Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • Propertarian Government?

    (FB Timestamp) PROPERTARIAN GOVERNMENT LIBERTY, RULE OF LAW, AND THE OPTIONS FOR GOVERNANCE: PRODUCTION OF COMMONS [L]iberty as far as I know refers to the condition produced by rule of law rather than rule by man. The principal problem with rule of law has been the means of decidability as to the scope of the law. This is why libertarianism failed – it does not define the scope of the law objectively and empirically rather than subjectively and preferentially. In the west this refers to reciprocity both between members, between members and the government, and between governments(international). However, commons must be produced since it is by commons the west outpaced (rapidly) the rest, in the bronze, iron and finally steel ages. We invented the corporation precisely because we have been practicing it for thousands of years – particularly since 700ad under bipartite manorialism (the agrarian corporation). Once the question of the limit of law is defined as reciprocity, the only question then refers to who and how the polity decides to choose which commons to produce that is in the interest of everyone in the hierarchy. A judge of last resort can choose the commons (monarchy). The monarch can choose the commons and then have another ‘house’ approve or not the appropriation of funds. Or a house can choose the commons and the people approve the appropriations, and the monarch (judge of last resort) hold veto. Or the people can choose the commons and then approve the appropriations for those commons, with a house, monarch, or judiciary veto those commons and appropriations. History appears to suggest that monarchs that must obtain permission from industry and the public in order to appropriate the necessary funds, produces the superior set of outcomes. And this is the lesson of the 20th century, and the reason for the systemic failure of democracy – even in the west. Not that we needed to repeat the lesson since it has been known since the ancient era, that democracy was the worst of all possible options. But because democracy coincided with the returns on the second industrial revolution (germany), from which our 20th century wealth arose, the state, academy, media complex has claimed this was due to democracy rather than democracy has brought that wealth to an end through redistribution of reproduction, destroying what that industrial revolution depended upon: the ‘white’ laboring, working, and middle classes – which are the only high trust such classes in the world outside of japan and korea. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • How Germany Made Use of Second Mover Advantage:

    BRITAIN VS GERMANY (how germany made use of second mover advantage: england betamax, germany vhs) By Aaron Kahland [I]’ll start by addressing education. Let’s take the metric of universities. Germany had more than ten before 16th century concluded whilst England’s third university was first founded in 1824 and Oxbridge were largely confined to theology and law. The protestant reformation led to compulsory education in Germany well before it was commonplace in England. The pietist movement in Germany led to the concept of ‘Bildung’ or a general education in the humanities which led to a revival of the study of the Classics. By the 19th century, whilst the Britons were busying themselves with superficial comparisons between Victorian and Roman periods, Germans were discovering places like Troy. By 1933, Germany had more Nobel Prize winners than all English speakers on the planet combined. But that is actually a poor metric considering that Germany invented the modern university and it became the model for the rest of the world and, importantly, the United States. I want to emphasize that i am not entirely convinced that the general education of the average German was better than that of the average Briton. Perhaps it was, perhaps it was not – I really don’t know. A good indicator might be book sales and what books were being sold in the 19th century. However, I would argue that by the 19th century, the upper 5% of Germans were better educated than Britons – and this is reflected in the fact that the Second Industrial Revolution occurred not in Britain but Germany. Whilst Britain was the origin of the Scientific Revolution – the Germans scholars absolutely embraced it and built their deucational institutions using the scientific method as a foundation. In fact I might argue that German philosophy was a response / reaction to that tremendous pace of scientific advance. By the 19th century in both France and Britain – Germany became synonymous with science and France had entirely given up hope of ever competing. It came to be understood, in Europe, that there was something peculiar about German civilization that provided it a technological advantage over others. It was this second Industrial Revolution – the fact that Germany now completely dominated electrics, machine tools, chemicals, pharmaceuticals that, in my view, was the cause of this civilizational conflict. By the late 19th Century the British ruling classes were determined to build a global Empire that would be run by a global English-speaking elite – the Rhodes Scholarship was established precisely for the purpose of selecting this elite on merit. Germany however, was the obstacle to achieving this because of her scientific advancement. (I baited Aaron Kahland into this post. He didn’t bite. So I just outright asked him. This is the result. lol -hugs )

