Curt Doolittle

Form: Critique

  • Taleb as Scam Artist Undermining Western Civilization

    TALEB AS SCAM ARTIST UNDERMINING WESTERN CIVILIZATION (tough talk from twitter) (read at your own risk)

    —“Taleb, like Gould, is trying to demonise mainstream psychology–but he’s only successful in creating a folk demon for the lay public. He knows that anyone with any technical expertise thinks he’s a clown. But he doesn’t care, because accuracy is less important to him than fame.”—Claire Lehmann @clairlemon

    I don’t want to be the front man on this subject but he’s not trying to take down psychology, he’s trying to justify arab immigration to the west, and satisfy the chip on his shoulder as a christian arab. His empirical work was a dead end, and he can’t tolerate the truth: Trust. West and east used tests successfully to filter out corruption for positions in government. Same for military, then same for academy. Wealth is available across the bell curve, with complexity (IQ) determining your market. You need conscientiousness to accumulate that wealth. What taleb is attempting to obscure is west can create large complex organizations because of trust and trust under rule of law, and rule of law by filtering out corruption granting privilege to IQ. He can’t face that because levantines cannot create trust, rule of law or … … large complex organizations, because they thing lying is a tool, cunning is of merit, outwitting by cunning superior than outwitting by increase in productivity, quality, or innovation, and that the commons is to be pilfered rather than invested in at every opportunity. So taleb is missing the whole point: that he is only able to use his techniques of via-negativa risk invstment, becuase he is in the only high trust polity, using IMMORAL MEANS OF GAIN, and so is his alter ego “Fat Tony”. These men are, by western ethics and morality ‘Scammers”. Yet Taleb’s entire literature is devoted to lionizing scamming while ridiculing those who hold positions of privilege (influence) precisely because they are not in the scamming business. Now, this analysis will expose the primary difference between middle eastern and western… … people and it will explain why certain groups profit in certain industries: because they are immoral, and westerners are not.Morality requires reciprocity: productive, fully informed,warrantied, voluntary transfer, free of imposition of costs by externality against interests. It is quite profitable to engage in immorality among moral people, just as it is less so among immoral people. And the finance business is by and large unproductive. In other words a westerner would never engage in the tactic used by Georg Soros, which was extractive. He did. So whether you cast these people as amoral or immoral, intentional or unintentional, or genetically or culturally different,the reality is that only westerners practice material Reciprocity and verbal reciprocity Truth,and because we do we produce high trust and large complex … … disproportionately productive organizations from the family to the enterprise to the state. And lower trust people that do NOT sort for trust and grant privilege to people who have ability in complexity to PRESERVE that TRUST. That is what the chinese and the west did. What institutions did the middle east foster instead? Cunning, Cheating, Lying, Rent seeking, taxing trade routes rather than producing. They lauded inbreeding, familiasm, tribalism, and not trust and productivity – and they rewarded dogmatists not talent. As such they could not produce a middle class, middle class majority population, and middle class ethics, and as such they could not push trustworthiness down into the middle, working, and lower classes. Which is why they remained poor despite taxing world trade and … … consuming the genetic, cultural, institutional, knowledge and aesthetic capital of five great civilizations and reducing them to ignorance, poverty and dysgenia. So yes you can make money if your conscientious at every point in the IQ curve … … but you cannot push trust, reciprocity, truth, and duty, judge and jury, contract and rule of law, down into a population and produce the multiples of scale, unless you FILTER upward for both intelligence (complexity) and conscientiousness, and you reward the combination … … with status and income, forcing a status hierarchy that must be imitated. And that’s before we get to the fact that smarter people are better at suppressing error – which strangely, Taleb, as another proponent of via-negativa seems to overlook. And that as we scale … … opportunities are not scarcer, but more plentiful, but so are the increasing cascades of error. So you know, basically, Taleb has been trying to teach the west how to devolve into a low trust bunch of middle eastern scam artists and calling it ‘smart’. … Meanwhile, he fails to grasp that those ‘educated but unintelligent people’ are in their position to eliminate error and low trust, not to maximize profits. Which if you have been following along this argument I’m making, means that not maximizing personal profit maximizes ALL. So let me reduce Taleb’s life’s work as an essayist in ridicule of western civilization to its foundations: (a) Mandelbrot was right that the stock market is just noise so w/o inside information just invest in funds. … (and here comes the big one) … …. (b) rule of law and involuntary warranty must be extended from commercial goods and services to all information in the marketplace. yes that’s right. We gave license to people to not warranty their words in the 20th, and that’s the reason we are where we are today. Period. Did you make that leap with me? Well, then follow me. Taleb is a Charlatan who at first glance popularized Mandelbrot’s insights through humorous ego-inspiring essays making us feel smart like it made him feel smart. But the reality is, we have been smart for 5000 years: … … warranty of one’s words, martial testimony “reporting” in all walks of life. The RETURNS ON COMMONS make Private returns possible, and commons require high trust and that’s why europeans are the only people to have produced them. We call it the civil society.

