Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • The Dependence on Land and The Variation in Group Strategies

    Apr 24, 2020, 12:15 PM

    –“I was working the rather large winter garden this afternoon I have planted with my father. Thinking about the respective Peloponnesian and Delian strategies. It got me thinking about two things. Agricultural productivity / output and the concurrent effervescence of commercial activity, economic growth, and thus civilisational expansion (consider this also in a Rome vs Carthage context too). The second angle was the context of one’s own personal independence and self-sovereignty, in this sense as a landowner, either large or small scale. Be it in terms of food supply, land as a hold of value, and also as an individual / family / community area with which to defend one’s own assets. Whilst Australia and America have different cultures and expressions of “homesteading” there are some similarities too, you might call it a “dying frontier of the self-owned man”. Do you have any pointers or suggestions from a Propertarian standpoint?”— A Friend

    Yes, you have the correct insight, that I would translate as “If a man is dependent upon the land, he intuits others are also dependent upon the land, and that he cannot defend his land nor can others without collective defense of land, and collective defense by almost everyone. This is the opposite of migratory pastoralists and disaporic traders (Carthage), or diasporic usurers (Jews), or diasporic thieves(gypsies), or diasporic raiders(muslims), diasporic rent seekers(russians, mongols), but not the same as settled(germans, spartans) or diasporic producers (europeans, chinese – and what should have been hindus). That is because we specialize in different strategies and our value of territory, built capital, institutional, and cultural commons, differs by where our revenue comes from and the composition of our ‘armies’ and the strategy that these men use for control of predation (raiding), parasitism (extractive rule, usury, theft), or domestication (productive rule, settlement, common capital production.)

  • The Cognitive Origins of Conspiracy and Oppression Theories

    A conspiracy theory requires that one attribute incentives that fail the test of occam’s razor, almost always because the individual is a social outlier, and has limited sensitivity to, experience with, or knowledge and understanding of how people operate in large groups. Conspiracy theory is the equivalent of dunning kruger failure of personal assessment, projected upon interpersonal and social assessment. In both cases the individual attributes greater ability, agency, and logic to the self and others than they have, because of mistrust, because they do not trust either their own cognition, others, or both. This is why conspiracy theory (systemization) tends to be a male category of cognitive failure, and oppression (personalization) tends to be a female category of cognitive failure. However, we note that in both the Male conspiracy theory and the female oppression cognitive failures, that the parties do not seek to understand the incentives of the individuals they are judging, or to falsify their conspiracy or oppression narratives. There is a reason for it. The human mind operates by building a world model ‘fit for it’s physical, emotional, psychological, and mental budget’. A physiological, emotional, and cognitive economy. This is why people who are ill, depressed, tired, at different points of the day, rested, healthy, excited, or joyous all perceive the same world slighlty differently In both conspiracy and oppression cognitive failures, the individual has defended his or her desperate attempt to suppress the feeling of being out of control of his or her life (due to his or her cognitive limitations), by false self-promise of comprehension. Status is our human accounting system. There are healthy and unhealthy means of suppression emotional panic from cognitive failure to find a means of obtaining success (status) in the social, economic, and political marketplace. Agency (success), Truth / Knowledge / Understanding (acceptance), Philosophy (settlement), Theology-Religion (detachment), Self Discipline (buddhism,stoicism), Ritual/Sport-exercise/hypersocializatin(exposure), Conspiracy and Oppression (withdrawal) narratives are the most common means of providing mindfulness. It’s not hard to see how the consequences of deviation from Knowledge escalate. So, both oppression and conspiracy behaviors are expressions of proto-depression, or prolonged depression from the continuous failure of one’s ideas about one’s self and others and what is in other’s abilities and interests. And That’s because evolution insured that we would remain optimistic to survive in the face of incredible stresses when continued existence is no longer rational. Exhaust all possible explanation for rational choice prior to default to malincentives (conspiracy of intent). In most cases it’s conspiracy of organizational incentives, conspiracy of common interests, conspiracy of genetic bias (such as the ashkenazi adoption of the female strategy), ignorance, error, or stupidity. If you exhaust all of the possible rational incentives then only malincentives remain. But rare. Never attribute to intention what is the product of either incentives, ignorance, or stupidity. Humans by and large justify what they do post hoc with a story. Humans by ad large pursue self interests that they can justify with a story afterward. Because that’s what our brains do. And frankly the more responsibility you have, for the more people, for more risk, the more you have to compromise between different sets of unacceptable externalities that are the cost of getting whatever it s you’re doing done with the resources available, time available, people you have to work with, and incentives you can provide. Most organizational failure that we interpret as conspiracy is the result of people in organizations that are producing malincentives by accident rather than by design. Most groups that engage in evil are doing so because they consider what they’re doing a good. As I’m fond of saying, serial killers justify what they do, and the mothers of serial killers justify what they’ve done, and the fathers of serial killers are happy to throw away the key if not pull the lever. So if it is other than a conspiracy of intention, our problem is not to wish for better humans, but to rule with the humans we have, using the law and incentives to prevent malincentives.