  • Western Heroism and Semitic Submission – the Masculine versus The Feminine Across 3500 Years of History

    WESTERN HEROISM and SEMITIC SUBMISSION – THE MASCULINE VERSUS THE FEMININE ACROSS 3500 YEARS OF HISTORY (thanks to whomever asked me to comment) [I]t’s a very simple difference. Agency vs Submission. Heathens (Pagans in the pejorative) in western civilization are imagined heroes in competition with the spirits(dead), non-humans(green man, primitive man), demigods(powerful but mortal), and gods (powerful and immortal), and can, by effort and cunning outwit them – or – negotiate (bribe) them. This is a universal artifact of the conquest and replacement of european peoples by the westward expansion of the indo-europeans (Yaman, Corded ware et al) and their Militaristic, Expansionist, Sky Worshipping, Metalsmithing, business of profiting from the domestication of animal man, with horse, bronze, wheel and their very visible power over nature. It is a religion of agency not submission. Demand for a “religion of empires” increases with the distribution of peoples under rule, and the group strategies of those people under rule, and the compatibilities of those group’s strategies under such a universal rule. The semitic methodology of INVERTING the aristocratic (western) ethos by converting the bible of greco roman civilization (iliad of homer) which occupied the vast majority of writings in the greco roman period, with a ‘hero’ of ‘submission and resistance’ was an interesting strategy by which the vast underclasses of the old european (byzantine), and greco-anatolian, syrian levantine world could create a resistance movement by the cultural destruction of their superiors, Just as the Marxists (Marx, Boas, Freud, Cantor, Mises, Adorno et al, Rothbard, and the neocons) repeated 1700 years later (monopoly marxism of private property, monopoly marxism of common property, monopoly marxism of identity-property (culture)). The Semitic method of undermining was as successful in the Modern world (undermining colonialism) as it was in the ancient world (undermining colonialism). False promise of salvation after death. False promise of economic salvation. False promise of cultural (identity) salvation. The method of using sophism (false promise + sophism (Pilpul) + Straw Manning (Critique) is in fact a successful method of undermining a civilization that is overwhelmed by overextension, and profiting from overextension through commerce, and the dependence of commerce at international scales on trust. Christianity succeeded because trade collapsed in europe after (a) undermining by jewish-christian vanguard, (b) enforcement by byzantine (old world, greek) defeat of rome, and (c) collapse of world trade under arab-muslim expansion, (d) and the eventual consumption of all capital of the great civilizations of the ancient world, and the destruction of all those civilizations as a consequence. So, as trade and knowledge increased, europeans gradually (expectedly) extracted themselves from Semitic superstition, the church’s’ monopoly on information and literacy, the 50% of dead capital in europe under the church. and the corruption of the church as a monopoly federal government selling false receipts of salvation the way the current academy sells false diplomas. Given that the remains of Christianity are what leave us vulnerable to Semiticism (abrahamic monotheism, marxism-socialism-postmodernism-feminism, and the use of false promise, sophism, straw-manning, and the discount on disapproval, shaming, ridicule, moralizing, rallying as a substitute for truthful (scientific, rational) argument. It is only logical that the aristocratic right in Europe (using literary philosophy, moralism, and history) and aristocratic right in the States (using law and, economics, and science) should produce arguments to restore our native religion of the hearth to one that is heroic and expansionary rather than submissive and assisting in our surrender. Nothing in human behavior or history is difficult. It’s all simple. Once you understand that nearly all use of language is simply means of lying in order to obtain discounts on the acquisition of the power to alter the probability of outcomes in one’s favor. And all we do is search for narratives to echo (script). Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine https://arktos.com/2018/10/31/alain-de-benoist-paganism-and-the-neo-christian-west/

  • PROPERTARIAN GOVERNMENT LIBERTY, RULE OF LAW, AND THE OPTIONS FOR GOVERNANCE: PR

    PROPERTARIAN GOVERNMENT

    LIBERTY, RULE OF LAW, AND THE OPTIONS FOR GOVERNANCE: PRODUCTION OF COMMONS

    Liberty as far as I know refers to the condition produced by rule of law rather than rule by man.

