Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • Tripartism to Quadripartism

    Oct 29, 2019, 12:19 PM

    —“Those who Fight, Those who Pray, Those who Work What’s the fourth class?”— Richard Hall

    ^Burghers (the middle class). “Those who Trade” The middle class emerged only once production was able to scale. And production could only scale once productivity was high enough to produce sufficient surpluses to scale. We can modernize Tripartism and simply call them The Defensive, Military, Judicial classes, The Administrative, Clerical, Educational classes, and Productive Financial Entrepreneurial, Professional, Managerial, Craftsman and Labor classes. None of us mention the underclasses, because until recently that meant ‘slave’ because they lacked agency, family, resources, and knowledge to be allowed to ‘roam free’ without an ‘owner’ to take responsibility for them – meaning defend the population from them. But since we develop elites in each of the Military, Administrative, and Productive classes, leaving the majority of the population managing only personal capital, especially the family, and making use of whatever elites that most serve their needs, we tend to separate the economic (Financial, Entrepreneurial,) from the Professional, Managerial, craftsmanly, and laboring classes. The middle east and far east, because of flood river valleys, and irrigation in them, combined the organization of production into the priesthood, and into the state, and the merchant class, even wealthy, traded specialty goods more than organized commodity capital goods in production. Preserving the trading, craftsman, and workman classes, and maintaining what we consider the capitalist class into the state. The problem is of course, state inefficiency and parasitism. The big economic shift occurred when the middle class Germanic Europe, was able to accumulate enough capital to develop the Hanseatic league on the continent – thanks to the lack of a strong central state – and create its own rule of law, own defense, own outposts, and trade networks. It ruled for three hundred years dragging northern Europe into post medieval wealth. The British people able to do the same in the colonies by the same reason: a military state, but an entrepreneurial middle class, capable of funding it’s own adventure. The colonies ended up being a better long term investment, which is why germany, after fighting off napoleon, needed to unify to prevent another despotic french catastrophe, sought to expand her influences (rightly so in my understanding) into territories it had economically domesticated, putting her into competition with Russia and England by unbalancing the world distribution of powers england found (like the usa wrongly does today) the optimum for commercial gains. The British Americans took this to the ultimate test, and created a purely middle class civilization – escaping both church and state – preserving the germanic rule of law, and individual sovereignty. And while england created empire, germany created science, we created opportunity and productivity, and the rest is history.

  • Tripartism to Quadripartism

    Oct 29, 2019, 12:19 PM

    —“Those who Fight, Those who Pray, Those who Work What’s the fourth class?”— Richard Hall

    ^Burghers (the middle class). “Those who Trade” The middle class emerged only once production was able to scale. And production could only scale once productivity was high enough to produce sufficient surpluses to scale. We can modernize Tripartism and simply call them The Defensive, Military, Judicial classes, The Administrative, Clerical, Educational classes, and Productive Financial Entrepreneurial, Professional, Managerial, Craftsman and Labor classes. None of us mention the underclasses, because until recently that meant ‘slave’ because they lacked agency, family, resources, and knowledge to be allowed to ‘roam free’ without an ‘owner’ to take responsibility for them – meaning defend the population from them. But since we develop elites in each of the Military, Administrative, and Productive classes, leaving the majority of the population managing only personal capital, especially the family, and making use of whatever elites that most serve their needs, we tend to separate the economic (Financial, Entrepreneurial,) from the Professional, Managerial, craftsmanly, and laboring classes. The middle east and far east, because of flood river valleys, and irrigation in them, combined the organization of production into the priesthood, and into the state, and the merchant class, even wealthy, traded specialty goods more than organized commodity capital goods in production. Preserving the trading, craftsman, and workman classes, and maintaining what we consider the capitalist class into the state. The problem is of course, state inefficiency and parasitism. The big economic shift occurred when the middle class Germanic Europe, was able to accumulate enough capital to develop the Hanseatic league on the continent – thanks to the lack of a strong central state – and create its own rule of law, own defense, own outposts, and trade networks. It ruled for three hundred years dragging northern Europe into post medieval wealth. The British people able to do the same in the colonies by the same reason: a military state, but an entrepreneurial middle class, capable of funding it’s own adventure. The colonies ended up being a better long term investment, which is why germany, after fighting off napoleon, needed to unify to prevent another despotic french catastrophe, sought to expand her influences (rightly so in my understanding) into territories it had economically domesticated, putting her into competition with Russia and England by unbalancing the world distribution of powers england found (like the usa wrongly does today) the optimum for commercial gains. The British Americans took this to the ultimate test, and created a purely middle class civilization – escaping both church and state – preserving the germanic rule of law, and individual sovereignty. And while england created empire, germany created science, we created opportunity and productivity, and the rest is history.

