Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • Curt Doolittle shared a link.

    (FB 1551542857 Timestamp) THE NEXT STEP IN EVOLUTION IS HERE. WE MUST REORGANIZE TO EXPLOIT IT. THE NEXT STEP IN HIGH INVESTMENT PARENTING. My view is that autistics (like me) are the next step in neoteny, and that this next step in our ‘evolution’ require an additional leap in high investment parenting, just like homo-sapiens required an additional leap in high investment parenting. RE: http://expand-your-consciousness.com/autistic-teenager-higher-iq-einstein-path-noble-prize/ “LIfe Skills” are a female code word for “don’t leave us behind in evolutionary development”. The feminine mind fears leaving behind, the masculine mind fears not running ahead. Women demonstrably infantilize generations at every opportunity. Our next revolution in government is to undo the damage done by women’s infantilization of the polity, economy, and civilization, by eliminating the artificial construct we call childhood, and adding 15 years back to our productive development, and participation. My grandmother knit and sold mittens by the time she was four. Children were usually employed (particularly girls) by ages of five or six. Boys began their trades at seven. Boys commended ships at the age of twelve. Generals at the age of 14. We are graduating people from college with 100K in debt that don’t understand compound interest, basic economics, or the natural inequality of peoples – all because of the demands of women to ‘maintain influence and control’ – because they naturally lack the ability to do so by dominance in competition.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1551542045 Timestamp) Scale was an advantage after napoleon’s invention of total war, and Jewish Banking’s financing of it, providing a via-positiva elimination of limits. Scale is now a disadvantage, with the size of the underclasses you carry the via-negativa limit, given that money is no longer a scarcity, and labor no longer a value – but a dead weight. And net consumers a slow drag producing continuous decline.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1551549723 Timestamp) When I was in college my education taught me that the law was immoral. It wasn’t until my 30’s I discovered that it’s entirely possible to practice law morally. It just limits your customer base. And for the best lawyers, that’s a great strategy. I’d have been perfectly happy as a full time litigator if I’d switched to law at that point in my life. I just feel like ending up as a tech entrepreneur did a better job of financing my work as a philosopher.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1551544387 Timestamp) RADICAL CHANGE TO REVERSE RADICAL CHANGE The returns on low investment parenting in exchange for additional income by women’s entry into the workforce, then absorbed by taxation and redistributed to the underclasses and immigrants has been catastrophic in addition to dysgenic. Instead, return to high investment parenting, high returns commons, and reduction in signaling costs between peoples capable of high trust order, with the resulting high returns is superior to the continuation of this suicide by finance.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1551638509 Timestamp) DON”T DEMONSTRATE YOUR INCOMPETENCE BY PUNCHING RIGHT. You’re punching against what you understand as trivial violations in loyalty or solidarity, because it’s all you have the intellectual capacity of doing. And because it’s the only thing others with the same limited intellectual capacity will respond to. What you aren’t doing is punching against the enemy and then defending yourself – because you lack the intellectual capacity and knowledge to defend yourself. When you punch at Cantwell you’re jerking off. You would fold under pressure from the system. Everyone does. You would out people on your side who had undermined you. Everyone does. If you don’t t hink so you’re too inexperienced in the real world of real consequences to have an opinion. You can punch at and Peterson (soyboys) for counter signaling ethnocentrism – despite the science says it’s the optimum. You can punch Molyneux (potential men) if he overstaps into denial. But punching Others for not taking the next step is just stupid. They are just a sales funnel for slowly dragging people into the fold. I punch against ideas. I punch at specific libertarians and christians in general terms because they are allies of our ((())) ancient enemy. I try to avoid the punching right as much as possible unless someone punches me first. Be smart. Be strong. Be an army. Punch Left. Guilt Center. Don’t punch right. #post

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1551721702 Timestamp) TERRITORIAL DIFFERENCES POST THREE ON POLITICAL THEORY Apr 25, 2016, 12:35 PM What are the first things one should know in political theory?

    1. The first question of ethics is ‘Why don’t I kill you and take your stuff?’.

    2. The first question of politics is “Why don’t me and mine kill you and yours and take your stuff?”

    3. The first question of group evolutionary strategy is “How can we either kill them and take their stuff, or prevent them from killing us and taking our stuff?”