    The principal problem with rule of law has been the means of decidability as to the scope of the law. This is why libertarianism failed – it does not define the scope of the law objectively and empirically rather than subjectively and preferentially.

    In the west this refers to reciprocity both between members, between members and the government, and between governments(international).

    However, commons must be produced since it is by commons the west outpaced (rapidly) the rest, in the bronze, iron and finally steel ages.

    We invented the corporation precisely because we have been practicing it for thousands of years – particularly since 700ad under bipartite manorialism (the agrarian corporation).

    Once the question of the limit of law is defined as reciprocity, the only question then refers to who and how the polity decides to choose which commons to produce that is in the interest of everyone in the hierarchy.

    A judge of last resort can choose the commons (monarchy). The monarch can choose the commons and then have another ‘house’ approve or not the appropriation of funds. Or a house can choose the commons and the people approve the appropriations, and the monarch (judge of last resort) hold veto. Or the people can choose the commons and then approve the appropriations for those commons, with a house, monarch, or judiciary veto those commons and appropriations.

    History appears to suggest that monarchs that must obtain permission from industry and the public in order to appropriate the necessary funds, produces the superior set of outcomes.

    And this is the lesson of the 20th century, and the reason for the systemic failure of democracy – even in the west. Not that we needed to repeat the lesson since it has been known since the ancient era, that democracy was the worst of all possible options.

    But because democracy coincided with the returns on the second industrial revolution (germany), from which our 20th century wealth arose, the state, academy, media complex has claimed this was due to democracy rather than democracy has brought that wealth to an end through redistribution of reproduction, destroying what that industrial revolution depended upon: the ‘white’ laboring, working, and middle classes – which are the only high trust such classes in the world outside of japan and korea.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 16:26:00 UTC

  • BRITON VS GERMANY (how germany made use of second mover advantage: england betam

    BRITON VS GERMANY

    (how germany made use of second mover advantage: england betamax, germany vhs)

    By Aaron Kahland

    I’ll start by addressing education. Let’s take the metric of universities. Germany had more than ten before 16th century concluded whilst England’s third university was first founded in 1824 and Oxbridge were largely confined to theology and law.

    The protestant reformation led to compulsory education in Germany well before it was commonplace in England.

    The pietist movement in Germany led to the concept of ‘Bildung’ or a general education in the humanities which led to a revival of the study of the Classics. By the 19th century, whilst the Britons were busying themselves with superficial comparisons between Victorian and Roman periods, Germans were discovering places like Troy.

    By 1933, Germany had more Nobel Prize winners than all English speakers on the planet combined.

    But that is actually a poor metric considering that Germany invented the modern university and it became the model for the rest of the world and, importantly, the United States.

    I want to emphasize that i am not entirely convinced that the general education of the average German was better than that of the average Briton. Perhaps it was, perhaps it was not – I really don’t know. A good indicator might be book sales and what books were being sold in the 19th century.

    However, I would argue that by the 19th century, the upper 5% of Germans were better educated than Britons – and this is reflected in the fact that the Second Industrial Revolution occurred not in Britain but Germany. Whilst Britain was the origin of the Scientific Revolution – the Germans scholars absolutely embraced it and built their deucational institutions using the scientific method as a foundation. In fact I might argue that German philosophy was a response / reaction to that tremendous pace of scientific advance.

    By the 19th century in both France and Briton – Germany became synonymous with science and France had entirely given up hope of ever competing. It came to be understood, in Europe, that there was something peculiar about German civilization that provided it a technological advantage over others.

    It was this second Industrial Revolution – the fact that Germany now completely dominated electrics, machine tools, chemicals, pharamaceuticals that, in my view, was the cause of this civilizational conflict. By the late 19th Century the British ruling classes were determined to build a global Empire that would be run by a global English-speaking elite – the Rhodes Scholarship was established precisely for the purpose of selecting this elite on merit. Germany however, was the obstacle to achieving this because of her scientific advancement.

