Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • The Church Is Finally Free To Follow It’s Naturally Anti-European Incentives

    THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS FREE TO FOLLOW ITS NATURAL INCENTIVES
    (worth repeating)

    The church’s operating model is dependent upon funding by a massive ( poor ignorant dim superstitious ) peasantry needing defense from corrupt states – or those whose actions they cannot grasp.

    So yes, the church is naturally feminine and communist and was only kept in check by the facts that:

    1) The aristocracy used it as a holding company under primogeniture, funded with land grants, staffed with their non-inheriting sons, leasing land to the peasants, and managing to maintain an ignorant, illiterate, fearful, subservient peasantry.

    2) That competing religions would disrupt the church income stream, privilege, and holdings of the noble families.

    Economics in everything. Follow incentives not stories. The church industrialized lying by the combination of maintaining illiteracy, manipulation through sophistry and supernatural authority, and destroyed the works of reason, and the great civilizational achievements of the Greco-Roman revolution.

    The Church was incrementally abandoned in european civilization and became funded by Africans, South Americans, and the rest of the third world. With the collapse of european participation and funding, the transfer of income to the third world, and the demographics of the third world unable to compete in the technological age, and therefore producing continued demand for authoritarian socialism, the church has followed its interest in support of natural allies (the left, globalists, and the communists).

    The only Christian solution I can see is to complete the defeat of the catholic church in the northern hemisphere, the replacement of it with the Orthodox, which has no political ambitions, is inherently nationalistic, and purely ritualistic, and the continued bifurcation of our people into secular, pagan, orthodox, and fundamentalists and leaving the catholic church to its natural demise.

  • The Church Is Finally Free To Follow It’s Naturally Anti-European Incentives

    THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS FREE TO FOLLOW ITS NATURAL INCENTIVES
    (worth repeating)

    The church’s operating model is dependent upon funding by a massive ( poor ignorant dim superstitious ) peasantry needing defense from corrupt states – or those whose actions they cannot grasp.

    So yes, the church is naturally feminine and communist and was only kept in check by the facts that:

    1) The aristocracy used it as a holding company under primogeniture, funded with land grants, staffed with their non-inheriting sons, leasing land to the peasants, and managing to maintain an ignorant, illiterate, fearful, subservient peasantry.

    2) That competing religions would disrupt the church income stream, privilege, and holdings of the noble families.

    Economics in everything. Follow incentives not stories. The church industrialized lying by the combination of maintaining illiteracy, manipulation through sophistry and supernatural authority, and destroyed the works of reason, and the great civilizational achievements of the Greco-Roman revolution.

    The Church was incrementally abandoned in european civilization and became funded by Africans, South Americans, and the rest of the third world. With the collapse of european participation and funding, the transfer of income to the third world, and the demographics of the third world unable to compete in the technological age, and therefore producing continued demand for authoritarian socialism, the church has followed its interest in support of natural allies (the left, globalists, and the communists).

    The only Christian solution I can see is to complete the defeat of the catholic church in the northern hemisphere, the replacement of it with the Orthodox, which has no political ambitions, is inherently nationalistic, and purely ritualistic, and the continued bifurcation of our people into secular, pagan, orthodox, and fundamentalists and leaving the catholic church to its natural demise.

  • TRUTH IS COSTLY Specializing in uncomfortable truths necessary for the resolutio

    TRUTH IS COSTLY

    Specializing in uncomfortable truths necessary for the resolution of the conflicts of the age, isn’t something that earns you friends, but Hatred, Ridicule, Dismissal, Respect, or Admiration. This is why so few people have done it. You must afford it emotionally and economically. I’m just willing to pay the cost.

    The increase in the precision of truth testing was necessary for increasing the precision of lying, given the increase in the scale of the consequences of our actions.

    Taboos are just the most sacred lies. The third rale of interpersonal, social, economic, political, military, and geostrateic discourse.

    They are however, the cause of market demand for increases in the precision of truth testing.