  • Taleb as Scam Artist Undermining Western Civilization

    TALEB AS SCAM ARTIST UNDERMINING WESTERN CIVILIZATION (tough talk from twitter) (read at your own risk)

    —“Taleb, like Gould, is trying to demonise mainstream psychology–but he’s only successful in creating a folk demon for the lay public. He knows that anyone with any technical expertise thinks he’s a clown. But he doesn’t care, because accuracy is less important to him than fame.”—Claire Lehmann @clairlemon

    I don’t want to be the front man on this subject but he’s not trying to take down psychology, he’s trying to justify arab immigration to the west, and satisfy the chip on his shoulder as a christian arab. His empirical work was a dead end, and he can’t tolerate the truth: Trust. West and east used tests successfully to filter out corruption for positions in government. Same for military, then same for academy. Wealth is available across the bell curve, with complexity (IQ) determining your market. You need conscientiousness to accumulate that wealth. What taleb is attempting to obscure is west can create large complex organizations because of trust and trust under rule of law, and rule of law by filtering out corruption granting privilege to IQ. He can’t face that because levantines cannot create trust, rule of law or … … large complex organizations, because they thing lying is a tool, cunning is of merit, outwitting by cunning superior than outwitting by increase in productivity, quality, or innovation, and that the commons is to be pilfered rather than invested in at every opportunity. So taleb is missing the whole point: that he is only able to use his techniques of via-negativa risk invstment, becuase he is in the only high trust polity, using IMMORAL MEANS OF GAIN, and so is his alter ego “Fat Tony”. These men are, by western ethics and morality ‘Scammers”. Yet Taleb’s entire literature is devoted to lionizing scamming while ridiculing those who hold positions of privilege (influence) precisely because they are not in the scamming business. Now, this analysis will expose the primary difference between middle eastern and western… … people and it will explain why certain groups profit in certain industries: because they are immoral, and westerners are not.Morality requires reciprocity: productive, fully informed,warrantied, voluntary transfer, free of imposition of costs by externality against interests. It is quite profitable to engage in immorality among moral people, just as it is less so among immoral people. And the finance business is by and large unproductive. In other words a westerner would never engage in the tactic used by Georg Soros, which was extractive. He did. So whether you cast these people as amoral or immoral, intentional or unintentional, or genetically or culturally different,the reality is that only westerners practice material Reciprocity and verbal reciprocity Truth,and because we do we produce high trust and large complex … … disproportionately productive organizations from the family to the enterprise to the state. And lower trust people that do NOT sort for trust and grant privilege to people who have ability in complexity to PRESERVE that TRUST. That is what the chinese and the west did. What institutions did the middle east foster instead? Cunning, Cheating, Lying, Rent seeking, taxing trade routes rather than producing. They lauded inbreeding, familiasm, tribalism, and not trust and productivity – and they rewarded dogmatists not talent. As such they could not produce a middle class, middle class majority population, and middle class ethics, and as such they could not push trustworthiness down into the middle, working, and lower classes. Which is why they remained poor despite taxing world trade and … … consuming the genetic, cultural, institutional, knowledge and aesthetic capital of five great civilizations and reducing them to ignorance, poverty and dysgenia. So yes you can make money if your conscientious at every point in the IQ curve … … but you cannot push trust, reciprocity, truth, and duty, judge and jury, contract and rule of law, down into a population and produce the multiples of scale, unless you FILTER upward for both intelligence (complexity) and conscientiousness, and you reward the combination … … with status and income, forcing a status hierarchy that must be imitated. And that’s before we get to the fact that smarter people are better at suppressing error – which strangely, Taleb, as another proponent of via-negativa seems to overlook. And that as we scale … … opportunities are not scarcer, but more plentiful, but so are the increasing cascades of error. So you know, basically, Taleb has been trying to teach the west how to devolve into a low trust bunch of middle eastern scam artists and calling it ‘smart’. … Meanwhile, he fails to grasp that those ‘educated but unintelligent people’ are in their position to eliminate error and low trust, not to maximize profits. Which if you have been following along this argument I’m making, means that not maximizing personal profit maximizes ALL. So let me reduce Taleb’s life’s work as an essayist in ridicule of western civilization to its foundations: (a) Mandelbrot was right that the stock market is just noise so w/o inside information just invest in funds. … (and here comes the big one) … …. (b) rule of law and involuntary warranty must be extended from commercial goods and services to all information in the marketplace. yes that’s right. We gave license to people to not warranty their words in the 20th, and that’s the reason we are where we are today. Period. Did you make that leap with me? Well, then follow me. Taleb is a Charlatan who at first glance popularized Mandelbrot’s insights through humorous ego-inspiring essays making us feel smart like it made him feel smart. But the reality is, we have been smart for 5000 years: … … warranty of one’s words, martial testimony “reporting” in all walks of life. The RETURNS ON COMMONS make Private returns possible, and commons require high trust and that’s why europeans are the only people to have produced them. We call it the civil society.