  • Oct 29, 2019, 3:17 PM (contemplating the biases of indians who participate in ou

    Oct 29, 2019, 3:17 PM (contemplating the biases of indians who participate in our debates.) I think I understand the frustrations I have with indian’s who try to participate in these conversations, whether educated in india or the states. First of all, i do appreciate the rather odd optimism free of evidence endemic in indian culture. it’s what i admire. But, in india, or in an immigrant indian family, or in an indian immigrant community, those with first generation educations have the “doctor problem”, or the ’60’s kid problem’ meaning that when you are surrounded by generations people drastically different in educational knowledge and subsequent ability you overestimate your knowledge and ability, and when you come to America you are ‘educated’ in our academy that markets to that demographic, and sells sociological psychological nonsense in order to preserve income from that demographic – by not ‘correcting’ you and ‘insulting’ you by doing so. This is why our academy is ridiculous now. At least European Americans are educated by habituation in the long history, culture, and information flow of eastern civlization, and our optimism is in our ability to work hard and not be blamed if we fail for our heroic efforts. Or we are optimistic (badly) in our estimations of people from other cultures because we do not realize how Aristotelianism, rule of law, truthful speech, responsibility for the commons, But it’s not some naive optimism that ‘everything is gonna be alright’. Regardless of what civilization or culture you are from, I’m not one of those professors paid to coddle you with comforting falsehoods, or pretense of respect, in exchange for preserving the income stream for the university, or my job. I know my job. My job is jurisprudence. I’m a prosecutor.

  • Oct 29, 2019, 3:17 PM (contemplating the biases of indians who participate in ou

    Oct 29, 2019, 3:17 PM (contemplating the biases of indians who participate in our debates.) I think I understand the frustrations I have with indian’s who try to participate in these conversations, whether educated in india or the states. First of all, i do appreciate the rather odd optimism free of evidence endemic in indian culture. it’s what i admire. But, in india, or in an immigrant indian family, or in an indian immigrant community, those with first generation educations have the “doctor problem”, or the ’60’s kid problem’ meaning that when you are surrounded by generations people drastically different in educational knowledge and subsequent ability you overestimate your knowledge and ability, and when you come to America you are ‘educated’ in our academy that markets to that demographic, and sells sociological psychological nonsense in order to preserve income from that demographic – by not ‘correcting’ you and ‘insulting’ you by doing so. This is why our academy is ridiculous now. At least European Americans are educated by habituation in the long history, culture, and information flow of eastern civlization, and our optimism is in our ability to work hard and not be blamed if we fail for our heroic efforts. Or we are optimistic (badly) in our estimations of people from other cultures because we do not realize how Aristotelianism, rule of law, truthful speech, responsibility for the commons, But it’s not some naive optimism that ‘everything is gonna be alright’. Regardless of what civilization or culture you are from, I’m not one of those professors paid to coddle you with comforting falsehoods, or pretense of respect, in exchange for preserving the income stream for the university, or my job. I know my job. My job is jurisprudence. I’m a prosecutor.