    4. The answer to all three questions is the same: “Because **cooperating in a division of labor **is productive and can continue to produce mutual returns while conflict is costly and and results only in net consumption. Over time those who cooperate have more numbers, are healthier, have better industry, technology, and warfare than those who don’t.
    5. So, how do we organize group evolutionary strategy, politics, ethics, production and reproduction, so that we can out-compete, or at least say at pace with, competitors, given the people, their abilities, the territory and its resources that are at our disposal?
    6. Answering this question requires facing a very unpleasant fac****t, that the problem we face is** human capital **(talents) and that every person at the bottom of the curve drastically reduces the effectiveness of every person at the middle and top of the curve. In other words, it matters more that you don’t have impulsive, aggressive, idiots than it does that you have calm geniuses. So by and large nations in colder climates were more successful at killing off the undesirables through winters and starvation, than those in the warmer climates.
    7. So we see many different group evolutionary strategies dependent upon human capital, territory, and resources. The most obvious are

    * the hierarchical and authoritarian irrigated flood-river valleys * the aggressive tribal steppe and desert regions * the egalitarian forest and river regions. * the equalitarian polar peoples * Each of these main groups produce different political systems in order to make use of the territory and means of production available to them. Those that do not make good use of territory and means are displaced, conquered, or exterminated by those that do. * All groups require: * A method of organizing reproduction (usually marriage) * A method of organizing production (an economy) * A method of organizing norms (usually religion/education) * A method of producing commons (government) * A method of holding territory (army) * There are two economic poles available and all make use of one part of the spectrum or another, and all economies resulting in some variant on the mixed economy: * Propertarian / Libertarian / Capitalist / High Trust / High Innovation – Why? No corruption in theory. Incentives work. But no competitive commons are produced, so it doesn’t work. * Mixed Economy of Consumer capitalism with some authoritarian commons production. Incentives work and commons possible. * Authoritarian / Totalitarian / Socialist / Low Trust / Low Innovation – Why? high corruption, no incentives, and it doesn’t work. * All governments are corrupt but if a people are successful at implementing rule of law it is possible to protect the economy using the courts from excessive interference by the government monopoly. * The method of deciding ( making excuses for ) which commons is produced rather than some other commons is a matter of local dispute. But it is actually a question of competition with other states, and it is only very wealthy states that choose luxuries rather than necessities. * That is about all there is to political theory.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1551721702 Timestamp) TERRITORIAL DIFFERENCES POST THREE ON POLITICAL THEORY Apr 25, 2016, 12:35 PM What are the first things one should know in political theory?

    1. The first question of ethics is ‘Why don’t I kill you and take your stuff?’.

    2. The first question of politics is “Why don’t me and mine kill you and yours and take your stuff?”

    3. The first question of group evolutionary strategy is “How can we either kill them and take their stuff, or prevent them from killing us and taking our stuff?”

    4. The answer to all three questions is the same: “Because **cooperating in a division of labor **is productive and can continue to produce mutual returns while conflict is costly and and results only in net consumption. Over time those who cooperate have more numbers, are healthier, have better industry, technology, and warfare than those who don’t.
    5. So, how do we organize group evolutionary strategy, politics, ethics, production and reproduction, so that we can out-compete, or at least say at pace with, competitors, given the people, their abilities, the territory and its resources that are at our disposal?
    6. Answering this question requires facing a very unpleasant fac****t, that the problem we face is** human capital **(talents) and that every person at the bottom of the curve drastically reduces the effectiveness of every person at the middle and top of the curve. In other words, it matters more that you don’t have impulsive, aggressive, idiots than it does that you have calm geniuses. So by and large nations in colder climates were more successful at killing off the undesirables through winters and starvation, than those in the warmer climates.
    7. So we see many different group evolutionary strategies dependent upon human capital, territory, and resources. The most obvious are