    Why? Because we either war, suffer, or resolve those conflicts, and the only method of resolving them is understanding them – truthfully.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-10-28 02:09:22 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/105109976658312455

  • Church vs State Accountability in Education

    The difference between the Church’s education and state education is that the Church’s future was dependent upon the production of capable peasants – and so the priests, brothers, and sisters were economically ACCOUNTABLE for at least the social and economic results of their efforts. As the product of what remained of catholic education myself, the near military discipline, was almost as good as the military discipline of the military schools (Which I begged for and couldn’t get).

    The problem with contemporary education isn’t just that the schools aren’t run by the nobility, they aren’t staffed by talent, but the bottom end of the education system, and the staff and the administration are not dependent upon, and accountable for, their efforts.

    The problem is worse in the academy, where, like the sale of medieval indulgences, the new academic religion is incentivized to maximize the throughput of students, in exchange for a diploma that grants them access to the workforce.

    This is the most evil system in history

  • Church vs State Accountability in Education

    The difference between the Church’s education and state education is that the Church’s future was dependent upon the production of capable peasants – and so the priests, brothers, and sisters were economically ACCOUNTABLE for at least the social and economic results of their efforts. As the product of what remained of catholic education myself, the near military discipline, was almost as good as the military discipline of the military schools (Which I begged for and couldn’t get).

    The problem with contemporary education isn’t just that the schools aren’t run by the nobility, they aren’t staffed by talent, but the bottom end of the education system, and the staff and the administration are not dependent upon, and accountable for, their efforts.

    The problem is worse in the academy, where, like the sale of medieval indulgences, the new academic religion is incentivized to maximize the throughput of students, in exchange for a diploma that grants them access to the workforce.

    This is the most evil system in history

  • Evolution: It’s not that Europeans were under more pressure but different pressure.

     

    —“KMac, in his last book, talked about how we evolved under extremely challenging environmental circumstances. And that even though so did northern Asians, they are tribal and as blind to their tribalism as is the chosen people. I don’t recall how he reconciled these divergent outcomes. Maybe he didn’t – maybe he just acknowledged them. Then you picked up the thread, if memory serves, and attributed it to the divine. True or false?”—

    I don’t want to get into the position of criticizing KM because it’s nit picking on mentors, allies, and peers. But try to understand his specialization versus mine. His original presumption was that it was genetic more than cultural. Duchesne’s more cultural than genetic. Mine more institutional than cultural, and probably even with genetic. So I KNOW what caused our uniqueness. It’s not a question. The data is in. We know genetics, institutional and cultural, linguistic, technological, and most of all we know how impervious group strategy is to change, and how language contains the group strategy.

    Also, I don’t attribute anything to the divine unless I’m trying to reach people across the isle, speaking on their terms, or engaging in poetic expression.

    It’s not that Europeans were under more pressure but different pressure. Pressure from African diseases is different from pressure from cold. Pressure from competitors is different from competition by nature. Social demands from population density in river farms, vs social demands from scarce population among people constantly on the move. Social competition in warm open climates different from huddling with animals in cold winter longhouses.

    Similar for east Asians(few genetic competitors). Very different for south Eurasians (many genetic competitors), and more so for Africans (zillions of genetic competitors)

    The correct order is probably: Climate, Neoteny, Demographic distribution, first institution, competitors, the sequence of revolutions vs sequence of conquests.

    Net is the most recent race is ancient north Eurasians, and Europeans are the result of a chain of hybridization events as the east Asians moved north and west, and the north Eurasians moved west and south. Our people bypassed the religion-river-farmer stage and went right to steppe herding. That group spread west to conquer the farmers in Europe, and formed a conquering and ruling class, and yes, largely replaced them – organizing an entire polity to adopt the metaphysics of superiority.

    Genghis Khan learned that it was better to rule the Chinese and tax them than slay them, and likewise the steppe herders learned it was better to enslave and rule to pay for their expansionary militarism.

    The original steppe herders were far closer to the spartans than the Athenians. And in retrospect, it’s obvious where spartan habits came from. And its to the spartans we can look for cultural memory, and the romans only slightly less so. The athenians modernized more quiclky – because naval people do so more than territorial army people do (just like anglos vs germans).

