(FB 1546091221 Timestamp) SACRED INVERSION There have been things in the world properly made sacred by inversion; we’re doing our damnedest to reverse the sanctity of these things by making them “normal” once again. Jonathan Pageau gives a wonderful presentation on the perversion of “modern” art. He speaks to the world “turning upside down.” I see this as the world turning from sacred back to merely ordinary. 🙁 [The reversal of a necessary and brilliant upending] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUcdDfmjoTQ. Humans have a nature and thus bring a “collective subjectivity” to the value judgement of artistic endeavors. In other words it’s not “simply” subjective. By: G.K. Chesterton: “The family may fairly be considered, one would think, an ultimate human institution. Every one would admit that it has been the main cell and central unit of almost all societies hitherto, except, indeed, such societies as that of Lacedaemon, which went in for âefficiency,â and has, therefore, perished, and left not a trace behind. Christianity, even enormous as was its revolution, did not alter this ancient and savage sanctity; it merely reversed it. It did not deny the trinity of father, mother, and child. It merely read it backwards, making it run child, mother, father. This it called, not the family, but the Holy Family, for many things are made holy by being turned upside down. But some sages of our own decadence have made a serious attack on the family. They have impugned it, as I think wrongly; and its defenders have defended it, and defended it wrongly. The common defence of the family is that, amid the stress and fickleness of life, it is peaceful, pleasant, and at one. But there is another defence of the family which is possible, and to me evident; this defence is that the family is not peaceful and not pleasant and not at one.” Scott Adams, whom I have a great respect for misses the mark in his most controversial (and that’s saying a lot figuring most of his positions support Trump in some manner or another) video yet; the problem of the nuclear family. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyVK_T9m5R0
Form: Mini Essay
-
Curt Doolittle shared a post.
(FB 1546091221 Timestamp) SACRED INVERSION There have been things in the world properly made sacred by inversion; we’re doing our damnedest to reverse the sanctity of these things by making them “normal” once again. Jonathan Pageau gives a wonderful presentation on the perversion of “modern” art. He speaks to the world “turning upside down.” I see this as the world turning from sacred back to merely ordinary. 🙁 [The reversal of a necessary and brilliant upending] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUcdDfmjoTQ. Humans have a nature and thus bring a “collective subjectivity” to the value judgement of artistic endeavors. In other words it’s not “simply” subjective. By: G.K. Chesterton: “The family may fairly be considered, one would think, an ultimate human institution. Every one would admit that it has been the main cell and central unit of almost all societies hitherto, except, indeed, such societies as that of Lacedaemon, which went in for âefficiency,â and has, therefore, perished, and left not a trace behind. Christianity, even enormous as was its revolution, did not alter this ancient and savage sanctity; it merely reversed it. It did not deny the trinity of father, mother, and child. It merely read it backwards, making it run child, mother, father. This it called, not the family, but the Holy Family, for many things are made holy by being turned upside down. But some sages of our own decadence have made a serious attack on the family. They have impugned it, as I think wrongly; and its defenders have defended it, and defended it wrongly. The common defence of the family is that, amid the stress and fickleness of life, it is peaceful, pleasant, and at one. But there is another defence of the family which is possible, and to me evident; this defence is that the family is not peaceful and not pleasant and not at one.” Scott Adams, whom I have a great respect for misses the mark in his most controversial (and that’s saying a lot figuring most of his positions support Trump in some manner or another) video yet; the problem of the nuclear family. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyVK_T9m5R0
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1546103947 Timestamp) On suspicion, I’ve been watching videos of people surprised by their DNA results. And it’s really obvious they’re trying to spread multiculturalism rather than the history of defeat conquest and extermination evident in peoples genetics. If you understand the basic races and how they evolved and that all the data says is who you share genes with today, then you can grasp that if you’re south american you will have some north african, some iberian, and some european. And if you have slavery you will have either a touch of northeastern or a touch of central african. You will also learn that ONE DROP is a curse that stays with you and your line for freaking ever. If you are northern european you will be some mixture of atlantic-celtic, nordic, germanic, slavic. If you have mediterranean your origins are anatolian and greek, with old levantine and north african. If you are north african (berber etc) you are related to west eurasians. if you are arab you come from the border of somalia/ethiopia and the arab peninsula, and the later ‘marsh arabs’ of the north. If you are persian you are from central branch of west eurasians. if you are turkic you are from the eastern branch of the west eurasians. If you are from old europe (balkans) your admixture can be either very very old european (extinct), greek, slavic, turkic, and some middle eastern. Just because you share a few genes with the Ashkenazi does not mean you have any jewish ancestors, only that jews had common