Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • CRITICAL RACE THEORY IS JUST THE PRESENT APPLICATION OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS OF RE

    CRITICAL RACE THEORY IS JUST THE PRESENT APPLICATION OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS OF REBELLION BY THE FEMININE MIDDLE EAST AGAINST THE MASCULINE INDO EUROPEANS.

    No matter how we describe it or how we name it:

    1) “The female method of anti-social behavior, converted to a means of anti-social wafare”,
    2) “The Revolutionary Spirit”,
    3) Communism, Leninism, Neo-Marxism, Postmodernism, Anti-Male feminism, PC-Woke, Critical Race Theory.

    These are all the single technique of rallying the margins to destroy cooperation between sexes, classes, ethnicities, and races, by the false promise that “after indo europeans”, “after rome”, or “after white men”, we can violate the laws of the universe:

    1) the formal sciences (logic),

    2) the physical sciences (scarcity),

    3) the behavioral sciences (acquisition, cooperation, division of labor, by sovereignty in demonstrated interestsa and reciprocity within the limits of proportionality)

    4) the evolutionary sciences (sex, class, ethnicity, and race differeinces. mutational load is almost always negative, and drifts downward into the lower classes. natural selection by sortition and control of reproduction is necessary to prevent regression to the mean. Markets by internal forces are the substitute for natural selection by external forces. we must always defeat the red queen, and we have a narrow time frame in which to do so before this hostile climate, geology, solar system, and galacy visit upon us another extinction event.

    It’s a beautiful lie. A desirable lie. It allows the enemies of our people our civlization and human evolution to blame us for the laws of nature, when it is our discovery, adaptation to, application of, and evolution by those laws of nature that allows those of ‘infantilized mind’ to have the privilge to undermine rather than disappear into ashes and dust.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-10-28 14:31:42 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107179638942061536

  • KNOWLEDGE THAT WE DONT ALWAYS WANT TO HAVE 😉 Why did y’all encourage me to work

    KNOWLEDGE THAT WE DONT ALWAYS WANT TO HAVE 😉

    Why did y’all encourage me to work on the dating, mating, marrying problem? It’s depressing.Seriously. But, as in anything, disambiguation(decomposition) of the problem provides insights into females more so than males, as to just how much we’re bots and how simple the algorithm.

    I mean for example, the female instinct is to maximize consumption so she and hers won’t be left behind, just as much as the male instinct is to maximize capital. So in any condition where the female can hyper-consumer without social regulation of it, she will do so on instinct.

    But this understanding still provides just the first principle, the causal axis of her behavior.What it doesn’t tell us is that this hyperconsumption is the result of the infant stage, and is produced by our tendency both male and female to coddle girls and women:infantilization.

    And what this understanding of infantilization doesn’t tell us directly, is that the difference between the classes is biological limitation on development causing infantilization of self regulation – at least on the conscientiousness axis.

    So this is why we see Christians (continuous training in adult responsibility for self, family, commons) producing families across the classes, and conservatives doing it out of instinct and tradition.We see infantilization across the progressive spectrum: responsibility evasion.

    So conservatism (adulting by capitalization) vs progressivism (infantilization by hyperconsumption) are biological intuitionistic and cognitive biases that have sexual origins in cognitive dimorphism, and the competition between them in reciprocity calculating ‘optimums’.

    So, the algorithm for human behavior is extremely simple but because we have such large brains, capable of such exhaustive generalization, we can apply that algorithm endlessly as we can apply language in infinite permutation. But w/o reciprocity we get F:’cancer’ vs M:’aging’

    And I’ll use that Female: Cancer vs Male: Aging as the biological equivalent of the unregulated expression of female hyperconsumption and infatilization vs male hypercapitalization, and …again… reciprocal exchange discovering the continuously moving equilibrium between them.

    At some point, ‘sciencing’ mankind is increasingly depressing. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2021-10-28 14:03:51 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107179529449730144

  • EXAMPLES OF TRIFUNCTIONALISM A positive and negative charge either produce a sta