    The fall of the Spartans, like us, being the incremental accumulation of political power by women until all the wealthiest landholders were women. why? men died a lot and women could inherit. So women married to accumulate land from aristocracy that was likely to die off. (really).

  • Evolution: It’s not that Europeans were under more pressure but different pressure.

     

    —“KMac, in his last book, talked about how we evolved under extremely challenging environmental circumstances. And that even though so did northern Asians, they are tribal and as blind to their tribalism as is the chosen people. I don’t recall how he reconciled these divergent outcomes. Maybe he didn’t – maybe he just acknowledged them. Then you picked up the thread, if memory serves, and attributed it to the divine. True or false?”—

    I don’t want to get into the position of criticizing KM because it’s nit picking on mentors, allies, and peers. But try to understand his specialization versus mine. His original presumption was that it was genetic more than cultural. Duchesne’s more cultural than genetic. Mine more institutional than cultural, and probably even with genetic. So I KNOW what caused our uniqueness. It’s not a question. The data is in. We know genetics, institutional and cultural, linguistic, technological, and most of all we know how impervious group strategy is to change, and how language contains the group strategy.

    Also, I don’t attribute anything to the divine unless I’m trying to reach people across the isle, speaking on their terms, or engaging in poetic expression.

    It’s not that Europeans were under more pressure but different pressure. Pressure from African diseases is different from pressure from cold. Pressure from competitors is different from competition by nature. Social demands from population density in river farms, vs social demands from scarce population among people constantly on the move. Social competition in warm open climates different from huddling with animals in cold winter longhouses.

    Similar for east Asians(few genetic competitors). Very different for south Eurasians (many genetic competitors), and more so for Africans (zillions of genetic competitors)

    The correct order is probably: Climate, Neoteny, Demographic distribution, first institution, competitors, the sequence of revolutions vs sequence of conquests.

    Net is the most recent race is ancient north Eurasians, and Europeans are the result of a chain of hybridization events as the east Asians moved north and west, and the north Eurasians moved west and south. Our people bypassed the religion-river-farmer stage and went right to steppe herding. That group spread west to conquer the farmers in Europe, and formed a conquering and ruling class, and yes, largely replaced them – organizing an entire polity to adopt the metaphysics of superiority.

    Genghis Khan learned that it was better to rule the Chinese and tax them than slay them, and likewise the steppe herders learned it was better to enslave and rule to pay for their expansionary militarism.

    The original steppe herders were far closer to the spartans than the Athenians. And in retrospect, it’s obvious where spartan habits came from. And its to the spartans we can look for cultural memory, and the romans only slightly less so. The athenians modernized more quiclky – because naval people do so more than territorial army people do (just like anglos vs germans).

    The fall of the Spartans, like us, being the incremental accumulation of political power by women until all the wealthiest landholders were women. why? men died a lot and women could inherit. So women married to accumulate land from aristocracy that was likely to die off. (really).

  • Examples of Cultural Relativism Around the World

     

    —“Curt: What are some examples of cultural relativism around the world?”– quora user

    1) Bride Kidnapping (actions)

    Just to pick a controversial one. While less than two hundred years have passed, we have lost cultural memory of the reason women wanted to be married: independence. It is better to be in command of your own house over your own children than under command of your parent’s house in the service of your brothers and sisters. And to begin insuring you would have children to care for you in your old age. Sex and affection were a perk. A family meant economic independence, social status, and investment in the future.

    In primitive societies, particularly those of horse culture (raiders), of steppe, tundra, and desert, children are part of the household workforce. So husbands must (a) ‘compensate’ parents for the loss of the labor, (b) demonstrate the capacity to provide income for the daughter on the other. (c) provide insurance in case the marriage fails and the family must support the daughter and her children.

