(FB 1550507923 Timestamp) ABRAHAMIC MONOPOLY DEATH CULTS I mean, more people are dead because of judaism, christianity,and islam than anything other than the great plagues and diseases. Islam is worse than the black plague, and possibly close to malaria – the deadliest disease of all. I mean, between Boaz, Freud, and Marx we have 100M dead in this century alone. Good numbers on christianity are impossible but trivial by comparison because most all are due to disease in the new world. Islam is the master of death cults with close to 1B dead, and a genetic decline worse than all but a few global volcanic catastrophes.
Form: Mini Essay
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1550505772 Timestamp) UM. NO, CHRISTIANITY INHIBITED OUR REVIVAL Aryanism built europe and still does. Christianity was at best an infantilizing nursemaid for the celtic holocaust, resulting migrations to fill the vacuum, and resulting fall of the old (greco) and new(Roman) european empire (Civilization). And had christians spread literacy and aristotle rather than illiteracy and magic…we would have recovered within a century. But no. christianity destroyed our civilization. The rate of productivity under the aryan(indo european) religion and the rate of productivity under the abrahamic (afro asiatic) religion is what it is. There is no comparison. The rate of innovation once we exited religious thought is what it is. Abrahamism=Darkness.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1550668909 Timestamp) Rothbard (Jewish Pale) and Hoppe (German Free Cities) via positiva, via rationalism. Doolittle(Rights of Englishmen) via negativa, via empiricism. Construct a value system by appeal(RH), or prohibit an anti-value system with violence (D). Inspiration and indoctrination (RH) vs prohibition and market for prosecution(D). Unlimited suppression of parasitic behavior that generates retaliation (D), suppression limited to intersubjectively verifiable property (RH). Suppression of blackmail, defamation, public sophism, supernaturalism pseudoscience( marxism, postmodernism, feminism, denialism). Doolittle: existential survivable without imperial protection, vs Rothbard and Hoppe: dependent, non existential without imperial protection. Doolittle: demonstrated, vs Rothbard and Hoppe: not demonstrated, not modelable, not survivable under competition. RH not possible due to praxeological incentives, and D possible because of praxeological testable incentives. No RH community can form or survive market for polities without parasitic dependence upon an empire because of insufficient incentives for defense and production of commons and their resulting multipliers in competition with free riders. vs Any D community can survive in the market for polities because it does not depend upon an external empire because of sufficient incentives for defense and production of commons and their resulting multipliers in competition with free riders. Crusoe’s island depends upon the ‘free’ protection of a vast ocean. The ghetto depends upon the host city or state. And the Free Cities, The Pale (european wildlands), The American/Australian wildlands, and Iceland/Greenland – all depend upon the host empire, and are economically subsidized by lack of political competition, and the availability of cheap and settleable land. The ghetto ethics of the jews and being exterminated for it on a regular basis versus the high trust ethics of the people who dragged humanity kicking and screaming out of ignorance superstition poverty starvation disease hard labor early death…. and the quality of life that people seek despite the costs of commons required to do so. ie: RH consists of pretense that ‘children’ polities, subsidized by parents, can compete against adult polities on their own merits in competition by military, political, economic, religious, demographic, warfare that never ends.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1550627670 Timestamp) —“Q: 5 +1 * 10 = ?”— This category of math ‘tests’, is not a test of intelligence but of a weakness in mathematical grammar that makes the reader fall back to the order of operations when the sentence is malformed. The correct form is (1×10)+5. or 5+(1×10), gracefully failing to 5 + 1 * 10 if malformed. Almost seemingly complex questions of philosophy are nothing more than a failure to fully expand idiomatic speech into well formed sentence beginning with “I promise that …”. The lower your patterning the more likely you are to see this trick. The higher your patterning (not discreetly seeing the individual glyphs of the text) the more likely you are to miss it. And that is all. Tricks don’t test intelligence. They insult it.