  • Men Evolved for Analytics (politics) and Women for Empathy (children)

    Oct 29, 2019, 7:43 PM (sarcastic humor warning) Yes, the ability of the Academy to sell non-stem courses in and emotional sedation to women wiling to pay 100k for a non-science degree in pseudosciences, sophisms and fictionalisms like psychology, sociology, marketing, human relations, ‘business’, ‘nonsense-studies’, – “advance mothering and gossiping” – without demonstrating cognitive ability in mathematics, physics, chemistry, biochemistry, and economics does in fact fund the entire edifice, and at the same time nearly eradicate rates of reproduction. This is the problem throughout history. Women in every civlization conform to whatever other women conform to no matter how … questionable – whether islamic suppression, or endemic tolerance for physical abuse, or the marxist, postmodern,, feminist, and denialist folly of equality that takes advantage of the female cognitive fear of she or her children being left behind in the resource distribution – or worse, left behind as the band and tribe migrate to new territories. Women are how the they brought christianity in to undermine the empire, and women are how the marxist, postmodernists, and feminists, brought their repetition of the destruction of civilization into ours. Women evolved for empathy to extend their nervous system to infants and children who are unable to communicate. Men are easily fooled by women day in day out. We lack their empathy. But we men evolved for politics (empiricism). We are not fooled in politics – we are just fooled by women. And interestingly enough, the enemy uses the feminine technique of women to undermine our civilization using our women. Otherwise we would never have had the present problems, because we would never have had other than a conservative president and senate. Edit

  • Men Evolved for Analytics (politics) and Women for Empathy (children)

    Oct 29, 2019, 7:43 PM (sarcastic humor warning) Yes, the ability of the Academy to sell non-stem courses in and emotional sedation to women wiling to pay 100k for a non-science degree in pseudosciences, sophisms and fictionalisms like psychology, sociology, marketing, human relations, ‘business’, ‘nonsense-studies’, – “advance mothering and gossiping” – without demonstrating cognitive ability in mathematics, physics, chemistry, biochemistry, and economics does in fact fund the entire edifice, and at the same time nearly eradicate rates of reproduction. This is the problem throughout history. Women in every civlization conform to whatever other women conform to no matter how … questionable – whether islamic suppression, or endemic tolerance for physical abuse, or the marxist, postmodern,, feminist, and denialist folly of equality that takes advantage of the female cognitive fear of she or her children being left behind in the resource distribution – or worse, left behind as the band and tribe migrate to new territories. Women are how the they brought christianity in to undermine the empire, and women are how the marxist, postmodernists, and feminists, brought their repetition of the destruction of civilization into ours. Women evolved for empathy to extend their nervous system to infants and children who are unable to communicate. Men are easily fooled by women day in day out. We lack their empathy. But we men evolved for politics (empiricism). We are not fooled in politics – we are just fooled by women. And interestingly enough, the enemy uses the feminine technique of women to undermine our civilization using our women. Otherwise we would never have had the present problems, because we would never have had other than a conservative president and senate. Edit

  • I Don”t Do Mgtow, I Fix the Problem

    Oct 30, 2019, 9:09 AM While I understand the sentiment, and understand the need to restore masculinity, I don’t MGTOW – I only do truth, reciprocity, compatibilism, markets, and anti-feminism, anti-marxism, anti-postmodernism, and re-masculinization through restoration of bonding through competition and achievement, and re-militarization to preserve hierarchy in role, equality in value, self sacrifice for the common good. You do not see me in MGTOW circles. MGTOW is an expression of withdrawal, in the christian and buddhist models, not an expression of achievement or restoration. The movement exists because men feel they can only achieve individually improvement, instead collective improvement of in civic groups. This again was the product of feminism in eduction, both undermining male boding by competition, and male bonding by military conflict, and male bonding in commercial endeavors, and male bonding in civic improvement. MGTOW is the incorrect strategy. Instead it is restoration of male social orders that create male tribal spaces, leaving women to their nesting spaces. We must restore the destruction of male civc organizations by the feminists using the court system, to deprive men of the equivalent of the female brood and her gossip circle of friends. We must eliminate the dysgenia of the state incentives to redistribute disproportionate male contribution to state revenues, to disproportionate female consumption of state services, without reciprocal exchange. End common property, alimony, child support, and women must fund ‘women’s issues’ with their revenues. Just as men musts fund ‘mens issues’ with their revenues. Unless they exchange in trades. We must restore reciprocity and compatibility. And to do that we must threaten retribution and restitution, by equal and opposite means. Which is how I argue the return to compromise: “We can easily reverse asymmetric female benefit from asymmetric male contribution, so that male asymmetric contribution remains male asymmetric benefit. Or we can compromise and return to exchanges that is the very reason why western women had standing to abuse any asymmetric benefit.