    However, in these same societies (i) banditry is heroic and in the family interest (in their world bravery), so is (ii) deception (in their world cunning), and (iii) some parents seek unreasonable prices for their daughters. (iv) some daughters are forced to care for their parents (like slaves) at their own expense.
    So when negotiation is impossible the boy’s family can arrange a kidnapping, and the women of his family will try to convincer her to join their family (she can refuse).

    Or couples who are interested in each other, can arrange a kidnapping, to escape the extraordinary demands of the girl’s parents, or disapproval of her parents, sometimes for reasons against her interests.

    And of course, girls from hostile tribes can be kidnapped, captured and raped at which point, they are ‘unmarketable’, and will escape or stay.

    So, this is why :

    … i) MORALITY is universal: Morality is always decidable, and consists of self-determination, by personal sovereignty, and interpersonal, social, and political reciprocity.

    … ii) Moral NORMS differ in different places at different times because the constitution of moral actions requires accounting for many conditions.


    2) Corruption (Actions)

    In germanic civilization above the Hajnal line (or rather in germanic civilization alone) Europeans practiced bipartite manorialism from about 700AD onward. This had a dramatic effect on the behavior of the population, by limiting access to farmland to young marrieds who had demonstrated good character and suppressing the reproduction (and increasing the starvation and disease) of those who were not. It meant that peasantry was literally children of the manor under legal rule of the manor, until they had their own land at which point they were subject to common law like adults. And if you could somehow through achievement join the trading class, nobility, or god forbid, aristocracy, you would gain legislative influence over your trade, over your territory, or over the nation. In much of european history we see this same pattern: child-slave, teen-serf, adult-freeman, responsible-citizen, accomplished-sovereign. And everyone knew the requirement for moving up that pyramid.

    And that pyramid was jealously guarded with skepticism, demanding you perform successfully to climb it. (all though not to fall from it). And while your rights were individual, your membership was to an insurer. That insurer was your family, or your church community, or the manor, or the state.

    Corruption in this world was only suppressed above that line in Europe and in japan. The rest of the world is notoriously corrupt, from the Italian church to the french bureaucracy to the european Mediterranean, to Russia, India, china. But worst of all in the middle east, where they still cannot form a bureaucracy or an army because the ethic is purely familial and tribal. India suffers from the same devotion to family and village-tribe. China of course, has a long history of disregard for human life, and it’s civility is contrived purely as posturing.

    That’s because in most primitive civilizations deceit and theft is in the family interest. As civilizations evolve, corruption is in the family and regional interest. And for unique reasons, Europeans specialized in the development of commons which were in everyone’s interest. But it’s only because the prosecution of ‘cheats’ was so severe, and the privilege of access to land, freedom, and law, so precious, and that the bureaucracy evolved from the military not state or priesthood.

    Corruption is expected family behavior in most of the world. And it’s expected family behavior not to in the west.

    3) Truth (Words)

    Might as well stick with another controversial topic: **truth before face** (western egalitarianism), **face before truth** (eastern harmonialism), and **face by deceit** is honorable (Middle Eastern and African familism-tribalism). This spectrum describes truth as serving the political interests of everyone (western), the social interests of everyone (eastern), and the familial interests of everyone. This is because heterogeneity produces tribalism, and homogeneity not. Europe and East Asia provided cutural homogeneity. Africa and the Middle east didn’t. The middle east didn’t because Islam solved only the problem of disempowering the chieftains, but not the problem of tribalism – it only exacerbated it.

    Those two are all I have time for although they are excellent examples of the problem.

  • Examples of Cultural Relativism Around the World

     

    —“Curt: What are some examples of cultural relativism around the world?”– quora user

    1) Bride Kidnapping (actions)

    Just to pick a controversial one. While less than two hundred years have passed, we have lost cultural memory of the reason women wanted to be married: independence. It is better to be in command of your own house over your own children than under command of your parent’s house in the service of your brothers and sisters. And to begin insuring you would have children to care for you in your old age. Sex and affection were a perk. A family meant economic independence, social status, and investment in the future.