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1550668909 Timestamp) Rothbard (Jewish Pale) and Hoppe (German Free Cities) via positiva, via rationalism. Doolittle(Rights of Englishmen) via negativa, via empiricism. Construct a value system by appeal(RH), or prohibit an anti-value system with violence (D). Inspiration and indoctrination (RH) vs prohibition and market for prosecution(D). Unlimited suppression of parasitic behavior that generates retaliation (D), suppression limited to intersubjectively verifiable property (RH). Suppression of blackmail, defamation, public sophism, supernaturalism pseudoscience( marxism, postmodernism, feminism, denialism). Doolittle: existential survivable without imperial protection, vs Rothbard and Hoppe: dependent, non existential without imperial protection. Doolittle: demonstrated, vs Rothbard and Hoppe: not demonstrated, not modelable, not survivable under competition. RH not possible due to praxeological incentives, and D possible because of praxeological testable incentives. No RH community can form or survive market for polities without parasitic dependence upon an empire because of insufficient incentives for defense and production of commons and their resulting multipliers in competition with free riders. vs Any D community can survive in the market for polities because it does not depend upon an external empire because of sufficient incentives for defense and production of commons and their resulting multipliers in competition with free riders. Crusoe’s island depends upon the ‘free’ protection of a vast ocean. The ghetto depends upon the host city or state. And the Free Cities, The Pale (european wildlands), The American/Australian wildlands, and Iceland/Greenland – all depend upon the host empire, and are economically subsidized by lack of political competition, and the availability of cheap and settleable land. The ghetto ethics of the jews and being exterminated for it on a regular basis versus the high trust ethics of the people who dragged humanity kicking and screaming out of ignorance superstition poverty starvation disease hard labor early death…. and the quality of life that people seek despite the costs of commons required to do so. ie: RH consists of pretense that ‘children’ polities, subsidized by parents, can compete against adult polities on their own merits in competition by military, political, economic, religious, demographic, warfare that never ends.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1550627670 Timestamp) —“Q: 5 +1 * 10 = ?”— This category of math ‘tests’, is not a test of intelligence but of a weakness in mathematical grammar that makes the reader fall back to the order of operations when the sentence is malformed. The correct form is (1×10)+5. or 5+(1×10), gracefully failing to 5 + 1 * 10 if malformed. Almost seemingly complex questions of philosophy are nothing more than a failure to fully expand idiomatic speech into well formed sentence beginning with “I promise that …”. The lower your patterning the more likely you are to see this trick. The higher your patterning (not discreetly seeing the individual glyphs of the text) the more likely you are to miss it. And that is all. Tricks don’t test intelligence. They insult it.
-
(FB 1550687130 Timestamp) —âTEACHING AS TRUE BY LAW RATHER THAN TRUE BY FAIT
(FB 1550687130 Timestamp) —âTEACHING AS TRUE BY LAW RATHER THAN TRUE BY FAITHâ— CLARIFICATION Over the past few weeks I have been trying to find a means of limiting abrahamic means of false promise, baiting into moral hazard, and pilpul and critique, from application outside of christian doctrine, thereby ending the ability to pursue marxism, postmodernism, feminism, denialism and other application of abrahamic persuasion (deceit) in the ongoing war against our people by the globalists (mostly semites and their allies). The solutions were either prohibit, gain compromise, or give compromise, which is the ancient one that faced the romans when attempting to bring the jews into the empire. The ‘give compromise’ is an exchange: “spiritual is true by faith, and material is true by law”. This frustrates both parties a bit but is the only truly reciprocal exchange under the law. And it works for christianity alone because the law also requires compatibility with natural law. Judaism and Islam as well as marxism, postmodernism, feminism, and denialism are not compatible with the law. So the remaining challenge is just to define christianity as some set of existing sects sharing some long standing tradition, limited to compliance with natural law AND the demarcation between the spiritual faith and the material law. I felt it was not possible even to achieve this compromise, so it was better to state the law as the law, and grant christians a specific license under the law. The exchange gives christianity peerage with the law. The exemption gives it permission under the law. And legal scholars will have to debate these things for centuries – because I cannot close the loophole of truthful speech because of the christian demand for identity between truth and myth. So that is where I ended up. To avoid the question by specific license rather than compromising on the question as a difference between faith and law. -Curt
