Curt Doolittle

Form: Critique

  • DUGIN REPEATING GERMAN, RUSSIAN, AND PLATO’S FAILURES He’s just trying to repeat

    DUGIN REPEATING GERMAN, RUSSIAN, AND PLATO’S FAILURES
    He’s just trying to repeat Hegel and Heidegger and justify returning to a world of an authorarian paternal state and maternal church, putting their heads in the agrarian sand, because Russian civilization is so low trust after the communists and Putin, that they have lost confidence (as is India now) that a future of self-respect is possible. Because they can only ‘fake’ self-respect as a ‘religion’ now. Russia keeps failing. It keeps failing for the same reasons. Christianity will prepare you for a majority middle-class civilization, if and only if you use the law and courts and good governance to suppress public and private corruption long enough for trust to develop and that middle class to emerge. Russians aren’t trustworthy, and so they aren’t trusting. That’s why it’s still a family-and-frends civ and not a political one. They’re still backward.
    (And yes I love them but that doesn’t change a thing.)

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-12 19:17:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634996972087066625

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634992705918078976

  • DUGIN REPEATING GERMAN, RUSSIAN, AND PLATO’S FAILURES He’s just trying to repeat

    DUGIN REPEATING GERMAN, RUSSIAN, AND PLATO’S FAILURES
    He’s just trying to repeat Hegel and Heidegger and justify returning to a world of an authorarian paternal state and maternal church, putting their heads in the agrarian sand, because Russian civilization is so low trust after the communists and Putin, that they have lost confidence (as is India now) that a future of self-respect is possible. Because they can only ‘fake’ self-respect as a ‘religion’ now. Russia keeps failing. It keeps failing for the same reasons. Christianity will prepare you for a majority middle-class civilization, if and only if you use the law and courts and good governance to suppress public and private corruption long enough for trust to develop and that middle class to emerge. Russians aren’t trustworthy, and so they aren’t trusting. That’s why it’s still a family-and-frends civ and not a political one. They’re still backward.
    (And yes I love them but that doesn’t change a thing.)

    Reply addressees: @UBERSOY1

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-12 19:17:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634996971902578688

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634992705918078976

  • Vapid Criticisms The current problem is the intersection of inflation vs interes

    Vapid Criticisms
    The current problem is the intersection of inflation vs interest rates to suppress it, and no possibility of buyback from the treasury on 2% securities that they could then re-issue at 5% at tiny cost to taxpayers.

    This would prevent both SVB failure AND contagion because it was a simple liquidity problem caused by the delta in interest rates due to the killing of the bond market by the treasury by increasing interest rates. I don’t see distortion out there. I see debt out there. But not distortion.

    The government, treasury, and fed must choose a delicate balance of regulation that doesn’t constrain investment, but maybe constrains debt expansion, and maybe just consumer debt expansion, and to do that the treasury would have to bring (almost) ALL credit (credit money) expansion IN HOUSE.

    Because no one is going to run an economy today on 100% reserves unless the want the entire financial sector to move somewhere that doesn’t.

    Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-12 15:32:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634940518781034498

  • Vapid Criticisms The current problem is the intersection of inflation vs interes

    Vapid Criticisms
    The current problem is the intersection of inflation vs interest rates to suppress it, and no possibility of buyback from the treasury on 2% securities that they could then re-issue at 5% at tiny cost to taxpayers.

    This would prevent both SVB failure AND contagion because it was a simple liquidity problem caused by the delta in interest rates due to the killing of the bond market by the treasury by increasing interest rates. I don’t see distortion out there. I see debt out there. But not distortion.

    The government, treasury, and fed must choose a delicate balance of regulation that doesn’t constrain investment, but maybe constrains debt expansion, and maybe just consumer debt expansion, and to do that the treasury would have to bring (almost) ALL credit (credit money) expansion IN HOUSE.

    Because no one is going to run an economy today on 100% reserves unless the want the entire financial sector to move somewhere that doesn’t.

    Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-12 15:32:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634940518659391489

  • REASONS FOR BLOCKING (responding to i/o, formerly @monitoringbias post) I/o list

    REASONS FOR BLOCKING
    (responding to i/o, formerly @monitoringbias post)

    I/o listed the author’s criteria for blocking on Twitter. And the only differences were how the author categorized the criteria, and his tolerance for taboo subjects. Since I work on the via negativa including the taboos, I can’t block for the content per say, only for it’s delivery:

    Hmm.. I block on:
    …1) Decorum(GSRRM, criticism, defamation, slander, and cursing). It contributes nothing to the discourse and prohibits knowledge seekers with different views.
    …2) Intellectual dishonesty and poisoning the well (Trolls),
    …3) “Overconfidence given demonstrated incompetence” Which you’d classify as magial thinking, overconfident incompetence, belief in indefensibiles and conspiracy.
    …4) Oddly: for memes, which I consider demonstrating incompetency and poisoning the well of discourse.
    …5) Wasting my time. I’m generous with it. I love to serve. But not if it’s a waste of my effort because the person wants to be right. 😉

    And I don’t care about taboo subjects (I study them). Particularly Racism, Culture-ism, Sexism, and anti-semitism and anti-europeanism. In other words all those conflicts that we hold some investment in, that divide us.

    Because there is a difference of decorum between description, criticism, defamation, and slander, which does nothing except poison the well of discourse – compared to data and explanation that dispassionately explain the causes of our taboos and conflicts.

    It wasn’t impossible to work on the problems of racism, sexism, anti-semitism, and anti-europeanism, and working on them only required pinching your nose and doing the hard work to understand the causes of the conflict sufficiently to figure out how to solve them by resolving those conflicts. If that means (as economists say “going slumming” to see how the other half lives thinks, talks, and behaves” then thats what it takes to uncover causality.

    Nothing is relative really. Just turns out that decidability is always and everywhere possible. And we don’t have to like some of the answers. But we can’t have nice things unless we accept and adapt to them.

    Evasion of taboos prevents resolution of taboos.
    The differences is, that some of us are willing to take the slings and arrows of discord, and some of us arent. And there is no shame in choosing which side of that line you want to stand on.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-11 22:45:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634686983074086912

  • REASONS FOR BLOCKING (responding to i/o, formerly @monitoringbias post) I/o list

    REASONS FOR BLOCKING
    (responding to i/o, formerly @monitoringbias post)

    I/o listed the author’s criteria for blocking on Twitter. And the only differences were how the author categorized the criteria, and his tolerance for taboo subjects. Since I work on the via negativa including the taboos, I can’t block for the content per say, only for it’s delivery:

    Hmm.. I block on:
    …1) Decorum(GSRRM, criticism, defamation, slander, and cursing). It contributes nothing to the discourse and prohibits knowledge seekers with different views.
    …2) Intellectual dishonesty and poisoning the well (Trolls),
    …3) “Overconfidence given demonstrated incompetence” Which you’d classify as magial thinking, overconfident incompetence, belief in indefensibiles and conspiracy.
    …4) Oddly: for memes, which I consider demonstrating incompetency and poisoning the well of discourse.
    …5) Wasting my time. I’m generous with it. I love to serve. But not if it’s a waste of my effort because the person wants to be right. 😉

    And I don’t care about taboo subjects (I study them). Particularly Racism, Culture-ism, Sexism, and anti-semitism and anti-europeanism. In other words all those conflicts that we hold some investment in, that divide us.

    Because there is a difference of decorum between description, criticism, defamation, and slander, which does nothing except poison the well of discourse – compared to data and explanation that dispassionately explain the causes of our taboos and conflicts.

    It wasn’t impossible to work on the problems of racism, sexism, anti-semitism, and anti-europeanism, and working on them only required pinching your nose and doing the hard work to understand the causes of the conflict sufficiently to figure out how to solve them by resolving those conflicts. If that means (as economists say “going slumming” to see how the other half lives thinks, talks, and behaves” then thats what it takes to uncover causality.

    Nothing is relative really. Just turns out that decidability is always and everywhere possible. And we don’t have to like some of the answers. But we can’t have nice things unless we accept and adapt to them.

