather than predation. Feminism is a kleptocratic philosophy – they want everything without paying for it. Seemingly ignorant of the fact that it is just as easy to discipline, abuse, and enslave women as it is to treat them with care. Like marriage, chivalry is a price women pay for their relative liberty, despite their free passage through man’s universe. This is unpleasant, impolitic, but entirely true. Incentives matter.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-13 13:38:00 UTC

  • THE JUDICIOUS USE OF FEAR AND VIOLENCE How do we prevent the rise of the corpora

    THE JUDICIOUS USE OF FEAR AND VIOLENCE

    How do we prevent the rise of the corporate state over the interest of kin, tribe and nation? Fear. The purpose of kings is to deny people an alternative. It is not that kings are good. It is that no government is good. The only goods are the market for goods and services in which competition provides incentives to produce and consume; the market for commons in which prevention of privatization provides incentives to invest in long term returns; and the ostracization from both markets if one fails to consume, product and invest. The most moral use of violence is in the prevention of parasitism leaving man only productivity as a means of survival. An armed militia provides power-seekers fear. The sheriff and judiciary provide abusers with fear. The king is merely evidence that the militia, sheriff, and judiciary succeed in the use of fear. For it is the judicious use of fear that eliminates the need for judicious use of violence.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-13 13:30:00 UTC

  • WHAT CONSTITUTES A TRUTHFUL RELIGION (important) I have a soul. I can observe it

    WHAT CONSTITUTES A TRUTHFUL RELIGION

    (important)

    I have a soul. I can observe it through introspection. It is a full accounting of my sins, offset by a selective accounting of my acts of charity. I know the balance of that account. We all know the balance of that account – even if we fear to look at it. The chief value of an all-knowing god, is as a psychological device that assists us in looking at the transactions in, and balance of, that account, without any ability to lie to ourselves. The chief value of confession is to publicly admit this balance, and use peer pressure to eliminate any deficit.

    Whether that soul is eternal is not a question – of course it is. We can commit no sin or perform no charity without the existence of others to sin or perform charity against. Our actions leave a permanent record in the universe. We live on eternally in the changes to the universe that we have made by our actions. That is what acting means: to alter the course of events. Each action does so. That our simple human minds need to anthropomorphize these ideas so that they are easier for the ignorant, dim, and fearful to grasp is no more surprising than that children need parables, myths, legends, and fairy tales to grasp basic concepts using models for concepts otherwise beyond their experience.

    This scientific view of one’s sould is not without what humans consider supernatural properties however. It is increasingly clear that we do not understand the structure of matter, space, and time, and that our perception of matter, space, and time, is limited to that in which we can act. If even some small part of our understanding of the universe is true, then it is entirely possible that it matters not only how we act, but how we think, and what we believe, and how others remember us.

    Given that the worst case argument we can construct about supernatural forces is to say “I do not know, but it places no cost upon me either way,” or that “I choose to act as if it is so because there is no penalty for doing so, but a benefit for doing so”, “and there are benefits to psychological rituals for all mankind”, we have enough justification for the conceptual use of one or more all knowing gods that assists our minds in confronting a full accounting of our actions, and the presumption of the possibility that collective ritual may in fact alter the structure of not only our minds in beneficial ways, but the minds of others, and potentially the structure of the universe in beneficial ways.

    Moreover, since it is increasingly clear that we are not cognizant of the power of our genes, our intuitions and our biases upon our minds and actions, it is not clear that there is an as yet unrecognized equivalent of a calculating system of some sort – ostensibly unaware – produced by the actions, thoughts and memories of all of us. I have no way of knowing one way or the other. But without knowing I will not fail to pay the cost of perpetuating what has worked for all of human history: rituals that bind us to one another through invocation of the submission-to-the-pack response ever present in our brain stems.

    Our understanding is overrated, because it is extremely limited. So in these cases I prefer to do what is beneficial for men and man, assuming that the recipe we follow for collective religious ritual is causing us to produce some product that I do not understand, rather than to write it off as a psychological crutch or weakness. It’s just science. How we justify this particular thing as purely scientific and useful, rational, psychological or mystical is not important to me. These are just languages for different levels of abstraction, all of which describe the same process and its effects.

    As such I merely prefer the least false set of beliefs, and the most constructive forms of ritual. And those are, from my knowledge: the practice of sport, the discipline of stoic mindfulness, the sacredness of nature, the ceremonial request for wisdom from, and the ceremonial thanks to our heroes, the gathering of souls in the practice of all of the above, and our surrender to the pack as a means of overcoming our petty differences and interests.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-12 09:06:00 UTC

  • DEPORTATION. IT’S EASY BY COMPARISON. PAY NOW OR PAY LATER. If we can Conquer th

    DEPORTATION. IT’S EASY BY COMPARISON. PAY NOW OR PAY LATER.

    If we can Conquer the Romans, kick the Muslims and Jews out of Spain, the Turks out of Europa, Conquer Napoleon, Conquer the Nazis, Fascists and communists, drive the Russians out of Europe, and reduce multiple modern nations to the stone age, we can quite easily round up twenty million unarmed invaders and send them packing against their will. If we learned anything from emancipation of the slaves it is that we should have packed them up and sent them home, and prevented the civil war, half a million deaths, the civil rights movement, the destruction of our cities, the rise of the imperial american government, and the alliance between blacks, feminists, jews and catholics that ended the american experiment. The invasion of southern Spanish speaking amerindians and African, middle eastern, and central Asian muslims all of who possess cultural and ideological weaponry as well as extreme rates of reproduction, will result in far worse than the civil war. And people like me will ensure that it does.