    (I baited Aaron Kahland into this post. He didn’t bit. So I just outright asked him. This is the result. lol -hugs )

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 13:17:00 UTC

  • HEROISM, SEMITIC SUBMISSION THE MASCULINE VERSUS THE FEMININE ACROSS 3500 YEARS

    https://arktos.com/2018/10/31/alain-de-benoist-paganism-and-the-neo-christian-west/WESTERN HEROISM, SEMITIC SUBMISSION THE MASCULINE VERSUS THE FEMININE ACROSS 3500 YEARS OF HISTORY

    (thanks to whomever asked me to comment)

    It’s a very simple difference. Agency vs Submission.

    Heathens (Pagans in the pejorative) in western civilization are imagined heroes in competition with the spirits(dead), non-humans(green man, primitive man), demigods(powerful but mortal), and gods (powerful and immortal), and can, by effort and cunning outwit them – or – negotiate (bribe) them. This is a universal artifact of the conquest and replacement of european peoples by the westward expansion of the indo-europeans (Yaman, Corded ware et al) and their Militaristic, Expansionist, Sky Worshipping, Metalsmithing, business of profiting from the domestication of animal man, with horse, bronze, wheel and their very visible power over nature. It is a religion of agency not submission.

    Demand for a “religion of empires” increases with the distribution of peoples under rule, and the group strategies of those people under rule, and the compatibilities of those group’s strategies under such a universal rule. The semitic methodology of INVERTING the aristocratic (western) ethos by converting the bible of greco roman civilization (iliad of homer) which occupied the vast majority of writings in the greco roman period, with a ‘hero’ of ‘submission and resistance’ was an interesting strategy by which the vast underclasses of the old european (byzantine), and greco-anatolian, syrian levantine world could create a resistance movement by the cultural destruction of their superiors, Just as the Marxists (Marx, Boas, Freud, Cantor, Mises, Adorno et al, Rothbard, and the neocons) repeated 1700 years later (monopoly marxism of private property, monopoly marxism of common property, monopoly marxism of identity-property (culture)).

    The Semitic method of undermining was as successful in the Modern world (undermining colonialism) as it was in the ancient world (undermining colonialism). False promise of salvation after death. False promise of economic salvation. False promise of cultural (identity) salvation. The method of using sophism (false promise + sophism (Pilpul) + Straw Manning (Critique) is in fact a successful method of undermining a civilization that is overwhelmed by overextension, and profiting from overextension through commerce, and the dependence of commerce at international scales on trust.

    Christianity succeeded because trade collapsed in europe after (a) undermining by jewish-christian vanguard, (b) enforcement by byzantine (old world, greek) defeat of rome, and (c) collapse of world trade under arab-muslim expansion, (d) and the eventual consumption of all capital of the great civilizations of the ancient world, and the destruction of all those civilizations as a consequence.

    So, as trade and knowledge increased, europeans gradually (expectedly) extracted themselves from Semitic superstition, the church’s’ monopoly on information and literacy, the 50% of dead capital in europe under the church. and the corruption of the church as a monopoly federal government selling false receipts of salvation the way the current academy sells false diplomas.

    Given that the remains of Christianity are what leave us vulnerable to Semiticism (abrahamic monotheism, marxism-socialism-postmodernism-feminism, and the use of false promise, sophism, straw-manning, and the discount on disapproval, shaming, ridicule, moralizing, rallying as a substitute for truthful (scientific, rational) argument. It is only logical that the aristocratic right in Europe (using literary philosophy, moralism, and history) and aristocratic right in the States (using law and, economics, and science) should produce arguments to restore our native religion of the hearth to one that is heroic and expansionary rather than submissive and assisting in our surrender.

    Nothing in human behavior or history is difficult. It’s all simple. Once you understand that nearly all use of language is simply means of lying in order to obtain discounts on the acquisition of the power to alter the probability of outcomes in one’s favor. And all we do is search for narratives to echo (script).