ancestors with yours. Just because you have italian markers does not mean you are italian because the north of italy is german, the south greek, and the Itals and Etru that preceded them are extinct other than fragments, and only germanic and greek remaining any dominance. The UK is a celtic and nordic country with a history of german rulers, and french language. The UK was the most thoroughly decimated (replaced, genocided) early european population by the IE expansion. France is a genetically split country between southern europeans (S/SW), celts(nw) and germans (E/SE), which is why it shows up as ‘general european’. If your genome says you have thai-southeast asian that just means that your native american ancestry with genes shared by people in east and southeast asia. Think about where people lived during the glacial period and that is where today’s races come from. The movement of people has not been that significant. aside from the genocides against the americans the north africans, and the levantines, and the balkans, we tend to retain our neolithic identities. What has happened is that large empires have exterminated subraces. In other words, genocide is the most influential action in history. And that’s not a very nice thing to understand.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1546103947 Timestamp) On suspicion, I’ve been watching videos of people surprised by their DNA results. And it’s really obvious they’re trying to spread multiculturalism rather than the history of defeat conquest and extermination evident in peoples genetics. If you understand the basic races and how they evolved and that all the data says is who you share genes with today, then you can grasp that if you’re south american you will have some north african, some iberian, and some european. And if you have slavery you will have either a touch of northeastern or a touch of central african. You will also learn that ONE DROP is a curse that stays with you and your line for freaking ever. If you are northern european you will be some mixture of atlantic-celtic, nordic, germanic, slavic. If you have mediterranean your origins are anatolian and greek, with old levantine and north african. If you are north african (berber etc) you are related to west eurasians. if you are arab you come from the border of somalia/ethiopia and the arab peninsula, and the later ‘marsh arabs’ of the north. If you are persian you are from central branch of west eurasians. if you are turkic you are from the eastern branch of the west eurasians. If you are from old europe (balkans) your admixture can be either very very old european (extinct), greek, slavic, turkic, and some middle eastern. Just because you share a few genes with the Ashkenazi does not mean you have any jewish ancestors, only that jews had common ancestors with yours. Just because you have italian markers does not mean you are italian because the north of italy is german, the south greek, and the Itals and Etru that preceded them are extinct other than fragments, and only germanic and greek remaining any dominance. The UK is a celtic and nordic country with a history of german rulers, and french language. The UK was the most thoroughly decimated (replaced, genocided) early european population by the IE expansion. France is a genetically split country between southern europeans (S/SW), celts(nw) and germans (E/SE), which is why it shows up as ‘general european’. If your genome says you have thai-southeast asian that just means that your native american ancestry with genes shared by people in east and southeast asia. Think about where people lived during the glacial period and that is where today’s races come from. The movement of people has not been that significant. aside from the genocides against the americans the north africans, and the levantines, and the balkans, we tend to retain our neolithic identities. What has happened is that large empires have exterminated subraces. In other words, genocide is the most influential action in history. And that’s not a very nice thing to understand.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1546100286 Timestamp) Let me help you. It is a disadvantage to me, to the work, and to the movement to be associated with ‘those who have failed’. The more mainstream we become, the less value in fringe players. So no, leaving behind the fringe is part of the strategy. Not getting their attention. Propertarianism is not a philosophy or a religion, it is practical law the purpose of which is to defeat the means by which our high trust people (and other stupid people) are deceived by taking advantage of the weakness of our neurological construct using language. NO MORE LIES, NO MORE PARASITISM IS NOT A RIGHT WING MESSAGE: IT IS A MAJORITARIAN MESSAGE. The purpose of separatism is economic and political as well as genetic and cultural. The purpose of conquest is the same. It is just a choice given the possibilities. My strategy is simple: STARVE THE BEAST AND THE PARASITES DIE WITH IT.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1546205702 Timestamp) Lemme’ tell ya’ somthin’. Somthin’ import’nt. There is a reason Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Smith/Hume, Nietzsche, and their kind all write what they do: to remind us that those sensibilities we apply at local scale, and that are so useful at local scale, do not scale to international scale. in other words, in every era some thinker must remind the dominant forces, that morality is a local contrivance for utilitarian purposes and not an intrinsic good. And that in order to maintain those utilitarian properties of our local order, some of us, at least the military, judiciary, and monarchy, must never make the mistake that civility is an advantage outside of the polity any more than socialism is an advantage outside of the family, or democracy outside of the neighborhood. That’s my job for this era.