  • The Cognitive Origins of Conspiracy and Oppression Theories

    A conspiracy theory requires that one attribute incentives that fail the test of occam’s razor, almost always because the individual is a social outlier, and has limited sensitivity to, experience with, or knowledge and understanding of how people operate in large groups. Conspiracy theory is the equivalent of dunning kruger failure of personal assessment, projected upon interpersonal and social assessment. In both cases the individual attributes greater ability, agency, and logic to the self and others than they have, because of mistrust, because they do not trust either their own cognition, others, or both. This is why conspiracy theory (systemization) tends to be a male category of cognitive failure, and oppression (personalization) tends to be a female category of cognitive failure. However, we note that in both the Male conspiracy theory and the female oppression cognitive failures, that the parties do not seek to understand the incentives of the individuals they are judging, or to falsify their conspiracy or oppression narratives. There is a reason for it. The human mind operates by building a world model ‘fit for it’s physical, emotional, psychological, and mental budget’. A physiological, emotional, and cognitive economy. This is why people who are ill, depressed, tired, at different points of the day, rested, healthy, excited, or joyous all perceive the same world slighlty differently In both conspiracy and oppression cognitive failures, the individual has defended his or her desperate attempt to suppress the feeling of being out of control of his or her life (due to his or her cognitive limitations), by false self-promise of comprehension. Status is our human accounting system. There are healthy and unhealthy means of suppression emotional panic from cognitive failure to find a means of obtaining success (status) in the social, economic, and political marketplace. Agency (success), Truth / Knowledge / Understanding (acceptance), Philosophy (settlement), Theology-Religion (detachment), Self Discipline (buddhism,stoicism), Ritual/Sport-exercise/hypersocializatin(exposure), Conspiracy and Oppression (withdrawal) narratives are the most common means of providing mindfulness. It’s not hard to see how the consequences of deviation from Knowledge escalate. So, both oppression and conspiracy behaviors are expressions of proto-depression, or prolonged depression from the continuous failure of one’s ideas about one’s self and others and what is in other’s abilities and interests. And That’s because evolution insured that we would remain optimistic to survive in the face of incredible stresses when continued existence is no longer rational. Exhaust all possible explanation for rational choice prior to default to malincentives (conspiracy of intent). In most cases it’s conspiracy of organizational incentives, conspiracy of common interests, conspiracy of genetic bias (such as the ashkenazi adoption of the female strategy), ignorance, error, or stupidity. If you exhaust all of the possible rational incentives then only malincentives remain. But rare. Never attribute to intention what is the product of either incentives, ignorance, or stupidity. Humans by and large justify what they do post hoc with a story. Humans by ad large pursue self interests that they can justify with a story afterward. Because that’s what our brains do. And frankly the more responsibility you have, for the more people, for more risk, the more you have to compromise between different sets of unacceptable externalities that are the cost of getting whatever it s you’re doing done with the resources available, time available, people you have to work with, and incentives you can provide. Most organizational failure that we interpret as conspiracy is the result of people in organizations that are producing malincentives by accident rather than by design. Most groups that engage in evil are doing so because they consider what they’re doing a good. As I’m fond of saying, serial killers justify what they do, and the mothers of serial killers justify what they’ve done, and the fathers of serial killers are happy to throw away the key if not pull the lever. So if it is other than a conspiracy of intention, our problem is not to wish for better humans, but to rule with the humans we have, using the law and incentives to prevent malincentives.