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    https://arktos.com/2018/10/31/alain-de-benoist-paganism-and-the-neo-christian-west/

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 13:10:00 UTC

  • ON DEMAND FOR THE SACRED: EUROPEAN MARKET OR SEMITIC MONOPOLY? 1 – Heidegger=ger

    ON DEMAND FOR THE SACRED: EUROPEAN MARKET OR SEMITIC MONOPOLY?

    1 – Heidegger=german, which is the point of the discussion. Whether the Truth (knowledge, science, history, heroes, evolution) or Wisdom Literature (parables, fictions, myths) are the basis for civic contract (Monopoly). Or whether a hierarchy of graceful failure from the scientific to the religious is the basis of our civic contract (Market)

    2 – The sacred can consist of us, ourselves, can be something else (creatures, anthropomorphic, or formless), can be of things (idols), can be of ideas (of books and words), or of anything that we owe a debt. Although, ideas, things, symbols-proxies for leaders, and ourselves is a very close to complete list of the possibilities.

    3 – The sacred serves as a proxy between those who are not good enough to submit to one another.

    4 – Religion consists of training (education) the intuition (emotions) so that people ‘feel like’ you do by taking advantage of our pre-cognitive biases.

    6 – We can measure increase and decrease demand for ‘the sacred’ (proxies) and I am fairly sure the science of it (like that of status) is simply one that generates denialism. That is to to say that such therapeutic measures are unnecessary, but that they are not explicable.In other words, exposing the content and drive behind the ‘sacred’ makes the sacred impossible, thereby removing which is why it is denied. I

    7 – So , to some people the scientific truth is sacred, to some of us (american constitutionalists) the constitution and by proxy ‘we, us, our-way’ is sacred. To some religious tradition is sacred. To some of us a monarchy or leader is sacred. To some of us family, tribe, and nation is sacred. To some of us mankind is sacred. To some of us the transcendence of mankind into the gods we imagine is sacred (that would include me). And to some of us we spread, combine, include, or exclude as suits our interests.

    8 – Since debts of submission can be created along those and other axis, the behaviors we want to develop in a polity need only be expressible in all those paradigms – or at least, be sufficiently compatible that group persistence survives competition and shocks.

    9 – So the question is, (a) what are those rules of group strategy obscured within and created by some sacred debt, (b) what paradigms within each grammar (system of thought) each system of thought which corresponds to a degree of agency and interests, given our age, class, and accumulated relationships and assets.

    10 – it is not … challenging … to understand that the occult is an expression of vulnerability or powerlessness, that ritual an expression of mindfulness, that gatherings are an expression of inclusion, and that festival an expression of trust creation is rather simple. That the narrative content of a mythos allows us categories, relations, and values that can be taught to children (or idiots) which allows graceful (simple) calculation and coordination of cooperation is rather simple.

    11 – I don’t do via positiva (religion, philosophy, and literature). I do via negativa law. While we differ in what is preferable and good, and we differ in demand for proportionality, and we differ in demand for liberty (opportunity), we do not differ in demand for reciprocity. Instead, we all seek to preserve our advantageous means of parasitism, predation, deception, and self deception.

    12 – philosophy religion and literature (via positiva ) is for others (and frankly, for those who need them). I don’t do either.

    13 – It is possible that the clash of civilizations between the german continental and the anglo scandinavian (naval) is simply that the british were smarter, better educated, and more evolved, and the germans, who were the “rednecks” of europe for all of her history, were, and remain a more sentimental people. I just don’t know if that’s an advantage or not. What it appears, is that it’s economically and militarily superior to follow the german model of TRUTH, DUTY, PIETY, AND RECIPROCITY.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 05:15:00 UTC

  • “Were the Sumerians White?” (no)