    1. MGTOW to restore male self-care – reconstructive education and therapy.

    2. Teach Stoic Method, Masculine Aryan Virtues-Feminine Christian Values, Epicurean Means

    3. Restore voluntary association and disassociation in law.

    4. Restore men’s sport, military, trade, commercial, and civilc organizations.

    5. De-Financialize the economy, and end consumer interest, to restore working and middle class reproduction, and restore rates of reproduction.

    6. Restore the “church” under secular, traditional, christian-feminine, and pagan-masculine options instead of the academy-state as the central organ of education, family, and family finance, creating the most advanced system of family support ever existing in human history.

    7. Reform academy by limiting it to the teaching of courses in calculative and operationally constructible methods; cause all colleges and universities to warranty their services; cause all colleges and universities to carry any and all student debt – payable within six years; restore the division of grades 8+ to trades, clerical, managerial, professional, entrepreneurial, financial, and scientific specialization. And have children in education overlap ages in this classroom to compensate for different rates of development, or separate into classrooms again by degree of development that masks the fact that the principle difference between us is the tradeoff between rate of physical maturity and rate of leaning increasingly complex content.(and ending stigmas that wrongly stick thru life). Yes we are all in the end different in cognitive complexity we are not different in achievement within our degree of cognitive complexity. This is the issue. We can learn conscientiousness to some degree even if we cannot learn to learn complexity faster.

    8. Restore all production of commons to the sphere of influence and responsibility over the commons, but limiting the federal to it’s functions, state and city-state to its functions, county to its functions, locality to its functions, neighborhood to its functions, and family to its functions and individual to his functions.

    This will restore mutual consideration and care, the civic society only europeans developed, and the high trust civilization upon which all of our privileges both western and across all mankind derived.

  • I Don”t Do Mgtow, I Fix the Problem

    Oct 30, 2019, 9:09 AM While I understand the sentiment, and understand the need to restore masculinity, I don’t MGTOW – I only do truth, reciprocity, compatibilism, markets, and anti-feminism, anti-marxism, anti-postmodernism, and re-masculinization through restoration of bonding through competition and achievement, and re-militarization to preserve hierarchy in role, equality in value, self sacrifice for the common good. You do not see me in MGTOW circles. MGTOW is an expression of withdrawal, in the christian and buddhist models, not an expression of achievement or restoration. The movement exists because men feel they can only achieve individually improvement, instead collective improvement of in civic groups. This again was the product of feminism in eduction, both undermining male boding by competition, and male bonding by military conflict, and male bonding in commercial endeavors, and male bonding in civic improvement. MGTOW is the incorrect strategy. Instead it is restoration of male social orders that create male tribal spaces, leaving women to their nesting spaces. We must restore the destruction of male civc organizations by the feminists using the court system, to deprive men of the equivalent of the female brood and her gossip circle of friends. We must eliminate the dysgenia of the state incentives to redistribute disproportionate male contribution to state revenues, to disproportionate female consumption of state services, without reciprocal exchange. End common property, alimony, child support, and women must fund ‘women’s issues’ with their revenues. Just as men musts fund ‘mens issues’ with their revenues. Unless they exchange in trades. We must restore reciprocity and compatibility. And to do that we must threaten retribution and restitution, by equal and opposite means. Which is how I argue the return to compromise: “We can easily reverse asymmetric female benefit from asymmetric male contribution, so that male asymmetric contribution remains male asymmetric benefit. Or we can compromise and return to exchanges that is the very reason why western women had standing to abuse any asymmetric benefit.