-
(FB 1550687130 Timestamp) —âTEACHING AS TRUE BY LAW RATHER THAN TRUE BY FAIT
(FB 1550687130 Timestamp) —âTEACHING AS TRUE BY LAW RATHER THAN TRUE BY FAITHâ— CLARIFICATION Over the past few weeks I have been trying to find a means of limiting abrahamic means of false promise, baiting into moral hazard, and pilpul and critique, from application outside of christian doctrine, thereby ending the ability to pursue marxism, postmodernism, feminism, denialism and other application of abrahamic persuasion (deceit) in the ongoing war against our people by the globalists (mostly semites and their allies). The solutions were either prohibit, gain compromise, or give compromise, which is the ancient one that faced the romans when attempting to bring the jews into the empire. The ‘give compromise’ is an exchange: “spiritual is true by faith, and material is true by law”. This frustrates both parties a bit but is the only truly reciprocal exchange under the law. And it works for christianity alone because the law also requires compatibility with natural law. Judaism and Islam as well as marxism, postmodernism, feminism, and denialism are not compatible with the law. So the remaining challenge is just to define christianity as some set of existing sects sharing some long standing tradition, limited to compliance with natural law AND the demarcation between the spiritual faith and the material law. I felt it was not possible even to achieve this compromise, so it was better to state the law as the law, and grant christians a specific license under the law. The exchange gives christianity peerage with the law. The exemption gives it permission under the law. And legal scholars will have to debate these things for centuries – because I cannot close the loophole of truthful speech because of the christian demand for identity between truth and myth. So that is where I ended up. To avoid the question by specific license rather than compromising on the question as a difference between faith and law. -Curt
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1550780740 Timestamp) THE TRADE WITH XIANITY 1 – Look. I have an agreement ‘with management’ to stop harshing on Xianity now that my tests are done. You have really good people on the christian side. I recommend a lot of them. James fox Higgins and Vox Day among the obvious. Distributist is good at what he does too. … 2 – … so given that we are speaking in different grammars, me in via negativa science and law of dispute resolution, and you are speaking in via positiva of theology of organization, it’s not possible to discourse. 3 – So, if you want your faith I’ll fight for it if you fight for my law.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1550775965 Timestamp) GO GET YOUR OWN LEADER OR BECOME ONE YOURSELF. Let me help you. I don’t want to ‘lead’. Especially losers. I want to provide a solution. I want to arm people with possibility. I want leadership to emerge by attracting talent to the solution. I want our people to win. And it won’t be ANYONE on the alt right that emerges. OK? NO ONE. NEVER HAPPEN. EVER. Getting alt-righters what they want as working class men and leading the alt right are contradictory propositions. I’m in it for the little guy. They guy with a job, a family, and who is being fked by the Cathedral complex. And for our people’s persistence. I don’t need to be inspiring. I don’t seek to be. I need to manufacture a weapon that will work. And I need people to not cause damage to that weapon through stupidity, ignorance, arrogance, and signaling. And I’ve led most of my life thanks. The only reason I end up leading is if everyone better than I am fails. So stop trying to make me a cult leader, OR insult me for NOT being a cult leader. Because you do both. Which is ironic. I am either not a cult leader and therefore not good, or a cult leader and therefore bad. When the fact is I am an educator and solution provider, and that is all. What you mean is, you want me to carry your water. Because you can’t. I’ve done the engineering. You need to do the work. But your bullshit just hurts you. Not me. I can’t lose. The worst that happens to me is I produce a Tome that will bear my name for years, while I enjoy what remains of my life. The worst that happens to you is exactly what you fear. -cheers