    In primitive societies, particularly those of horse culture (raiders), of steppe, tundra, and desert, children are part of the household workforce. So husbands must (a) ‘compensate’ parents for the loss of the labor, (b) demonstrate the capacity to provide income for the daughter on the other. (c) provide insurance in case the marriage fails and the family must support the daughter and her children.

    However, in these same societies (i) banditry is heroic and in the family interest (in their world bravery), so is (ii) deception (in their world cunning), and (iii) some parents seek unreasonable prices for their daughters. (iv) some daughters are forced to care for their parents (like slaves) at their own expense.
    So when negotiation is impossible the boy’s family can arrange a kidnapping, and the women of his family will try to convincer her to join their family (she can refuse).

    Or couples who are interested in each other, can arrange a kidnapping, to escape the extraordinary demands of the girl’s parents, or disapproval of her parents, sometimes for reasons against her interests.

    And of course, girls from hostile tribes can be kidnapped, captured and raped at which point, they are ‘unmarketable’, and will escape or stay.

    So, this is why :

    … i) MORALITY is universal: Morality is always decidable, and consists of self-determination, by personal sovereignty, and interpersonal, social, and political reciprocity.

    … ii) Moral NORMS differ in different places at different times because the constitution of moral actions requires accounting for many conditions.


    2) Corruption (Actions)

    In germanic civilization above the Hajnal line (or rather in germanic civilization alone) Europeans practiced bipartite manorialism from about 700AD onward. This had a dramatic effect on the behavior of the population, by limiting access to farmland to young marrieds who had demonstrated good character and suppressing the reproduction (and increasing the starvation and disease) of those who were not. It meant that peasantry was literally children of the manor under legal rule of the manor, until they had their own land at which point they were subject to common law like adults. And if you could somehow through achievement join the trading class, nobility, or god forbid, aristocracy, you would gain legislative influence over your trade, over your territory, or over the nation. In much of european history we see this same pattern: child-slave, teen-serf, adult-freeman, responsible-citizen, accomplished-sovereign. And everyone knew the requirement for moving up that pyramid.

    And that pyramid was jealously guarded with skepticism, demanding you perform successfully to climb it. (all though not to fall from it). And while your rights were individual, your membership was to an insurer. That insurer was your family, or your church community, or the manor, or the state.

    Corruption in this world was only suppressed above that line in Europe and in japan. The rest of the world is notoriously corrupt, from the Italian church to the french bureaucracy to the european Mediterranean, to Russia, India, china. But worst of all in the middle east, where they still cannot form a bureaucracy or an army because the ethic is purely familial and tribal. India suffers from the same devotion to family and village-tribe. China of course, has a long history of disregard for human life, and it’s civility is contrived purely as posturing.

    That’s because in most primitive civilizations deceit and theft is in the family interest. As civilizations evolve, corruption is in the family and regional interest. And for unique reasons, Europeans specialized in the development of commons which were in everyone’s interest. But it’s only because the prosecution of ‘cheats’ was so severe, and the privilege of access to land, freedom, and law, so precious, and that the bureaucracy evolved from the military not state or priesthood.

    Corruption is expected family behavior in most of the world. And it’s expected family behavior not to in the west.

    3) Truth (Words)

    Might as well stick with another controversial topic: **truth before face** (western egalitarianism), **face before truth** (eastern harmonialism), and **face by deceit** is honorable (Middle Eastern and African familism-tribalism). This spectrum describes truth as serving the political interests of everyone (western), the social interests of everyone (eastern), and the familial interests of everyone. This is because heterogeneity produces tribalism, and homogeneity not. Europe and East Asia provided cutural homogeneity. Africa and the Middle east didn’t. The middle east didn’t because Islam solved only the problem of disempowering the chieftains, but not the problem of tribalism – it only exacerbated it.

    Those two are all I have time for although they are excellent examples of the problem.

  • The Alt Right Enemy Within

    What we imagine is:

    “If I can not persuade you, then I’ll bargain with you. If I cannot bargain with you I have to separate myself from you. If I cannot separate myself from you I have to destroy you.”–CD

    What we get is:

    Cowardly, Conflict-Avoiding, Permission-Seeking, Authority-Needing, Right-Wingers. They’re Perfect Christians. Great peasants. Great soldiers. And hyper-moral. The world’s best lower, working, and middle class and secret to western success.