    RACIAL CATEGORIES OF WEST EURASIANS I’ve covered this elsewhere in detail, but here, I’ll repeat: While even Aristotle used Racial Categories, (and was clearly a supremacist by every measure, and identified the same behaviors we do today due to geographic causes). It wasn’t until the western use of sail to cover the globe that we were able to observe and understand that all groups on the globe evolved on different continents and under different conditions and that all people could be categorized into three or four groups with common features and customs. (African, west asian, east asian, and the early people along the coastal route from africa to india, through the pacific into australia.) WHITE DIFFERENTIATION FROM OTHER GROUPS White (European, Western, Christendom) practices a unique combination of cultural traits, as well as two genetic traits. Cultural: (i) speaking the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, regardless of the impact on the status, dominance, and competence hierarchies that we inherited from the Yamna/Corded Ware, and Indo European Expansion (Paganism). This is in direct opposition to ‘Face’ practiced by all other cultures, and direct opposition to ‘postmodern political correctness’ and their attempt to restore the primitivism of ‘face’. (ii) the development of the corporation or commonsthat broke family barriers under bipartite manorialism, (high trust), (iii) the four principles of christianity also invented to break kinship bonds: iii.1 The eradication of hatred from the human heart. iii.2 The extension of kinship love to non-kin. iii.3 The extension of exhaustive forgiveness before punishment, enserfment, enslavement, death, or war. iii.4 The demand for personal charity until personally certain it didn’t work. Genetic: (i) greater neoteny than all but east asians but different dimorphic distribution of traits. (ii) a balance between both linguistic and spatial intelligence (iii) the additional successful reduction of the lower and underclasses and a downward expansion of the genetic middle classes, under (most recently) bipartite manorialism, but (apparently) back into prehistory as well. (iv) the additional successful reduction of the lower classes by aggressive hanging of scolds, malcontents, indolent, and criminals for over a thousand years (maybe as much as one half percent per year), (v) further culling of the impulsive during long winters, starvation, warfare, disease – despite better living standards under manorialism than the rest of the world – such that by 1200 europeans were already ahead in caloric consumption and military development than the middle east. THE MEANING OF WHITE We use white Today simply because ‘christendom’ and ‘european’, and ‘western’ have been intentionally undermined by the pseudoscientific postwar movement using marx(economics), boas(sociology), freud(psychology), the frankfurt school (culture), and the (literary sophism) of the french postmodernists (outright denialism), in order to prevent the continuation of the scientific revolution into the social sciences, which was started by Darwin, Menger, Maxwell, Poincare, Spencer, Nietzsche, and the Romanticists . So, white refers to the set of european ethnicities (Genetic Groups) consisting of Old Europe (Greeco-Byzantine Civilization, the boot of italy, sicily, and sardinia), The Southern Europeans, The Atlantics, Germanics/scandinavians, Slavs, Finnics. They consists of those people of the western indo european expansion of the Yamna ( Pit Grave, Militaristic, Technological, Paternalistic, Expansionist, Sky Worshipping, that gave us the uniqueness of western civilization, in combination with horse, bronze, and wheel.). WHITE is the identity of atlantic, germanic, scandinavian, finnic, slavic peoples, and for historical reasons we include Old Europeans even though they are of anatolian extraction, not european – hence the complexion, build, and hair. These are the people of the westward expansion of the indo europeans (Yamna, corded ware cultures). (and yes, they largely replaced (exterminated) those that they conquered. However, Whites are just the westernmost branches of west eurasians that resulted from the indo european expansion. We broadly group these people into the category caucasian, which might be better said either ‘peoples of the black sea’, or ‘people of the black sea that evolved during the ice age.

  • “Were the Sumerians White?” (no)