    Pay now or pay later, but we will pay one way or the other.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-12 07:50:00 UTC

  • WE STILL JUSTIFY THE MARRIAGE CONTRACT? (feminist trigger warning)(individualist

    https://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/3phro9/renegotiating_the_marriage_contract/CAN WE STILL JUSTIFY THE MARRIAGE CONTRACT?

    (feminist trigger warning)(individualist trigger warning)

    RE: (https://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/3phro9/renegotiating_the_marriage_contract/ )

    1) Pretty good analysis. I’d recommend reading the origin and development of the family and property by Engels. That is a more accurate history. It’s short and well written.

    2) Biologically, females were treated as (and therefore were) our property under hostile competition, they were an exchange of property between males in the pastoral era’s development of formal property, and ‘love’ (mate selection by attraction) is historically, a luxury good (and rare) – even if terribly eugenic for selection purposes. The development of property is what allowed males to re-take control of reproduction from females.

    3) Polygamy was and is practiced by the majority of cultures, but all major religions and philosophies attempted to break this practice in order to ‘soak up’ the majority of ‘troublesome’ males who otherwise failed to reproduce (something like 30% of males failed to reproduce – although I have seen estimated numbers as high at 70%). And even once we encounter monogamy (property), something like 20-25% of births are caused by mates outside of marriage (which is a dirty secret that is showing up now that we have massive databases of family trees combined with genetics.)

    4) Human Females still demonstrate r-selection behavior, much less in-group protection (more cheating), and lower loyalty. They are practical creatures. For most of history women were considered the root of all evil, and it was only in the victorian era that we stated otherwise – although this compromises the majority of our current literature.

    5) One can position marriage as a compromise between reproductive strategies; or as a social convenience necessary for peace and prosperity; or as a epistemological necessity for the purpose of meritocratic calculation of reproductive utility, required of an advanced society and economy; Or all of the above. My standing concern is that women have more CONTROL than men do, and men higher RISK and shorter LIVES than women do. So to some degree, for us to persist, women remain a herd men control, or a herd other men control. Women are a resource – an expensive resource.

    6) So under INDIVIDUALISM it is difficult to make take the position that marriage is beneficial for either man or woman. Under NATIONALISM (or tribalism or kinship) it is difficult to conceive of a condition under which males retain access to females without the cooperation, assistance, defense, of other males.

    7) I want to protect my genes and my relations so I want my female kin to be free to do the best they can WITHOUT betraying my male relations control of the reproductive resource of women. In other words, private benefit of free reproduction is limited by public harm from free reproduction, because organization into groups matters.

    I think the last is the least pleasant most accurate analysis.

    And (unpleasantly) that is where I end up.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-10 07:50:00 UTC

  • Just for what it’s worth, I argue aristocracy is best for all races, nations, tr

    Just for what it’s worth, I argue aristocracy is best for all races, nations, tribes, and families. I don’t do the racism thing

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-08 21:39:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/663470871898669056

    Reply addressees: @WhittierPal

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/663450956739178496

    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/663450956739178496

  • UM NO. CREATIVITY IS NOT SEPARATE FROM INTELLIGENCE. BUT TASK SWITCHING REDUCES

    UM NO. CREATIVITY IS NOT SEPARATE FROM INTELLIGENCE. BUT TASK SWITCHING REDUCES CREATIVITY.

    (hence why i tell everyone that I can teach them to be creative, but not smart)

    Are intelligence and creativity really so different?. Fluid intelligence, executive processes, and strategy use in divergent thinking (Article) Nusbaum, E.C. , Silvia, P.J. Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina, Greensboro, United States

    Abstract

    Contemporary creativity research views intelligence and creativity as essentially unrelated abilities, and many studies have found only modest correlations between them. The present research, based on improved approaches to creativity assessment and latent variable modeling, proposes that fluid and executive cognition is in fact central to creative thought. In Study 1, the substantial effect of fluid intelligence (Gf) on creativity was mediated by executive switching, the number of times people switched idea categories during the divergent thinking tasks. In Study 2, half the sample was given an effective strategy for an unusual uses task. The strategy condition interacted with Gf: people high in Gf did better when given the strategy, consistent with their higher ability to maintain access to it and use it despite interference. Taken together, the findings suggest that divergent thinking is more convergent than modern creativity theories presume. © 2010 Elsevier Inc.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-08 08:19:00 UTC

  • REVOLUTION IS A SIMPLE MATTER Revolution requires (a) one weapon: fire (b) short

    REVOLUTION IS A SIMPLE MATTER

    Revolution requires (a) one weapon: fire (b) shorting power lines (c) blocking roads (d) making police, fire and emergency workers fear to leave their barracks (e) encouraging the military to intervene, (f) collapsing both the economy and the government by the persistence of military occupation, and slowly enfranchising the military so that they take over the government.

    We pushed them out of europe before. We can push them out again. If we allied with the russians and the chinese we could push them out of existence. They are the enemy of libertarian and authoritarian civilization alike.

    The truth is enough. The truth at all costs.

    One needs incentive (our genocide), moral authority (we have been lied to), something to demand (a radical restructuring of government), a plan for transition (a body of thought), and a plan by which we raise the cost of the status quo until there is no alternative.

    Liberty in our lifetimes.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-01 10:49:00 UTC

  • Repeat after me: “I agree to rule; to rule of law; to rule by the prohibition of

    Repeat after me:

    “I agree to rule; to rule of law; to rule by the prohibition of free riding upon the productivity of others; to take responsibility for rule; to pay the costs of my rule; and to deny others the ability to rule, so that I, my kin, my people, and mankind, may evolve in sovereignty, productivity and prosperity. I am man. I am sovereign. And I promise to be warrior, sheriff, judge and legislator.”

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-26 10:44:00 UTC