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1546205702 Timestamp) Lemme’ tell ya’ somthin’. Somthin’ import’nt. There is a reason Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Smith/Hume, Nietzsche, and their kind all write what they do: to remind us that those sensibilities we apply at local scale, and that are so useful at local scale, do not scale to international scale. in other words, in every era some thinker must remind the dominant forces, that morality is a local contrivance for utilitarian purposes and not an intrinsic good. And that in order to maintain those utilitarian properties of our local order, some of us, at least the military, judiciary, and monarchy, must never make the mistake that civility is an advantage outside of the polity any more than socialism is an advantage outside of the family, or democracy outside of the neighborhood. That’s my job for this era.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1546359506 Timestamp) NEURAL ECONOMY AND THE FEMALE MIND —“Women turn more conservative when they have children.”—Martin Or put another way, women evolved to carry a cognitive load, and will generate demand for that cognitive load, and the signals to reinforce it, in one way or another until they possess it. It makes evolutionary sense that women who don’t have children would express ‘care’ to all, then express it more exclusively to their children when they have that “inventory” to worry about (expend their caretaking energies). So women evolved to carry the cognitive load of caring about proportionality and caretaking almost exclusively (the young short term) while men tend to are about the full spectrum of moral intuitions equally (the tribe long term). Men demand a cognitive load, but it seems less open to substitution than women. Men, we always have the tribe to defend.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1546303804 Timestamp) um. …. Shakespeare’s English is early-modern English, not old English (Anglo-Saxon) or Middle English; The difference between early modern and modern english is (a) pronunciation was pretty gaelic-sounding, and (b) quite a few words in early modern have fallen out of use. Middle English ( 1100-1500) The Lord governeth me, and no thing schal faile to me. In the place of posture there he hath set me. He nurschide me on the water of refreischyng. Early Modern English (King James Bible, 1611) The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want. He maketh me to lie down in green postures. He leadeth me beside the still waters. Major historical Periods of the English Language 1 – Old English AD 449- AD 1066 2 – Middle English 1066-1509 3 – Early Modern English 1509-1755 4 – Present Day English 1755-present Old English Her for se here of East Englum ofer Humbremuþan to Eoforwicceastre on Norþhymbre, ond þær wæs micel ungeþuærnes þære þeode betweox him selfum, ond hie hæfdun hiera cyning aworpenne Osbryht, ond ungecyndne cyning underfengon Ãllan; ond hie late on geare to þam gecirdon þæt hie wiþ þone here winnende wærun, ond hie þeah micle fierd gegadrodon, ond þone here sohton æt Eoforwicceastre, ond on þa ceastre bræcon, ond hie sume inne wurdon, ond þær was ungemetlic wæl geslægen Norþanhymbra, sume binnan, sume butan; ond þa cyningas begen ofslægene, ond sio laf wiþ þone here friþ nam. (Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, A.D. 867) Middle English Whan that aprill with his shoures soote The droghte of march hath perced to the roote, And bathed every veyne in swich licour Of which vertu engendred is the flour; Whan zephirus eek with his sweete breeth Inspired hath in every holt and heeth Tendre croppes, and the yonge sonne Hath in the ram his halve cours yronne, And smale foweles maken melodye, That slepen al the nyght with open ye (so priketh hem nature in hir corages); Thanne longen folk to goon on pilgrimages, And palmeres for to seken straunge strondes, To ferne halwes, kowthe in sondry londes; And specially from every shires ende Of engelond to caunterbury they wende, The hooly blisful martir for to seke, That hem hath holpen whan that they were seeke. (Geoffrey Chaucer, Canterbury Tales, c. 1400) Early Modern English To be, or not to be, that is the Question: Whether ’tis Nobler in the minde to suffer The Slings and Arrowes of outragious Fortune, Or to take Armes against a Sea of troubles, And by opposing end them: to dye, to sleepe No more; and by a sleepe, to say we end The Heart-ake, and the thousand Naturall shockes That Flesh is heyre too? ‘Tis a consummation Deuoutly to be wish’d. To dye to sleepe, To sleepe, perchance to Dreame; I, there’s the rub, For in that sleepe of death, what dreames may come, When we haue shuffel’d off this mortall coile, Must giue vs pawse. There’s the respect That makes Calamity of so long life (William Shakespeare, Hamlet, c. 1600, First Folio)
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1546366269 Timestamp) THE MALE COGNITIVE LOAD? by Simon Ström How is the male cognitive load operationalized? It isn’t as easily because of greater variation and division of labor among the male population. But the most basic load to which males are predisposed to carry should be the dominance hierarchy and male peer group. It probably goes a lot deeper and varies with class and IQ, and I bet there are actually evolved, discrete, ‘archetypical male clusters’ beyond the random, gaussian normal distribution of psychometric traits traits, (and the male-female division common to all of the animal kingdom.) Whereas the female cognitive load varies in sophistication along the class or IQ axis, I think the lifecycle of the reproductive bottleneck-sex limits the evolutionary plasticity of its physiological cognitive load. Men are not only biologically expendable but also evolutionarily plastic and differentiated along multiple axes of skills and ‘loads’.