    But the worst possible revolutionaries.

    —“Things unwilling and unable to be reciprocated by the non-European inferior; and such elegancies irrelevant to the common man and the ultimate inconcealable fact that: You remain a threat to me until I destroy you. So why are you wasting your and our time on this
    @curtdoolittle”— @CarsonMcCuller5

    1) RE “Inferiority”: True. And Inactionable. If you can’t operationalize a solution then it’s just a fantasy for children.
    2) RE “Common man”: the common docile conservative sheep is inferior also – at least the left isn’t cowardly. being the cheapest and most valuable laboring, working, and middle class is one thing. Being courageous enough to bear the costs of self-determination is quite different.
    3) RE “Waste our time”: So why are you threatened by the criticism? (you are)
    4)  Erroneous Presumptions: the purpose of my post is an exposition of the logic of the law – not populism.
    5)  Goal? To expose the fact that only a tiny aristocracy was “white”: and “you” aren’t.

    No More Lies.

    —“No more lies: The Anglocucks have no more understanding of your words than hobbits of the Shire, and the Enemy no more care for them than the Captain of the Black Gate, so why are you wasting our time with this? It’s not a vicaro-posthumous vanity is it?”— @CarsonMcCuller5

    1) There are plenty of people who understand – but numbers no longer matter.

    2) Erroneous Presumption of the relevance of the common man and the potential of the right – who are cowardly, Christan, Peasant, magical thinkers – confused that righteous responsibility does not mean bravery.

    —“I say ‘Truth is enough’ is magic thinking, You / We / Anyone haven’t even conveyed the truth to anyone much, let alone they acknowledging it. I say that you have the buffer of intellectual construction and the expectation of death by ill-health between you and reality.”—@curtdoolittle

    The dissident right used the internet to imitate the propaganda of the communists using the method of the bolsheviks: undermine. The difference is that the communists had a strategy and policy behind it that would empower top&bottom against middle.

    You don’t and “you” are middle

    —“What are you suggesting now?”—@CarsonMcCuller5

    I’m not suggesting anything. Winning was possible. I’m blaming you for your fate.

    The truth: “You” have been the cause of the failure of both the first and second attempts to unite the right. The first symbolically, second by policy. When only unity under moral license could make a political victory possible. But no. You chest thump like apes. You’re children.

    There will be no aristocratic revolution, though there may well be a clumsy multi-class revolution against the gifted Covid nonsense, so stop your ridiculous petulant hypocritical ‘anti-Nazi’ squirting, it makes you weaker and less credible for no benefit. End of story.

    Again erroneous presumption. I’m not looking for credibility with “you” because you are equally the enemy of our people. I’m seeking credibility with the majority who also consider you the enemy of our people, and whose influence cannot be permitted because you’re just apes no better than the enemy.

    So I justly measure you morons: chest-thumping boys plying symbolic schoolyard posturing to win a conflict driven by vast forces of genetic, economic, and political self-interest. The left has an intellectual base that drives their soldiers. Right soldiers think they’re smart – and it’s obviously false.

    SOLUTION

    All you ever have to do is show up, follow orders, and not take the bait. But you take the left’s bait every single time. You’re suckers and morons. And you ape-sucker-morons had the gall to poison the well for us because we wouldn’t take the bait as you ape-sucker-morons.

    So it doesn’t matter if we want the same things if you’re ape-boy-sucker-morons taking the left’s bait, falling into every ape-trap they set, and giving them the optics-over-arguments that they want.

    You’re imbeciles. The left is right. You’re undesirable, disagreeable idiots.

    All you had to do is show up, shut up, show support, and let the policy message, showing up, shutting up, showing support create a positive message around POLICY that would let us control the discourse.

    You poisoned both movements. And now we’re out of time.

    You’re a disease.

    You’re the enemy within.