    RACIAL CATEGORIES OF WEST EURASIANS I’ve covered this elsewhere in detail, but here, I’ll repeat: While even Aristotle used Racial Categories, (and was clearly a supremacist by every measure, and identified the same behaviors we do today due to geographic causes). It wasn’t until the western use of sail to cover the globe that we were able to observe and understand that all groups on the globe evolved on different continents and under different conditions and that all people could be categorized into three or four groups with common features and customs. (African, west asian, east asian, and the early people along the coastal route from africa to india, through the pacific into australia.) WHITE DIFFERENTIATION FROM OTHER GROUPS White (European, Western, Christendom) practices a unique combination of cultural traits, as well as two genetic traits. Cultural: (i) speaking the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, regardless of the impact on the status, dominance, and competence hierarchies that we inherited from the Yamna/Corded Ware, and Indo European Expansion (Paganism). This is in direct opposition to ‘Face’ practiced by all other cultures, and direct opposition to ‘postmodern political correctness’ and their attempt to restore the primitivism of ‘face’. (ii) the development of the corporation or commonsthat broke family barriers under bipartite manorialism, (high trust), (iii) the four principles of christianity also invented to break kinship bonds: iii.1 The eradication of hatred from the human heart. iii.2 The extension of kinship love to non-kin. iii.3 The extension of exhaustive forgiveness before punishment, enserfment, enslavement, death, or war. iii.4 The demand for personal charity until personally certain it didn’t work. Genetic: (i) greater neoteny than all but east asians but different dimorphic distribution of traits. (ii) a balance between both linguistic and spatial intelligence (iii) the additional successful reduction of the lower and underclasses and a downward expansion of the genetic middle classes, under (most recently) bipartite manorialism, but (apparently) back into prehistory as well. (iv) the additional successful reduction of the lower classes by aggressive hanging of scolds, malcontents, indolent, and criminals for over a thousand years (maybe as much as one half percent per year), (v) further culling of the impulsive during long winters, starvation, warfare, disease – despite better living standards under manorialism than the rest of the world – such that by 1200 europeans were already ahead in caloric consumption and military development than the middle east. THE MEANING OF WHITE We use white Today simply because ‘christendom’ and ‘european’, and ‘western’ have been intentionally undermined by the pseudoscientific postwar movement using marx(economics), boas(sociology), freud(psychology), the frankfurt school (culture), and the (literary sophism) of the french postmodernists (outright denialism), in order to prevent the continuation of the scientific revolution into the social sciences, which was started by Darwin, Menger, Maxwell, Poincare, Spencer, Nietzsche, and the Romanticists . So, white refers to the set of european ethnicities (Genetic Groups) consisting of Old Europe (Greeco-Byzantine Civilization, the boot of italy, sicily, and sardinia), The Southern Europeans, The Atlantics, Germanics/scandinavians, Slavs, Finnics. They consists of those people of the western indo european expansion of the Yamna ( Pit Grave, Militaristic, Technological, Paternalistic, Expansionist, Sky Worshipping, that gave us the uniqueness of western civilization, in combination with horse, bronze, and wheel.). WHITE is the identity of atlantic, germanic, scandinavian, finnic, slavic peoples, and for historical reasons we include Old Europeans even though they are of anatolian extraction, not european – hence the complexion, build, and hair. These are the people of the westward expansion of the indo europeans (Yamna, corded ware cultures). (and yes, they largely replaced (exterminated) those that they conquered. However, Whites are just the westernmost branches of west eurasians that resulted from the indo european expansion. We broadly group these people into the category caucasian, which might be better said either ‘peoples of the black sea’, or ‘people of the black sea that evolved during the ice age.

  • “Hey Curt, are you an American?”— By birth I am an american citizen. By upbrin

    —“Hey Curt, are you an American?”—

    By birth I am an american citizen. By upbringing, an anglo saxon. (WASP). In civilizational philosophy, I am an empiricist. In discipline I am a social scientist, in that specialization we call the Law.

    How’s that?

    —“By birth I am an Anglo Saxon colonial. By upbringing I am an Anglo Saxon colonial. In civilizational philosophy I am an Anglo Saxon colonial. In discipline I am an Anglo Saxon colonial, in that specialization we Anglo Saxon colonials call the Law’”— Rock Mandjinn

    That’s pretty good, except it fails to connect innovation in technology with Aryanism, Aryanism with Colonialism, Christianity as an ‘excuse’ for Colonialism and Aryanism.

    Aryanism: “Militaristic, Expansionist, Sky-Worshipping, Paternalist, Sovereign, Technologicals.”

    Where Paternalist and Expansionist means “Domesticating the Animal Man for Profit.”

    I get it. I do. The problem is that domesticating humans other than our own turns out to be a losing proposition for us. So separation in the chinese, korean, japanese model is the only solution to coexistence with ‘less domesticated’ peoples.

    😉

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-31 17:48:00 UTC