  • The Natural Law Of The European Peoples

    The Natural Law of the European Peoples

    The group evolutionary strategy of the European peoples has remained constant for thousands of years – through the bronze, Mediterranean, Continental, Steel, Naval Colonial, and Post-war, periods. And that’s because our traditional law that reinforced that strategy remained constant independent of the various attempts at reorganizing rule. But despite this consistency, the west never had a bible – just a Canon; and that Canon was written in multiple frames, including scientific, legal, philosophical, normative, literary, and theological. Philosophy, theology, and tradition are just vehicles for perpetuating a group strategy in a grammar of wishes. Law is the result of what actually occurs – not what is wished for. Our Founding Fathers, after generations of the English civil wars, sought to reduce that canon to constitution. But they lacked the skill we developed in the 20th because of programming, the sciences, and the collapse of the philosophical program. They were successful despite those weaknesses as long as the heroic narrative of the revolution persisted, or what the founders said was dependent upon the moral teachings of the church. The failure of the church to reform in the face of Darwin and the sciences, the replacement of the church with the academy, the capture of the academy by the left, combined with Anti-westernism, under the guise of privilege, colonialism, and slavery provided the means of undermining that narrative. So we must complete the Greco-Roman-germanic-anglo-American research program and produce that bible in the form of a constitution such that no narrative can undermine it, without causing our retaliation. We need to create the white law – a rational, scientific, western competitor to Jewish law and Muslim sharia. A strict construction from our founding differences: sovereignty and reciprocity, truth and duty, judge and jury, heroism and excellence, family and commons, and the market for voluntary cooperation in all walks of life – that together produce the social-political and economic order most rapidly open to adaptation and innovation. We need a constitution and a law closed to interpretation open to innovation, but beyond which no man, private, public, or foreign may tread. Heroism and excellence, Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, and Duty, Judge and Jury, and markets in all aspects of life: association, cooperation, production, reproduction, commons, polities, and war. That is the secret to western civilization. Sovereignty – and its consequences. In this section we codify for the first time, The Natural Law of the European Peoples – not only to explain, and inform, but to prevent repetition of the dark ages past and present, and to provide for the European peoples that which others have codified: a logic and body of law beyond which none may tread by display word or deed – especially those in the military, state, government, treasury, and academy.

  • The Natural Law Of The European Peoples

    The Natural Law of the European Peoples

    The group evolutionary strategy of the European peoples has remained constant for thousands of years – through the bronze, Mediterranean, Continental, Steel, Naval Colonial, and Post-war, periods. And that’s because our traditional law that reinforced that strategy remained constant independent of the various attempts at reorganizing rule. But despite this consistency, the west never had a bible – just a Canon; and that Canon was written in multiple frames, including scientific, legal, philosophical, normative, literary, and theological. Philosophy, theology, and tradition are just vehicles for perpetuating a group strategy in a grammar of wishes. Law is the result of what actually occurs – not what is wished for. Our Founding Fathers, after generations of the English civil wars, sought to reduce that canon to constitution. But they lacked the skill we developed in the 20th because of programming, the sciences, and the collapse of the philosophical program. They were successful despite those weaknesses as long as the heroic narrative of the revolution persisted, or what the founders said was dependent upon the moral teachings of the church. The failure of the church to reform in the face of Darwin and the sciences, the replacement of the church with the academy, the capture of the academy by the left, combined with Anti-westernism, under the guise of privilege, colonialism, and slavery provided the means of undermining that narrative. So we must complete the Greco-Roman-germanic-anglo-American research program and produce that bible in the form of a constitution such that no narrative can undermine it, without causing our retaliation. We need to create the white law – a rational, scientific, western competitor to Jewish law and Muslim sharia. A strict construction from our founding differences: sovereignty and reciprocity, truth and duty, judge and jury, heroism and excellence, family and commons, and the market for voluntary cooperation in all walks of life – that together produce the social-political and economic order most rapidly open to adaptation and innovation. We need a constitution and a law closed to interpretation open to innovation, but beyond which no man, private, public, or foreign may tread. Heroism and excellence, Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, and Duty, Judge and Jury, and markets in all aspects of life: association, cooperation, production, reproduction, commons, polities, and war. That is the secret to western civilization. Sovereignty – and its consequences. In this section we codify for the first time, The Natural Law of the European Peoples – not only to explain, and inform, but to prevent repetition of the dark ages past and present, and to provide for the European peoples that which others have codified: a logic and body of law beyond which none may tread by display word or deed – especially those in the military, state, government, treasury, and academy.

  • On Philosophy – Is It All Sophistry?

