Form: Diary

  • (omg. after-meeting, get-together with awesome radical libertarians. but toooooo

    (omg. after-meeting, get-together with awesome radical libertarians. but toooooo much scotch, and the room is spinning. lol )


    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-21 18:51:00 UTC

  • Reflections on our Progress

    (reflection) (important) (possible change in strategy) [L]ook at the past two years of posts by Eli Harman and Michael Philip, and look at the change in their sentence structure, length, and chain of causal relations. I’m very conscious of these things. So I see it. Johannes is a bit of a character, but at least offline, he is loosely stringing very long chains of causal explanation together and is perhaps best at constructing analysis by a chain of unloaded incentives. Look at the change in the confidence of argument of Haille Mariam-Lemar. Roman usually conducts his arguments elsewhere but he is the best at enfranchising the other side. Look at what we’ve seen from Jesse Bjorn and Mike Enoch in understanding and applying testimonial truth and propertarianism. It’s beautiful. But what is most beautiful, is the confidence that’s emerging. One of the things I wanted to do was increase the aggressiveness of the debate so that we spoke with confidence and conviction. I wanted to create a moral high ground that we weren’t afraid to argue without guilt, and with conviction. Truth is that moral high ground. And if we create a moral high ground to demand, we can stop complaining about the status quo, and work toward institutional change. We can demand institutional change. Revolt for institutional change. While it’s a phenomenal amount of work, I can see a future where we can train people to speak truthfully the same way we trained people to speak scientifically-morally instead of ratio-morally, and instead of religio-morally. Where we conduct exchanges rather than impose majority rule. Where we treat tribes like younger and older families rather than people to defeat or resist. But I’m still failing in some of my ambitions. I want to change the debate from criticism of multiculturalism and racism to advocacy of familialism and aristocracy. From genetic differences to differences in distributions. From equality and inequality to aristocratic success and failure. From corporate nation-states to private tribal families. From ratio-moral argument to scientific-truthful argument. Wherein each of us helping parent our tribes into a positive future for mankind. Each of us working to suppress error, bias, wishful thinking, deceit and outright lying. Each of us building not just the truthful society, but a truthful mankind. And with that we future we create the aristocracy of everybody we intuit that is possible, dream that is possible, but can only be achieved by diligent pursuit. We discovered truth. We discovered testimony. We discovered the jury and the common law and rule of law. We discovered high trust. And with them we discovered science, medicine and technology and with it and them, built the civil commons as a competitive evolutionary strategy, and by consequence the civic society and the economic velocity that comes with it. But while it may take a particular people at a particular time in a particular place to invent a technology – it is also truth that all people at later times and in various places, can adopt that technology and gain the benefits of it. But truth and trust are hard and expensive. They are however, the most important capital for the production of innovation and prosperity for all. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine. July 19, 2015
  • Reflections on our Progress

    (reflection) (important) (possible change in strategy) [L]ook at the past two years of posts by Eli Harman and Michael Philip, and look at the change in their sentence structure, length, and chain of causal relations. I’m very conscious of these things. So I see it. Johannes is a bit of a character, but at least offline, he is loosely stringing very long chains of causal explanation together and is perhaps best at constructing analysis by a chain of unloaded incentives. Look at the change in the confidence of argument of Haille Mariam-Lemar. Roman usually conducts his arguments elsewhere but he is the best at enfranchising the other side. Look at what we’ve seen from Jesse Bjorn and Mike Enoch in understanding and applying testimonial truth and propertarianism. It’s beautiful. But what is most beautiful, is the confidence that’s emerging. One of the things I wanted to do was increase the aggressiveness of the debate so that we spoke with confidence and conviction. I wanted to create a moral high ground that we weren’t afraid to argue without guilt, and with conviction. Truth is that moral high ground. And if we create a moral high ground to demand, we can stop complaining about the status quo, and work toward institutional change. We can demand institutional change. Revolt for institutional change. While it’s a phenomenal amount of work, I can see a future where we can train people to speak truthfully the same way we trained people to speak scientifically-morally instead of ratio-morally, and instead of religio-morally. Where we conduct exchanges rather than impose majority rule. Where we treat tribes like younger and older families rather than people to defeat or resist. But I’m still failing in some of my ambitions. I want to change the debate from criticism of multiculturalism and racism to advocacy of familialism and aristocracy. From genetic differences to differences in distributions. From equality and inequality to aristocratic success and failure. From corporate nation-states to private tribal families. From ratio-moral argument to scientific-truthful argument. Wherein each of us helping parent our tribes into a positive future for mankind. Each of us working to suppress error, bias, wishful thinking, deceit and outright lying. Each of us building not just the truthful society, but a truthful mankind. And with that we future we create the aristocracy of everybody we intuit that is possible, dream that is possible, but can only be achieved by diligent pursuit. We discovered truth. We discovered testimony. We discovered the jury and the common law and rule of law. We discovered high trust. And with them we discovered science, medicine and technology and with it and them, built the civil commons as a competitive evolutionary strategy, and by consequence the civic society and the economic velocity that comes with it. But while it may take a particular people at a particular time in a particular place to invent a technology – it is also truth that all people at later times and in various places, can adopt that technology and gain the benefits of it. But truth and trust are hard and expensive. They are however, the most important capital for the production of innovation and prosperity for all. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine. July 19, 2015
  • (It took me almost all day to review, edit and post my relevant FB posts from Ju

    (It took me almost all day to review, edit and post my relevant FB posts from July 8 to 19. Ack. But it was fun. )


    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-19 12:16:00 UTC

  • PERSPECTIVE ON PROGRESS (reflection) (important) (possible change in strategy) L

    PERSPECTIVE ON PROGRESS

    (reflection) (important) (possible change in strategy)

    Look at the past two years of posts by Eli Harman and Michael Philip, and look at the change in their sentence structure, length, and chain of causal relations. I’m very conscious of these things. So I see it. Johannes is a bit of a character, but at least offline, he is loosely stringing very long chains of causal explanation together and is perhaps best at constructing analysis by a chain of unloaded incentives. Look at the change in the confidence of argument of Haille Mariam-Lemar. Roman usually conducts his arguments elsewhere but he is the best at enfranchising the other side. Look at what we’ve seen from Jesse Bjorn and Mike Enoch in understanding and applying testimonial truth and propertarianism.