  • Useful Idiots for The Enemy: Nap-Addicts

    USEFUL IDIOTS FOR THE ENEMY: NAP-ADDICTS The NAP? Really?

    1. Define aggression, and aggression against what? How do you know what aggression means, and how do you know what constitutes aggression against what?
      a) define aggression?
      b) against what?
      c) who determines it’s aggression and how?

    2. The litmus test is blackmail. Is blackmail aggression?

    3. What is the minimum scope of property necessary for a polity to survive competition for territory and people? How do you know that?

    4. What is the minimum scope of contributions to the production of commons (defense, common goods and services) sufficient for a polity to survive competition for territory, population, and political control? How do you know that?

    5. Why can’t I proactively defend myself on my terms rather than wait until an opposition individual, group, organization, or state conducts violence, harm, theft, fraud, socialization of losses, free riding, rent seeking, corruption, immigration, conversion, undermining, warfare, conquest?

    Once you realize you’re a useful idiot it will probably make you angry that you were a useful idiot and then you will go thru a period of hating the enemy for baiting you in to useful idiocy, but the fact remains – you are a useful idiot if you bought the NAP instead of rule of law by sovereignty and reciprocity where property consists of demonstrated interests. You and your opinion don’t matter. The market determines all of these – not you.

  • Taleb, Women, and The Cathedral

    TALEB, WOMEN, AND THE CATHEDRAL Taleb’s early books are an effort to feed his ego (self image) His later works are an effort to defend his ego (self image). He made a career popularizing mandelbrot. He DID successfully restore ‘whatever doesn’t kill you only serves to make you stronger” as anti-fragility to the popular will but was unsuccessful in turning it into political policy or mandate – because it is contrary to female instinct and females control both the vote, consumer spending, the academy revenues. So females control the cathedral complex: state, academy, advertising, marketing, consumption, and males control military, finance, and production which services them. Which has led to this problem. As I remind us constantly – everything is institutions and incentives, and incentives always boil down to reproductive strategy, from which the rest of life is merely an exaggerated representation. Edit

  • Taleb, Women, and The Cathedral

    TALEB, WOMEN, AND THE CATHEDRAL Taleb’s early books are an effort to feed his ego (self image) His later works are an effort to defend his ego (self image). He made a career popularizing mandelbrot. He DID successfully restore ‘whatever doesn’t kill you only serves to make you stronger” as anti-fragility to the popular will but was unsuccessful in turning it into political policy or mandate – because it is contrary to female instinct and females control both the vote, consumer spending, the academy revenues. So females control the cathedral complex: state, academy, advertising, marketing, consumption, and males control military, finance, and production which services them. Which has led to this problem. As I remind us constantly – everything is institutions and incentives, and incentives always boil down to reproductive strategy, from which the rest of life is merely an exaggerated representation. Edit

  • Libertarian Means ‘Useful Idiot”

    PLEASE STOP BEING A USEFUL IDIOT ON BEHALF OF THE LEFT: LIBERTARIAN MEANS ‘USEFUL IDIOT”

    —“For me the last part best manifests itself within the ideas of libertarianism.”—psionin @psionin

    Libertarianism is just common property marxism. So “For me” means you don’t understand that the only source of Sovereignty, Liberty, Freedom and Prosperity is rule of law, producing markets for everything, including commons, or what we call ‘government’. Rothbardians turned ‘libertarianism’ from Classical Liberalism under Rule of Law to Ghetto Ethics of diasporic peoples having no, and taking no, responsibility for commons. It’s just common property parasitism rather than private property parasitism. So Rothbardians destroyed the term liberty as the left destroyed the term liberal. Either we have a militia in which every man holding the franchise defends rule of law under sovereignty and reciprocity, and produces commons necessary for survival of the polity – or not. If not, then the polity cannot survive competition in the market for territories, population and social, economic, and political order. Which is why there are no libertarian polities, and never will be. Libertarianism is just demand for a commune of private rather than common property at best, or an excuse to fool high trust european peoples into hosting parasitic peoples who specialize in profit from baiting into moral hazard, under the pretense of doing no harm. So please stop being a useful idiot. I use Sovereigntarian, or rule of law of reciprocity, or rule of law monarchy, or classical liberal. Libertarian in the hayekian sense means Classical Liberalism. Libertarianism in the Rothbardian sense just means “useful idiot”. Edit OCTOBER 5