    * the hierarchical and authoritarian irrigated flood-river valleys * the aggressive tribal steppe and desert regions * the egalitarian forest and river regions. * the equalitarian polar peoples * Each of these main groups produce different political systems in order to make use of the territory and means of production available to them. Those that do not make good use of territory and means are displaced, conquered, or exterminated by those that do. * All groups require: * A method of organizing reproduction (usually marriage) * A method of organizing production (an economy) * A method of organizing norms (usually religion/education) * A method of producing commons (government) * A method of holding territory (army) * There are two economic poles available and all make use of one part of the spectrum or another, and all economies resulting in some variant on the mixed economy: * Propertarian / Libertarian / Capitalist / High Trust / High Innovation – Why? No corruption in theory. Incentives work. But no competitive commons are produced, so it doesn’t work. * Mixed Economy of Consumer capitalism with some authoritarian commons production. Incentives work and commons possible. * Authoritarian / Totalitarian / Socialist / Low Trust / Low Innovation – Why? high corruption, no incentives, and it doesn’t work. * All governments are corrupt but if a people are successful at implementing rule of law it is possible to protect the economy using the courts from excessive interference by the government monopoly. * The method of deciding ( making excuses for ) which commons is produced rather than some other commons is a matter of local dispute. But it is actually a question of competition with other states, and it is only very wealthy states that choose luxuries rather than necessities. * That is about all there is to political theory.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1552057171 Timestamp) DIVISIVE? DIVISIVE? STUPIDITY IS WHAT’S DIVISIVE (the answer to the right) I worked to save my people from that false promise of liberty, and its baiting into moral hazard, by our ancestral enemy, under rothbardian libertinism. I was divisive in attacking rothbard and less so mises and hoppe. But I didn’t punch right unless someone punched me first. Although, I have to confess when I felt the fascists were going to continue to us down after C-ville, I more than considered it – and rightly so. Next, the New Right Wing Postmodernists came after me – seeking attention. Then Spencer came out with a quip, and then The Woo Woo Christians felt emboldened and rallied, and now the fascists are laying ground once again. There is zero reason to talk about me. There is zero reason for infighting between: – Fascists (rule of man by inspiration), – Nomocrats: Rule of Law by science, and; – Christians (Rule of Priests by woo woo). If you want to criticize rule of law, rule of man, or rule of ‘religion’ then do so. I do. But then, if you personalize that attack by taking on ‘one of the right’ rather than the general rule, you’re just a click-seeking attention-whore, doing the right a disservice. These are the three ancestral classes of our elites:

    1. Warriors, Soldiers (Masculine Defense),
      “Those who Fight (Father)”

      -and-

    2. Judges and Governors(Cooperation), Burghers, Business, Farmers
      “Those who Work (Brother)”

    -and-

    1. Priests and Public Intellectuals (Feminine Consumption)
      “Those Who Pray (Educate, Mother)”

    And we use our three classes of elites to our advantage and we keep them incompetition to ensure that we can use each as needed. At present all three classes: Fascists (Dominant Force ), Nomocrats (Practical Trade) and the Religious (Submissive Resistance) all all searching for a solution given that the Right Has Failed. Now, I’m pretty sure that y’all got nuthin, because (a) there is no fascist leader of any ability and there won’t be until fascism is re-articulated in adult language, (b) religion of the christian type only survived as a wife to the aristocracy – and islam is winning the war of ‘monopolies’, And at present, christianity is past its expiration date – because without operational means of governing an educated population it’s irrelevant and relegated to either the bible belt, or providing comfort to the outcast and underclass in the rest of the country. So only a fascist or a group of nomocrats are possible, and christianity has to simply pick one or both to bet on because christians have no answer – and frandkly appear ‘cucked’ and perhaps the source of current ‘cuckery’. So as far as I know we need a fascist (strong man leader), nomocracy (rule of law by which to govern a complex polity), and christians as a block to move the body faithful out of a condition of failure. It takes all three. However, the only means of governing a polity is and always will be law and economic information, because they are the ONLY POSSIBLE MEANS of operating a polity of greater scale than a village congregation.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1552041503 Timestamp) SOMEONE COMPLAINED ABOUT ME ELSEWHERE …. (I thought I was promoting their ideas….) From the Rules….

    1. No Fed posting. It’s fine to want revolutionary change, but we don’t need to bring unwanted attention to yourself and the group. If you want to talk about that, for the love of God(s) don’t do it on Facebook, they can see everything you do.
    2. Keep it civil. Do you think of yourself as pillar standing above the ruins of modernity? Prove it by acting like a higher man, and not some uppity snivelling modern. This is a place for building unity and community.
    3. Confidentiality, no unauthorized screenshots. That’s an immediate ban.
    4. I don’t want to do the Christian v Pagan thing here. I’ve got my opinions of Christianity, and I know some of you have your opinions on Paganism. It’s a pointless debate that will do nothing, but sowing division. I’ll say it again, this is a place for building unity and community.