    1. MGTOW to restore male self-care – reconstructive education and therapy.

    2. Teach Stoic Method, Masculine Aryan Virtues-Feminine Christian Values, Epicurean Means

    3. Restore voluntary association and disassociation in law.

    4. Restore men’s sport, military, trade, commercial, and civilc organizations.

    5. De-Financialize the economy, and end consumer interest, to restore working and middle class reproduction, and restore rates of reproduction.

    6. Restore the “church” under secular, traditional, christian-feminine, and pagan-masculine options instead of the academy-state as the central organ of education, family, and family finance, creating the most advanced system of family support ever existing in human history.

    7. Reform academy by limiting it to the teaching of courses in calculative and operationally constructible methods; cause all colleges and universities to warranty their services; cause all colleges and universities to carry any and all student debt – payable within six years; restore the division of grades 8+ to trades, clerical, managerial, professional, entrepreneurial, financial, and scientific specialization. And have children in education overlap ages in this classroom to compensate for different rates of development, or separate into classrooms again by degree of development that masks the fact that the principle difference between us is the tradeoff between rate of physical maturity and rate of leaning increasingly complex content.(and ending stigmas that wrongly stick thru life). Yes we are all in the end different in cognitive complexity we are not different in achievement within our degree of cognitive complexity. This is the issue. We can learn conscientiousness to some degree even if we cannot learn to learn complexity faster.

    8. Restore all production of commons to the sphere of influence and responsibility over the commons, but limiting the federal to it’s functions, state and city-state to its functions, county to its functions, locality to its functions, neighborhood to its functions, and family to its functions and individual to his functions.

    This will restore mutual consideration and care, the civic society only europeans developed, and the high trust civilization upon which all of our privileges both western and across all mankind derived.

  • Women are more easily persuaded by the modern-day mantra of “Whatever makes you happy”

    Oct 30, 2019, 9:55 AM WOMEN EVOLVED to make use of the market for sovereignty, particularly sovereignty from males seeking to limit their choice of reproduction and limits to their consumption. Conversely, men in collections of brothers, evolved to kill off rival collections of brothers, in order to obtain their property and their females. And men evolved cooperation using tools to constrain alphas in order to redistribute access to females for sex, and care. (reproduction is not in male minds until property evolves)

    —“Women initiate more divorces because we’re more easily persuaded by the modern-day mantra of “Whatever makes you happy”. It is entirely due to our capacity to prioritise feelings over truth.’—Lisa Outhwaite

    Lisa is insightful. But i’ll clarify a bit that that women have always and everywhere been hypergamic, and men willing to kill more so over women than any other reason by orders of magnitude, which is the origin of our ‘pairing off’ prior to our institution of marriage. When we evolved a division of labor, specialized tools, equipment, and constructions, animal property, and territorial property, we evolved marriage, but the property division was a women and her children and a man and his assets – which is a necessary division of the means of survival. So in contemporary economic productivity, there is no cost to women’s exercise of disassociation, and there are, as she says above, many incentives from the feminist movement, the postmodernist movement, and the anti-white male, anti-western civilization movement, and women always conform to whatever higher status women conform to, no matter what those women conform to. I’ll state “Whatever Makes You Happy” scientifically: the organization of the female brain, it’s developmental differences in connectivity and size, and it’s bias in hormones to cause that differences (brains are grown), creates a far more numerous, for more intense, far more urgent, stimulation of independent networks creating far more demand for her attention, and attention that causes her to bear costs (effort) to maintain in stable state (control). This is a purely physical process she has ver little control over and evolution prohibited her from having control over. Men by contrast ‘use less of our brains’ which is better said as men’s brains evolved for the opposite function, and they are organized to “compartmentalize information” so that it is limited to the physical world and physical body, so that we will bear physical costs on behalf of one another, of women, and of children they raise. Between work on the constitution, work on completing religion, work on migrating to the mainstream, work on the institute, work on Michael’s collection of my essays, and not working on the main book I need to publish, I am trying to make time to finish the Foundations course, and the explanation of the brain and behavior in operational terms, so that we are no longer attribute to petty psychologizing that which is a physical difference instructions of our brains, that evolution discovered was necessary for us to rise to the top of the planetary food chain. Once that is done, we will see the relationship between the structure of the brain, operational language, testimonial speech, psychological acquisitionism, ethical and moral propertarianism, and social compatibilism, that is only optimized by extending the structure of the brain into our institutions: markets in everything. The brain evolved to function as a market for attention, with differences in the cost of attention, by region, module, and sub-organ, determining differences in costs of providing attention to that region, module, and sub-organ. Even this description describes compatibilism. I only do compatibilism, for the purpose of maximum quality of life while in pursuit of maximum eugenic evolution, with maximum speed, for the maximum achievement of mankind, in the shortest possible time, given the hostility of the planet and the universe to the development of intelligent life forms, that require long periods of stability and short periods of stress to incrementally evolve. In other words, I always and everywhere take a question to its last criteria of decidability using what we call in computer science ‘exhaustive search’. Cheers