    A Collection of Posts on Philosophy from An Anti-Philosophy Philosopher. 😉

    . . .

    Q: Curt; Who are your influences?

    [insert page=”curt-who-are-your-influences” display=”content”]

    Q: Curt; What’s the most inspiring philosophical text you’ve read?

    [insert page=”curt-whats-the-most-inspiring-philosophical-text-youve-read” display=”content”]

    Q: No, I don’t have respect for ‘philosophers’

    [insert page=”curt-doolittle-updated-his-status-2043″ display=”content”]

    Q: But yes. There are a few philosophers I’d recommend.

    [insert page=”ok-so-yes-there-are-a-few-philosophers-id-recommend” display=”content”]

    Q: Who is the most influential living philosopher?

    [insert page=”who-is-the-most-influential-living-philosopher” display=”content”]

    Q: Who are the best current right wing (Western) thinkers?

    [insert page=”currently-who-are-the-best-right-wing-philosophers-thinkers-im-a-leftist-and-i-believe-that-its-important-to-challenge-the-beliefs-you-hold-so-im-mostly-looking-for-auth” display=”content”]

    Q: Are there any serious contemporary fascist philosophers (No, other than the chinese communist party)

    [insert page=”are-there-serious-contemporary-fascist-philosophers” display=”content”]

    Q: How do I learn Philosophy?

    [insert page=”q-how-do-i-learn-philosophy” display=”content”]

    Q What’s The Criteria for A Philosopher: What Disambiguates a Philosopher from Philosophizing?

    [insert page=”the-criteria-for-a-philosopher” display=”content”]

    Q: What does a philosopher do?

    [insert page=”what-does-a-philosopher-do” display=”content”]

    Q: Defining Philosophy

    [insert page=”11306″ display=”content”]

    The Functions of a Philosopher

    [insert page=”the-functions-of-a-philosopher” display=”content”]

    The Measure of A Philosopher: Beneficially Novel, Good, Bad(wrong), And Dangerous

    [insert page=”the-measure-of-a-philosopher-beneficially-novel-good-badwrong-and-dangerous” display=”content”]

    We Can Judge the Good and Bad Philosophers

    [insert page=”we-can-now-objectively-and-scientifically-judge-good-philosophers-and-bad-philosophers” display=”content”]

    The 20th Century Philosophers Were Seeking Power, Not Truth

    [insert page=”29th-century-philosophers-were-seeking-power-not-truth” display=”content”]

    Good Philosophers Matter – If you can find one.

    [insert page=”good-philosophers-matter” display=”content”]

    Why Doesn’t Philosophy Get Respect?

    [insert page=”why-doesnt-philosophy-get-respect” display=”content”]

    Philosophy Doesn’t Need a Rebranding, It Needs A Reformation

    [insert page=”nyt-followup-philosophy-needs-more-than-rebranding-it-needs-a-reformation” display=”content”]

    Philosophy Has Been a Catastrophic Failure

    [insert page=”philosophy-has-been-a-catastrophic-failure” display=”content”]

    Should We Kill All The Pseudoscientists and Philosophers and Theologians?

    [insert page=”kill-all-the-pseudoscientists-and-philosophers-theologians” display=”content”]

    The Demarcation Problem is Complete

    [insert page=”the-demarcation-problem-is-complete” display=”content”]

    Metaphysics Is Complete – All else is fictionalism.

    [insert page=”hierarchy-grammars-testimonies-metaphysics-deceits” display=”content”]

    [insert page=”what-is-your-personal-philosophy-as-it-relates-to-ethics-and-metaphysics-why” display=”content”]

    [insert page=”metaphysics-vs-paradigms-the-lesson” display=”content”]

    There Is Only One ‘Philosophy’ If We Speak The Truth. The Rest Is Ignorance, Error, Bias And Lies

    [insert page=”there-is-only-one-philosophy-if-we-speak-the-truth-the-rest-is-ignorance-error-bias-and-lies” display=”content”]

    Why Are So Many Scientists Bashing Philosophers?

    [insert page=”why-are-so-many-scientists-bashing-philosophers” display=”content”]

    The Scientist Is “the One Who Knocks”

    [insert page=”curt-doolittle-updated-his-status-2316″ display=”content”]

    Converting Kantian Rationalism to Scientific Prose

    [insert page=”a-very-very-important-set-of-ideas” display=”content”]

    The End of Justificationary A Priorism

    [insert page=”the-end-of-justificationary-apriorism-vs-critical-empiricism” display=”content”]

    Why Do Rationalists Avoid Testing via the Empirical, Operational, and Reciprocity?