    … Yep, that’s me. … Yep, that’s me. … Yep, that’s me. … Yep, that’s me. My goal with this group is to build fellowship, and that many of us will come to eventually see ourselves as brothers in arms. … I think maybe I should just leave the group. 😉 … I mean, they could have just ASKED me. … So….. I left the group. No axe to grind. We all fight the good fight as best we know how.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1552010801 Timestamp) NOPE NOPE —“Curt: What would (….) in a propertarian society?”— PROP IS A METHOD. Propertarianism is a methodology, consisting of a set of methodologies, a set of definitions, and a set of arguments, that produce a commensurable language, complete the scientific method, and embody that scientific method into rule of law. What you do with that law is wide open – it just has to be transparent, and it will prohibit all sorts of lying in public about whatever order you have. P-law is extremely facist out of the box – it is extremely nationalistic, and extremely intolerant, and especially intolerant of our ancient enemy’s means of deceit. And It is very hard to engage in malfeasance under P-Law since it is simply too profitable for individuals to report criminals for fun and profit. It is a ruthless system of government for enemies of the productive people. It has no mercy for enemies foreign or domestic. FOR MY PEOPLE My focus has been on correcting the United states first, and the other european states second. I recommend, for my people, and my people alone, because my people alone appear capable of it: 0 – An independent judiciary of the natural law 1 – A militia of all able bodied men in the regimental model, attached to a ‘church’/’school’. A standing army of professional warriors, and citizen employees of the military who are inducted in emergencies, since an increasing scope of military work is technical and administrative. 2 – A Hereditary Monarchy with a professional cabinet 3 – Virtual Houses of Governors, Industry, Business, Labor, and Family(homeowners). Where house members are selected randomly from the population, to provide assent or dissent to proposals by the monarchy in the raising and use of taxes. And where all houses must ‘pass’ (ascend). 4 – A near prohibition on bureaucracy; all government service “at the pleasure of the monarchy”; and a prohibition on pensions for public servants. 5 – My understanding is that this would provide all the benefits of fascism without the need for a dictator-character and the attendant risk. Even then, there is no reason a monarch cannot appoint such a person as did the romans, in times of crisis or need. FLIPPED INCENTIVES This produces a very different set of incentives since everyone is always and everywhere accountable for everything. MIDDLE CLASS IS HARD TO BEAT Monarchies appear to run better governments until they cannot. They cannot when the commercial complexity reaches the point of choosing limited investments from a host of possible investments. In this case the middle class appears to do well UNTIL they start socializing losses and privatizing the commons or engaging in arbitrage against the long term interests of the people. FEDERATION Any number of these monarchies can be federated under a supreme court of the natural law, just as the church federated the monarchies under church ‘license’ – the principle value of the court and the church being the ‘delegitimization’ of a ruler or a government, there by sanctioning the people and neighbors to replace that ruler, in the european tradition. This would, I expect, be rare, since royal families are extremely intolerant of family members who risk their status – and often make them ‘disappear’. My preference (Fantasy) would be to restore the anglo empire, and the germanic (Holy roman) empire, and to complete the intermarium and end the conflict of the 20th century brought about by ((())) the enemies of our people under the banner of world communism and the destruction of our peoples. FOR OTHER PEOPLES For other peoples I recommend a flexible system of government not terribly different from the Roman and English:

    • Fascism (Generalship) for time of war or conflict.
    • Monarchies with professional cabinets as long as possible
    • Adding Houses of government as via negativa juries when too large. These juries must only approve/deny raising of funds by the monarchy (cabinet).
    • If for some reason some semblance of democracy is necessary (it isn’t, but it may be impossible to avoid it for pragmatic reasons) I recommend virtual houses for each of the classes and genders, where classes trade in a market rather than pass legislation by majority rule. Where resources are either equally or proportionally distributed. Then posting proposals for x months, then using a lottery (Greece) rather than politicians to select the juries (houses), then allowing the juries to conduct business (trade)

    In other words, there is no ‘propertarian society’ per se other than all those societies run under rule of law by natural law. So…. You can ask me questions of natural law – ‘what would the law say about ????’ You can ask me about different political orders: “what order, or what would you recommend for ????” You can ask me what constitution I’d recommend for america or germany, or england or poland etc. “what would you recommend for????” You can ask me what I’ve put in the working constitution. As long as they are under natural law they are ‘propertarian’. If they are not then they are not.