  • Women are more easily persuaded by the modern-day mantra of “Whatever makes you happy”

    Oct 30, 2019, 9:55 AM WOMEN EVOLVED to make use of the market for sovereignty, particularly sovereignty from males seeking to limit their choice of reproduction and limits to their consumption. Conversely, men in collections of brothers, evolved to kill off rival collections of brothers, in order to obtain their property and their females. And men evolved cooperation using tools to constrain alphas in order to redistribute access to females for sex, and care. (reproduction is not in male minds until property evolves)

    —“Women initiate more divorces because we’re more easily persuaded by the modern-day mantra of “Whatever makes you happy”. It is entirely due to our capacity to prioritise feelings over truth.’—Lisa Outhwaite

    Lisa is insightful. But i’ll clarify a bit that that women have always and everywhere been hypergamic, and men willing to kill more so over women than any other reason by orders of magnitude, which is the origin of our ‘pairing off’ prior to our institution of marriage. When we evolved a division of labor, specialized tools, equipment, and constructions, animal property, and territorial property, we evolved marriage, but the property division was a women and her children and a man and his assets – which is a necessary division of the means of survival. So in contemporary economic productivity, there is no cost to women’s exercise of disassociation, and there are, as she says above, many incentives from the feminist movement, the postmodernist movement, and the anti-white male, anti-western civilization movement, and women always conform to whatever higher status women conform to, no matter what those women conform to. I’ll state “Whatever Makes You Happy” scientifically: the organization of the female brain, it’s developmental differences in connectivity and size, and it’s bias in hormones to cause that differences (brains are grown), creates a far more numerous, for more intense, far more urgent, stimulation of independent networks creating far more demand for her attention, and attention that causes her to bear costs (effort) to maintain in stable state (control). This is a purely physical process she has ver little control over and evolution prohibited her from having control over. Men by contrast ‘use less of our brains’ which is better said as men’s brains evolved for the opposite function, and they are organized to “compartmentalize information” so that it is limited to the physical world and physical body, so that we will bear physical costs on behalf of one another, of women, and of children they raise. Between work on the constitution, work on completing religion, work on migrating to the mainstream, work on the institute, work on Michael’s collection of my essays, and not working on the main book I need to publish, I am trying to make time to finish the Foundations course, and the explanation of the brain and behavior in operational terms, so that we are no longer attribute to petty psychologizing that which is a physical difference instructions of our brains, that evolution discovered was necessary for us to rise to the top of the planetary food chain. Once that is done, we will see the relationship between the structure of the brain, operational language, testimonial speech, psychological acquisitionism, ethical and moral propertarianism, and social compatibilism, that is only optimized by extending the structure of the brain into our institutions: markets in everything. The brain evolved to function as a market for attention, with differences in the cost of attention, by region, module, and sub-organ, determining differences in costs of providing attention to that region, module, and sub-organ. Even this description describes compatibilism. I only do compatibilism, for the purpose of maximum quality of life while in pursuit of maximum eugenic evolution, with maximum speed, for the maximum achievement of mankind, in the shortest possible time, given the hostility of the planet and the universe to the development of intelligent life forms, that require long periods of stability and short periods of stress to incrementally evolve. In other words, I always and everywhere take a question to its last criteria of decidability using what we call in computer science ‘exhaustive search’. Cheers