    [insert page=”why-do-rationalists-avoid-testing-via-the-empirical-operational-and-reciprocity” display=”content”]

    Why Did The Philosophers Of Science Only Partly Succeed?

    [insert page=”why-did-the-philosophers-of-science-only-partly-succeed/” display=”content”]

    Continental > Postmodern Philosophy -vs- Analytic > Testimonial Philosophy

    [insert page=”continental-postmodern-philosophy-vs-analytic-testimonial-philosophy” display=”content”]

    The Intellectual Catastrophe Of Specialization And The Cure For It In Education

    [insert page=”the-intellectual-catastrophe-of-specialization-and-the-cure-for-it-in-education” display=”content”]

    . . .

    The Timeline of Philosophy – Five Movements

    [insert page=”the-timeline-of-philosophical-methods” display=”content”]

    The Origins of Philosophy

    [insert page=”10932″ display=”content”]

    Philosophy (Moral Literature) Is Not Much Help

    [insert page=”philosophy-moral-literature-is-not-much-help” display=”content”]

    Moral Language As Attempted Fraud?

    [insert page=”moral-language-as-attempted-fraud” display=”content”]

    Conflation and Deconflation in Argument

    [insert page=”conflation-and-deconflation-in-argument” display=”content”]

    Philosophy vs Sophism

    [insert page=”counsel-philosophy-vs-sophism” display=”content”]

    Sophists Nearly All

    [insert page=”sophists-nearly-all” display=”content”]

    Demand for Preservation of Literary and Religious Mysticism so that we can roll around in our mental playpens

    [insert page=”demand-for-preservation-of-literary-and-religious-mysticism-so-that-we-can-roll-around-in-our-mental-playpens” display=”content”]

    German Philosophy

    [insert page=”german-philosophy” display=”content”]

    Nietzsche’s Morality Isn’t (Nietzche Failed)

    [insert page=”nietzsches-morality-isnt” display=”content”]

    The Error Of The Ancients: War is Fine But Economics Beneath Them

    [insert page=”the-error-of-the-ancients-war-is-fine-but-economics-beneath-them” display=”content”]

    Plato As The Origins Of Evil

    [insert page=”plato-as-the-origins-of-evil” display=”content”]

    Blame Plato’s Philosopher King For The Rise Of Totalitarianism In The Twentieth Century? (No)

    [insert page=”was-karl-popper-right-to-blame-platos-concept-of-the-philosopher-king-for-the-rise-of-totalitarianism-in-the-twentieth-century” display=”content”]

    . . .

    Correcting Aristotle’s Categories of Philosophy

    [insert page=”correcting-aristotles-categories-of-philosophy” display=”content”]

    Translating Between Philosophy and Propertarianism’s Natural Law

    [insert page=”quick-translation-between-philosophy-and-propertarianism-natural-law” display=”content”]

    Q: Curt, is your field (philosophy) art or science

    [insert page=”curt-doolittle-updated-his-status-1111″ display=”content”]

    Q: Curt, What is your innovation on popper in epistemology, science, and truth?

    [insert page=”qa-curt-what-is-your-innovation-on-popper-in-epistemology-science-and-truth” display=”content”]

    Q: Testimony – P Is the Expression of Our Ancient Traditions.

    [insert page=”testimony-p-is-the-rational-expression-of-our-ancient-traditions” display=”content”]

    Turns out like this: Hayek is the Philosopher. I’m the Logician.

    [insert page=”hayeks-the-philosopher-its-more-that-im-the-logician-for-him” display=”content”]

    Hayek’s Renunciation Of Conservatism – A Failure Of His Own

    [insert page=”hayeks-renunciation-of-conservatism-a-failure-of-his-own” display=”content”]

    Conservatism Is Not A Longing For The Past – It’s A Capitalization Strategy.