    EXAMPLES OF TRIFUNCTIONALISM

    1. A positive and negative charge either produce a stable equilibrium (particle) or they dissipate. So a triangle with negative at the bottom left, positive at the bottom right, and the height of the triangle the amount of energy or mass captured in the stable relation.
    2. In any opportunity for exchange two people will only voluntarily do so if they both increase their capital (have more than they did before hand).
    3. There are two sexes, the hyperconsumptive female (bottom left negative) and the hyperproductive male (bottom right positive) with voluntary exchange “marriage” the compromise between them that produces reproduction (the hight of the triangle).
    4. There are three methods of coercion: force (defense), undermining (care), bribery (trade). Undermining the negative bottom left, force the positive bottom right, and trade the energy captured by reciprocal exchange.
    5. Humans specialize in these means of coercion producing elites in that master these means of coercion, we call them right bottom feminine priesthoods offering false promises in exchange for inclusion, masuline warriros producing states offering defense in exchange for taxation, and craftsmen, scientists, entrepreneurs, and lawyers who master cooperation and the law of cooperation, that satisfies the equilibrium between the male and female interests.
    6. There are three possible formal institutions, of coercion, the bottom right force(defense) and the state, and the bottom left undermining (inclusion) and Religion, and the law (cooperation, dispute resolution, trade). Only trade captures energy as a voluntary exchange (stable equilibrium) between male (force) and female (undermining).
    7. Given the three means of coercion and the three possible institutions of coercion, humans evolve them in different sequences. Some develop force and state first (china) some religion first (middle east) and some law first (europeans). ANd this initial foundation creates a path-dependence (hierarchy of priority) meaning the first institution is strongest, the second institution is less so, and the third institution is weakest.
    8. The rate of evolutionary adaptation of any people is determiend by their first institution, where religion is the slowest, the state the medium, and the law the fastest means of discovery, innovation, and adaptation. This explains the difference btweeen the rates of evolution of all civilizations. It explains teh chrsitian dark ages. It explains the failure of islam. It explains the success but stagnation of china. It explains the rate of evolution of europeans. It even explains why india was unable to produce formal institutions at scale, and why african produced no institutions.

    This is a brief overview of the most simple examples that we can use to illustrate that the universe operates by a very simple rule of increasing the base of the triangle and the height of the triangle by computing via cooperating, the capture of increasing energy and mass.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-10-26 02:31:57 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107165484129089321

  • MALE – FEMALE EQUILIBRIUM Whenever talking about male and female differences (wh

    MALE – FEMALE EQUILIBRIUM

    Whenever talking about male and female differences (which are the greatest differences among humans) simply imagine a balance scale, where more of one thing means less of another on the opposite side and visa versa. We balance out. We have to. The fulcrum is TIME: F-Now, M-Then.

    In male-female differences, Female=Now, and Male=Then. So empathizing vs systematizing is again, just Female Empathizing for NOW and Male Systematizing for THEN. Females generate demand, and men generate supply and cooperation (especially sex) is the test of market equilibrium.

    Our male-female morals and traditions evolved from an agrarian world where almost all of us were equal in subsistence poverty, and so the golden rule, and common good applied. But as economies evolved, the silver rule and inequality apply, and solving for individual TRADES replaces solving for common “good”.

    In other words, morality is consistent (it’s reciprocity) but general rules of moral action increase in precision just like EVERY OTHER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY.

    And we are failing to construct intersexual trades because we’ve projected a universal behavior on classses that are widely different today.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-10-23 14:04:19 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107151219722303864

  • Why is Bob Murphy, and his criticism of mainstream economic pseudoscience (mathi

    Why is Bob Murphy, and his criticism of mainstream economic pseudoscience (mathiness, logic) less influential than we’d expect?

    Because no criminal gives up his crimes, nor immoralist his immorality, nor liar his lies, nor parasite its host without greater incentive to do so than not.

    Human beings are neither Hobbesian, Lockean, or Rousseauian, but amoral. All evidence from all history, all history of legal proceedings, and all scientific research, demonstrates man is amoral and only as moral as he must be, and maximizes immorality whenever he can justify it.

    The contemporary crisis begun with Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor, Bohr, then Keynes, Gramsci, Marcuse, Rez, Kelsen, Dworkin, Friedan, Steinem, Stiglitz and Krugman consists of little more than female tendency of feels over reals justified by magical thinking applied to pseudoscience.

    So we have tolerated the institutionalization and weaponization of the female means of seduction into false promise of freedom from the laws of nature that every mother uses to sedate her children, and for all intents and purposes legalized social, economic, and political Fraud.

    While I’m hostile to the abuse of the Austrian economic method by Mises and Rothbard, the point is that only the austrians including Mises, intuited the problem in math and science, that was the intuitionistic and operationalist revolution – that failed especially in economics.

    Unfortunately, it doesn’t occur to anyone that the intuitionistic and operational movement (revolution) was identifying the difference between symbolic mathematics as sophistry, vs computational mathematics as science. As such we lost a century to pseudo-math -> pseudoscience.

    This is the reason the ‘austrians’, or at least the Mengerian and Hayekian austrians, were correct in discovering the logic of social science, while Chicago discovered, economic insurance, and the Keynesians just restated old fashioned monetary fraud.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-10-23 13:41:57 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107151131782484904

  • The adversarial method, king of the hill games, are the same epistemology as whe

    The adversarial method, king of the hill games, are the same epistemology as when Neo fights Seraph in the Matrix: “You do not really know someone until you fight them”.
    You do not learn the first principles of an individual or group by discourse, or cooperation, but by conflict.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-10-23 01:09:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1451717279977295872

  • THEFT: All false pretenses of equality, end of scarcity, human nature and mallea