    Evasion of taboos prevents resolution of taboos.
    The differences is, that some of us are willing to take the slings and arrows of discord, and some of us arent. And there is no shame in choosing which side of that line you want to stand on.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-11 22:45:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634686982835130368

  • REASONS FOR BLOCKING (responding to i/o, formerly @monitoringbias post) I/o list

    REASONS FOR BLOCKING
    (responding to i/o, formerly @monitoringbias post)

    I/o listed the author’s criteria for blocking on Twitter. And the only differences were how the author categorized the , and tolerance for taboo subjects. Since I work on the via negativa including the taboos, I can’t block for the content per say, only for it’s delivery:

    Hmm.. I block on:
    …1) Decorum(GSRRM, criticism, defamation, slander, and cursing). It contributes nothing to the discourse and prohibits knowledge seekers with different views.
    …2) Intellectual dishonesty and poisoning the well (Trolls),
    …3) “Overconfidence given demonstrated incompetence” Which you’d classify as magial thinking, overconfident incompetence, belief in indefensibiles and conspiracy.
    …4) Oddly: for memes, which I consider demonstrating incompetency and poisoning the well of discourse.
    …5) Wasting my time. I’m generous with it. I love to serve. But not if it’s a waste of my effort because the person wants to be right. 😉

    And I don’t care about taboo subjects (I study them). Particularly Racism, Culture-ism, Sexism, and anti-semitism and anti-europeanism. In other words all those conflicts that we hold some investment in, that divide us.

    Because there is a difference of decorum between description, criticism, defamation, and slander, which does nothing except poison the well of discourse – compared to data and explanation that dispassionately explain the causes of our taboos and conflicts.

    It wasn’t impossible to work on the problems of racism, sexism, anti-semitism, and anti-europeanism, and working on them only required pinching your nose and doing the hard work to understand the causes of the conflict sufficiently to figure out how to solve them by resolving those conflicts. If that means (as economists say “going slumming” to see how the other half lives thinks, talks, and behaves” then thats what it takes to uncover causality.

    Nothing is relative really. Just turns out that decidability is always and everywhere possible. And we don’t have to like some of the answers. But we can’t have nice things unless we accept and adapt to them.

    Evasion of taboos prevents resolution of taboos.
    The differences is, that some of us are willing to take the slings and arrows of discord, and some of us arent. And there is no shame in choosing which side of that line you want to stand on.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-11 22:29:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634683063618662401

  • CHATGPT WOKE SCIENCE DENIAL: “NO MORE LIES” Denying IQ (the most accurate measur

    CHATGPT WOKE SCIENCE DENIAL: “NO MORE LIES”
    Denying IQ (the most accurate measure in pyschology)
    Denying IQ by Denomination (the studies exist with large sample sizes.)
    Denying IQ is a proxy for ALL individual, group, class, civilization and state measures. (I keep a massive… https://t.co/kVUgbzoKUu

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-11 16:29:38 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634592426034601985

  • Dickens was a propagandist. And made great money at it. Economists have criticiz

    Dickens was a propagandist. And made great money at it.
    Economists have criticized his FICTIONS for decades.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-09 13:24:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1633820939669446657

    Reply addressees: @PaulMaccio @shermanklumpp @guffynicola

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1633743573442088960

  • THE SINS OF THE OVERCONFIDENT IGNORANT REINFORCES THEIR IGNORANCE –“Bring it. E

    THE SINS OF THE OVERCONFIDENT IGNORANT REINFORCES THEIR IGNORANCE
    –“Bring it. Explain why you believe castrating children physically or chemically with a high chance of sterilization is an acceptable choice? Why are you@openy fighting to do it? What other dysphoria is helped by affirming the delusion of the dysphoria? I’m waiting.”– @hippy_dog

    If you had the vaguest I what I was saying you’d realize that advocating for such things violates the criteria for restitutability, and consists of baiting into harm.

    Like I said. You might want to ASK questions rather than make assertions. Because I promise you, I understand this subject better than anyone living. Because I’m the first person spend his adult life researching and developing legal, constitutional, and policy reforms to counter it.

    Reply addressees: @hippy_dog @ApicePaul @ScottAdamsSays

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-06 18:14:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1632806838541377536

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1632800271700049922

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @hippy_dog @ApicePaul @ScottAdamsSays You really should leave this subject to people like me who know what they’re talking about.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1632800271700049922