    [insert page=”conservatism-is-not-longing-for-the-past-it-is-a-class-ambition-in-a-division-of-knowledge-and-labor” display=”content”]

    Q: It’s A Function of the Right Place At The Right Time

    [insert page=”its-a-function-of-the-right-place-at-the-right-time” display=”content”]

  • Rights Aren’t Cheap – the Plan

    —“I’m gunna be a d__k for a moment. Wouldn’t a reduction in furthering this movement due to you having to take care of your mother be considered “not bearing the cost”? its not bearing the cost of “losing mother” in order “to fight”. Not meaning to make this personal – only pointing at the bullshit of these types of “do it for the cause” virtue/purity signals. … its really just a subtle “no true scotsman” and a kick in the teeth when done in the absence of acknowledging the costs already born by those that support your vision.”—Wayne Righton

    Good and honest question. I have no problem making that hard choice, and no problem dying for the cause. The truth is it’s strategically optimum to live in country, to maintain an out of country residence, have no assets in-country, to have no ‘entanglements’ and to be able to go fully mobile on a moment’s notice from within country. Otherwise I would have brought a certain ukrainian woman here, or returned to ukraine – because i’d be a lot happier doing biz and living a normal life, than working on this revolution and house-sitting the elderly from a backwater. At present I have a pretty concrete plan. We need enough gov’t employees back at work. (they are) We want some men still out of work (they will be). We want the president fearful of losing the election (he will be). We want stress from that anxiety to spread (it will) I need a ‘dramatic’ way of issuing the ‘proposal’ of settlement, but will seize any opportunity I can (three options). And I need enough people to show up so that the first phase works, and escalates to the second phase (that’s your problem). Aside from that: What evidence do you have that I don’t think things thru? 😉 Nothing is perfect. Nothing is fail safe. But we can make sure many people know the ‘offer’ ahead of time, then we’re fine. We don’t want to go early. We want to go at the last possible minute seizing the greatest opportunity for stress prior to the election. The optimum arrangement would be that we get enough traction to get a few players in the conservative media on board with the plan so that they voluntarily or out of necessity explain our ‘just’ position. What’s the worst that will happen? First try won’t be successful but will have been the most successful publicity action since Boston’s fight with the Redcoats. What’s the best that will happen? it will work and the entire world will shake, and the chaos that results will bring everyone to the table. What’s better than that? The conservatives adopt the platform. Now flip it around: I’m paying a huge cost (and so are my investors by the way.) If you’re dumb enough to both be in a vulnerable position AND use your real name so that you can pay some external loss then that’s your choice. Plenty of people don’t. If you think I’m writing another ideology, then you’re wasting your time and mine. If you want emotional, moral, and intellectual sedation by some narrative that makes you feel justified then you’re wasting your time and mine. I switched from intellectual to revolutionary when I was divorced raped, then procedurally nearly put out of business by manipulation of the court, then when the state sold my company’s bank but guaranteed the loans, so that the bank was incentivized to put us out of business, then Obama made it clear he was out to unify the left against my people, and then my own government tried to criminalize having made and honest living, by shutting down overseas banking, and then when for a simple error on a tax form where the state owed me hundreds of thousands, they nearly killed my business. I’m tired of lack of juridical defense. I’m tired of a genocide against my people. I’m tired of the second destruction of western civilization by the same means. And I’m tired of an enemy among us reveling in our naivety and tolerance. So man the F-k up. Shut the f-k up. Show the F-k up. And if you’re not here for the revolution, don’t waste the time of the men who are. Restoration of our rights as ‘Englishmen’. The rights made and rights we have fought to maintain for centuries. And if you don’t man up, shut up, and show up, then you don’t deserve those rights.

  • Rights Aren’t Cheap – the Plan

    —“I’m gunna be a d__k for a moment. Wouldn’t a reduction in furthering this movement due to you having to take care of your mother be considered “not bearing the cost”? its not bearing the cost of “losing mother” in order “to fight”. Not meaning to make this personal – only pointing at the bullshit of these types of “do it for the cause” virtue/purity signals. … its really just a subtle “no true scotsman” and a kick in the teeth when done in the absence of acknowledging the costs already born by those that support your vision.”—Wayne Righton