    THEFT: All false pretenses of equality, end of scarcity, human nature and malleability, accumulated genetic load and natural selection, are attempts to evade VOLUNTARY EXCHANGE and to evade limiting insurance to charity in exchange for conformity: doing no harm to commons. The European (Germanic > English > British > American) reason for equality (equity) under the law (natural, common, empirical law, of dispute resolution, under individual sovereignty), is to drive us into peaceful voluntary cooperation DESPITE INESCAPABLE INEQUALITY. Women destroy all attempts at capitalization in order to hyperconsume. All behavior is reducible to expressions of discovery, acquisition, retention, consumption, or trade of calories. That’s the underlying algorithm. Cooperation merely helps us obtain retain consume calories. So we live within the limits of preservation of cooperation.   I’m on the verge of addressing the female need for hyperconsumption, attention, validation, and hypergamy, seduction, and irresponsibility as necessary for suppression as is male dominance expression. Again, we must simply restore equal suppression of anti-social behavior. I should also talk about the difference between the complaining by the manosphere, the flawless EXPLANATION provided by James Lindsay, and my scientific explanation. As I’ve said, we must provide religious, literary, legal, and scientific frames of understanding to win, because the enemy has attacked all our institutions of cultural production.

  • THEFT: All false pretenses of equality, end of scarcity, human nature and mallea

    THEFT: All false pretenses of equality, end of scarcity, human nature and malleability, accumulated genetic load and natural selection, are attempts to evade VOLUNTARY EXCHANGE and to evade limiting insurance to charity in exchange for conformity: doing no harm to commons. The European (Germanic > English > British > American) reason for equality (equity) under the law (natural, common, empirical law, of dispute resolution, under individual sovereignty), is to drive us into peaceful voluntary cooperation DESPITE INESCAPABLE INEQUALITY. Women destroy all attempts at capitalization in order to hyperconsume. All behavior is reducible to expressions of discovery, acquisition, retention, consumption, or trade of calories. That’s the underlying algorithm. Cooperation merely helps us obtain retain consume calories. So we live within the limits of preservation of cooperation.   I’m on the verge of addressing the female need for hyperconsumption, attention, validation, and hypergamy, seduction, and irresponsibility as necessary for suppression as is male dominance expression. Again, we must simply restore equal suppression of anti-social behavior. I should also talk about the difference between the complaining by the manosphere, the flawless EXPLANATION provided by James Lindsay, and my scientific explanation. As I’ve said, we must provide religious, literary, legal, and scientific frames of understanding to win, because the enemy has attacked all our institutions of cultural production.

  • The Origin and Reason for Marriage – Political Economy of Marriage

    THE ORIGIN AND REASON FOR MARRIAGE – POLITICAL ECONOMY OF MARRIAGE — “we need to restore legal fault to (the mating) market. The entire courtship market was highly protected in the west until we “liberated” ourselves from law and men no longer can sue for crimes against their family.” — As you say, this is the primary institutional harm. However we also demand disclosure of the number and names of previous partners for marriage, must repair the economy so that it’s in favor of the working and middle classes, and provide basic education in human behavior. Family = Assets in a Private Corporation Just in case anyone tries to argue with me, the origin of the family is as a corporation of shared assets and liabilities, and marriage ritual as public insurance those assets from interference (theft) as commons are insured against interference. That’s the economy of marriage. So the idea that we invented the corporation for capitalism is just another leftist fraud. We can ONLY produce commons by reciprocal insurance of demonstrated interests (investments, assets, property), and the family, the tribe, the polity, the state, were all corporations. That’s what a corporation means: a collection of assets protected by limited liability and insured by the polity against the imposition of costs, whether by harm or privatization, by others. The family is the first corporation we insure. Because it’s the first reason men kill. And the destruction of the MARRIAGE MARKET IS THE PRIMARY REASON MEN REVOLT. Yep. it’s an evolutionary necessity. It can’t be otherwise. It’s the most common reason for revolutions in history. Because it’s an existential threat to the reason we exist: reproduction.

  • The Origin and Reason for Marriage – Political Economy of Marriage

    THE ORIGIN AND REASON FOR MARRIAGE – POLITICAL ECONOMY OF MARRIAGE — “we need to restore legal fault to (the mating) market. The entire courtship market was highly protected in the west until we “liberated” ourselves from law and men no longer can sue for crimes against their family.” — As you say, this is the primary institutional harm. However we also demand disclosure of the number and names of previous partners for marriage, must repair the economy so that it’s in favor of the working and middle classes, and provide basic education in human behavior. Family = Assets in a Private Corporation Just in case anyone tries to argue with me, the origin of the family is as a corporation of shared assets and liabilities, and marriage ritual as public insurance those assets from interference (theft) as commons are insured against interference. That’s the economy of marriage. So the idea that we invented the corporation for capitalism is just another leftist fraud. We can ONLY produce commons by reciprocal insurance of demonstrated interests (investments, assets, property), and the family, the tribe, the polity, the state, were all corporations. That’s what a corporation means: a collection of assets protected by limited liability and insured by the polity against the imposition of costs, whether by harm or privatization, by others. The family is the first corporation we insure. Because it’s the first reason men kill. And the destruction of the MARRIAGE MARKET IS THE PRIMARY REASON MEN REVOLT. Yep. it’s an evolutionary necessity. It can’t be otherwise. It’s the most common reason for revolutions in history. Because it’s an existential threat to the reason we exist: reproduction.