    It’s beautiful. But what is most beautiful, is the confidence that’s emerging. One of the things I wanted to do was increase the aggressiveness of the debate so that we spoke with confidence and conviction. I wanted to create a moral high ground that we weren’t afraid to argue without guilt, and with conviction. Truth is that moral high ground. And if we create a moral high ground to demand, we can stop complaining about the status quo, and work toward institutional change. We can demand institutional change. Revolt for institutional change.

    While it’s a phenomenal amount of work, I can see a future where we can train people to speak truthfully the same way we trained people to speak scientifically-morally instead of ratio-morally, and instead of religio-morally. Where we conduct exchanges rather than impose majority rule. Where we treat tribes like younger and older families rather than people to defeat or resist.

    But I’m still failing in some of my ambitions. I want to change the debate from criticism of multiculturalism and racism to advocacy of familialism and aristocracy. From genetic differences to differences in distributions. From equality and inequality to aristocratic success and failure. From corporate nation-states to private tribal families. From ratio-moral argument to scientific-truthful argument. Wherein each of us helping parent our tribes into a positive future for mankind. Each of us working to suppress error, bias, wishful thinking, deceit and outright lying. Each of us building not just the truthful society, but a truthful mankind.

    And with that we future we create the aristocracy of everybody we intuit that is possible, dream that is possible, but can only be achieved by diligent pursuit.

    We discovered truth. We discovered testimony. We discovered the jury and the common law and rule of law. We discovered high trust. And with them we discovered science, medicine and technology and with it and them, built the civil commons as a competitive evolutionary strategy, and by consequence the civic society and the economic velocity that comes with it.

    But while it may take a particular people at a particular time in a particular place to invent a technology – it is also truth that all people at later times and in various places, can adopt that technology and gain the benefits of it.

    But truth and trust are hard and expensive. They are however, the most important capital for the production of innovation and prosperity for all.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    July 19, 2015


    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-19 04:55:00 UTC

  • (Max got me drunk. changed hotels. been here 4 days. fixed the aspie. I think it

    (Max got me drunk. changed hotels. been here 4 days. fixed the aspie. I think it was the hotel space. Too small. jeez… what is life like for normals?)


    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-18 09:22:00 UTC

  • Feeling Extremely Drunk with Max Andronichuk. ;). At Mele London

    Feeling Extremely Drunk with Max Andronichuk. ;). At Mele London.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-17 18:22:00 UTC

  • (very aspie day today. killing me. like nyc. I wish the now-me could go back in

    (very aspie day today. killing me. like nyc. I wish the now-me could go back in time and talk to the then-me, and tell him how to live in harmony with our internal mental machine. at least I know enough to seek quiet spaces. ack. london is like a fire-hose of patterns to recognize and my machinery is having a seizure trying to make sense of it all. now i remember why traveling by car is so rewarding: its armor. insulation. gonna try headphones and see if that helps.)


    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-17 13:10:00 UTC

  • LONDON BRUNCH AND RECOVERY Had scones, coffee and poached eggs this morning. Sco

    LONDON BRUNCH AND RECOVERY

    Had scones, coffee and poached eggs this morning. Scones were perfect. eggs were not made by someone from the first world, and certainly no one who knows eggs. But hey. It’s not Ukraine. 😉 Coffee shops in London are now as good as those in Seattle. Even if the SPACE is cramped and cleanliness is just …. ahem… not to Seattle standards.

    Now I’m going to hit the recommended writing places. But I’m pretty sure that it doesn’t get better than the lounge at 5-star hotels. I just only brought casual clothes with me. Thinking I”ll hit:

    – Starbucks flagship store London.

    – Department of Coffee and Social Affairs

    – Prufrock Coffee (And maybe take their barista training!!!)

    – The Book Club (probably too hipster for me)

    Funny how I get treated in shops when I dress down. lol. It’s awesome.

    (Note to self: I have to find out why flying is so hard on my aspieness. It must have something to do with water. But I had to sleep almost 18 hours to get over a four-hour flight.)

    Cheers.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-15 09:42:00 UTC

  • What’s on my mind? Money and economy, politics and war. But pretty frustrated to

    What’s on my mind? Money and economy, politics and war.

    But pretty frustrated today. I want to remain accessible. But I really can’t afford to invest in training people without some knowledge of the Philosophy of science. Mathematicians and computer scientists, physicists and to some degree economists are relatively easy. Although in retrospect it is pretty clear that economics is not a practiced as a science of man but as a science of the deception of man. Not how to improve cooperation but how to force productivity.

    And so I am frustrated by conversations with conservatives a

    Just as readily by libertarians. And so I am having one of those down days where I think I am wasting my time. :(.

    On another note:

    Josh Jeppson said something smart last night: that Propertarianism isn’t conservative (reactionary) but innovative. That’s true.

    QUESTION:

    But then, how do I position it?

    ANSWER:

    —“You don’t want to go back to something (maybe some things but not all), so you’re not a reactionary, you don’t want to conserve what we have so you aren’t a conservative, and you don’t want to take what we have further, so you aren’t a progressive. You are (gasp) a revolutionary”—Adam Felix


    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-07 04:42:00 UTC