    Good and honest question. I have no problem making that hard choice, and no problem dying for the cause. The truth is it’s strategically optimum to live in country, to maintain an out of country residence, have no assets in-country, to have no ‘entanglements’ and to be able to go fully mobile on a moment’s notice from within country. Otherwise I would have brought a certain ukrainian woman here, or returned to ukraine – because i’d be a lot happier doing biz and living a normal life, than working on this revolution and house-sitting the elderly from a backwater. At present I have a pretty concrete plan. We need enough gov’t employees back at work. (they are) We want some men still out of work (they will be). We want the president fearful of losing the election (he will be). We want stress from that anxiety to spread (it will) I need a ‘dramatic’ way of issuing the ‘proposal’ of settlement, but will seize any opportunity I can (three options). And I need enough people to show up so that the first phase works, and escalates to the second phase (that’s your problem). Aside from that: What evidence do you have that I don’t think things thru? 😉 Nothing is perfect. Nothing is fail safe. But we can make sure many people know the ‘offer’ ahead of time, then we’re fine. We don’t want to go early. We want to go at the last possible minute seizing the greatest opportunity for stress prior to the election. The optimum arrangement would be that we get enough traction to get a few players in the conservative media on board with the plan so that they voluntarily or out of necessity explain our ‘just’ position. What’s the worst that will happen? First try won’t be successful but will have been the most successful publicity action since Boston’s fight with the Redcoats. What’s the best that will happen? it will work and the entire world will shake, and the chaos that results will bring everyone to the table. What’s better than that? The conservatives adopt the platform. Now flip it around: I’m paying a huge cost (and so are my investors by the way.) If you’re dumb enough to both be in a vulnerable position AND use your real name so that you can pay some external loss then that’s your choice. Plenty of people don’t. If you think I’m writing another ideology, then you’re wasting your time and mine. If you want emotional, moral, and intellectual sedation by some narrative that makes you feel justified then you’re wasting your time and mine. I switched from intellectual to revolutionary when I was divorced raped, then procedurally nearly put out of business by manipulation of the court, then when the state sold my company’s bank but guaranteed the loans, so that the bank was incentivized to put us out of business, then Obama made it clear he was out to unify the left against my people, and then my own government tried to criminalize having made and honest living, by shutting down overseas banking, and then when for a simple error on a tax form where the state owed me hundreds of thousands, they nearly killed my business. I’m tired of lack of juridical defense. I’m tired of a genocide against my people. I’m tired of the second destruction of western civilization by the same means. And I’m tired of an enemy among us reveling in our naivety and tolerance. So man the F-k up. Shut the f-k up. Show the F-k up. And if you’re not here for the revolution, don’t waste the time of the men who are. Restoration of our rights as ‘Englishmen’. The rights made and rights we have fought to maintain for centuries. And if you don’t man up, shut up, and show up, then you don’t deserve those rights.

  • It’s Not an Act. It’s a Method

    IT”S NOT AN ACT. IT”S A METHOD [Y]ou know, people don’t understand the method to the madness. Nothing is random.

    1. Equality was a false promise
    2. An aristocracy of everyone was a false promise.
    3. Aristocracy(Martial limits-via-negativa) > Nobility(Social-Political – choices-via-positiva) > Burgher(Economic practical) > Craftsman (productive, necessary) > Mother(reproductive, promising) > Children(Learning, the proposal) is not a false promise – it’s descriptive: the truth.

    We are not equal, we are interdependent. We earn respect despite our inequality by doing our duty to our interdependence. We maintain that respect and interdependence with loyalty despite our inequality. We demonstrate the obligation of the nobility, the duty of the citizenry, and this is how we work together. We are an army first and a polity second, a society third, bound by the EQUALITY UNDER OUR LAW despite our inequality in ability and value to one another. And that is our secret. Hence the ‘act like aristocracy’. You must be what you wish to become.

  • It’s Not an Act. It’s a Method

    IT”S NOT AN ACT. IT”S A METHOD [Y]ou know, people don’t understand the method to the madness. Nothing is random.

    1. Equality was a false promise
    2. An aristocracy of everyone was a false promise.
    3. Aristocracy(Martial limits-via-negativa) > Nobility(Social-Political – choices-via-positiva) > Burgher(Economic practical) > Craftsman (productive, necessary) > Mother(reproductive, promising) > Children(Learning, the proposal) is not a false promise – it’s descriptive: the truth.

    We are not equal, we are interdependent. We earn respect despite our inequality by doing our duty to our interdependence. We maintain that respect and interdependence with loyalty despite our inequality. We demonstrate the obligation of the nobility, the duty of the citizenry, and this is how we work together. We are an army first and a polity second, a society third, bound by the EQUALITY UNDER OUR LAW despite our inequality in ability and value to one another. And that is our secret. Hence the ‘act like aristocracy’. You must be what you wish to become.