  • Libertarian Means ‘Useful Idiot”

    PLEASE STOP BEING A USEFUL IDIOT ON BEHALF OF THE LEFT: LIBERTARIAN MEANS ‘USEFUL IDIOT”

    —“For me the last part best manifests itself within the ideas of libertarianism.”—psionin @psionin

    Libertarianism is just common property marxism. So “For me” means you don’t understand that the only source of Sovereignty, Liberty, Freedom and Prosperity is rule of law, producing markets for everything, including commons, or what we call ‘government’. Rothbardians turned ‘libertarianism’ from Classical Liberalism under Rule of Law to Ghetto Ethics of diasporic peoples having no, and taking no, responsibility for commons. It’s just common property parasitism rather than private property parasitism. So Rothbardians destroyed the term liberty as the left destroyed the term liberal. Either we have a militia in which every man holding the franchise defends rule of law under sovereignty and reciprocity, and produces commons necessary for survival of the polity – or not. If not, then the polity cannot survive competition in the market for territories, population and social, economic, and political order. Which is why there are no libertarian polities, and never will be. Libertarianism is just demand for a commune of private rather than common property at best, or an excuse to fool high trust european peoples into hosting parasitic peoples who specialize in profit from baiting into moral hazard, under the pretense of doing no harm. So please stop being a useful idiot. I use Sovereigntarian, or rule of law of reciprocity, or rule of law monarchy, or classical liberal. Libertarian in the hayekian sense means Classical Liberalism. Libertarianism in the Rothbardian sense just means “useful idiot”. Edit OCTOBER 5

  • Criticizing the Flaccid Right

    Criticizing the Flaccid Right. https://t.co/xBYcyJHd0P

  • From Elsewhere – Review

    By researching art, legal, economic, monetary, and technological history, I’m aware of indian inventions in mathematics, as well as such things as ‘Damascus Steel’ being an indian invention. And even fewer people are aware that india produced secular political thought, and like the chinese, it’s more practical than aspirational and ideal as is the european mediterranean tradition. We make a catastrophic mistake of overestimating the contributions of the middle east because of their early invention of the state, writing, and organized religion, and because our religious western heritage of having a semitic religion imposed pon the european people by byzantine force, and church deceit. So not only should we spend more time on chinese and indian and european history, we should spend less time on middle eastern. Why? They constantly collapsed because of an economy of taxing world trade routes rather than of producing themselves, and because of that failure, a failure to build trust among tribal peoples, whereas europeans, indians, and chinese succeeded. As for india, the equally interesting question is why are the people of india still strangely obsessed with their religion; why they hold onto the pseudoscience of indian origins; why their thought leadership died out, and why india stagnated earlier than even china. That said, current conditions are obvious. Islam remains an enemy of india, china, and european civilization. And there is nothing wrong with india that six generations of one child policy for the lower classes would not solve.

  • From Elsewhere – Review

    By researching art, legal, economic, monetary, and technological history, I’m aware of indian inventions in mathematics, as well as such things as ‘Damascus Steel’ being an indian invention. And even fewer people are aware that india produced secular political thought, and like the chinese, it’s more practical than aspirational and ideal as is the european mediterranean tradition. We make a catastrophic mistake of overestimating the contributions of the middle east because of their early invention of the state, writing, and organized religion, and because our religious western heritage of having a semitic religion imposed pon the european people by byzantine force, and church deceit. So not only should we spend more time on chinese and indian and european history, we should spend less time on middle eastern. Why? They constantly collapsed because of an economy of taxing world trade routes rather than of producing themselves, and because of that failure, a failure to build trust among tribal peoples, whereas europeans, indians, and chinese succeeded. As for india, the equally interesting question is why are the people of india still strangely obsessed with their religion; why they hold onto the pseudoscience of indian origins; why their thought leadership died out, and why india stagnated earlier than even china. That said, current conditions are obvious. Islam remains an enemy of india, china, and european civilization. And there is nothing wrong with india that six generations of one child policy for the lower classes would not solve.