Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • Um. Shroud of Turin Is a Nice Forgery. Sorry

    October 9th, 2018 2:08 PM UM. SHROUD OF TURIN IS A NICE FORGERY. SORRY [A]s far as I know the Shroud of Turin was produced for profit (a forgery) after the Fourth Crusade, as was common for all religious artifacts of the era. (Every little church wanted one as it provided an excuse for pilgrimage (vacationers). It is produced on fabric from the crusade period. The pattern of the weave was not produced in the origin period (not even sure it COULD be produced), which usually consisted of simple two-way weave. It appears likely that the cloth was of medieval Indian origins. The blood artifacts on the shroud are neatly applied not fitting splatter or settlement patterns. The posture appears to have been of a sculpted figure, not natural. The sculpture itself is medieval in technique (a knight) not ancient (a soldier or nobility). The coloring itself and its iron oxide can be produced relatively easily by wetting with organic compounds and laying on a relief sculpture and placing it in the sunshine to dry (uv radiation), thereby oxidizing (‘rusting’) the organic compounds. In other words all that was necessary was to find a relief sculpture common on a crusader burial of the period, to wet it with any number of organic materials (speculation on which was used isn’t clear), rub those organic compounds while on the sculpture, and to dry it in the intense regional sunshine. The problem we face is that so many people have come in contact with it, that other than the oxidation (Stains), we can’t trust any of the micro particles we’ve pulled from it since they contain everything from europe to the levant. In any event, as someone with a lot of experience with dead bodies, who has done rubbings of ancient 3d arts from all over the world, it looks like an obvious forgery, and it’s pretty hard for me to imagine anyone would think otherwise. But then I have an education in ancient art history, in identifying are methods, and as a consequence, art fraud, and my family is in the ‘burial’ business so maybe I’m just more informed by accident of circumstance.

  • Liberalism vs Absolutism

    October 9th, 2018 9:19 AM LIBERALISM VS ABSOLUTISM As usual, the study of Philosophy is almost always used as simply a reformation of the study of Theology. In that sense, it’s a sophism of the pre-scientific period, or a pseudoscience in the present. 1 – Morality (rules of good (non-retaliatory), and bad (retaliatory) display word and deed) (a) morality can refer to objective (reciprocal) as in international conflict and law, (b) traditional (contextual) as in civilizational/national/political rules in favor of group evolutionary strategy, (c)normative (contextual) as in class, locality, and disciplinary in favor of social political and commercial cooperation, (d) conflated with legal (which is common). In all cases, from intuition, to norm, to law, all moral rules reflect the incentives and rewards necessary in the given competitive order. 2 – Liberalism (european), Classical Liberalism(american), Conservatism(Anglo) (center-right) vs Anarchism(jewish), Libertinism(Jewish), Libertarianism(anglo/continental) (center-Left), (a) the purpose of tolerating liberalism is to generate increasing revenues because those revenues increase the state (authoritarian) power, just as the purpose of tolerating theology is to decrease costs and increased revenue through discounts on the cost of suppression. (b) the problem with authoritarian regimes is that the bureaucracy not the authority ends up ruling, maximizing rents, and consuming the profits that make externalization of power possible. (c) the problem (…) 50 more examples here I won’t waste my time on. CONCLUDING Liberalism (market society) isn’t beneficial because it is moral, or because it’s ‘legitimate’ in someone’s mind, but because it is the cheapest means of producing COMPETITIVE POWER at the lowest administrative cost, with the greatest opportunity to suppress rents, providing the rulers with the greatest opportunity to exert power. Democracy is rather ridiculous and certainly a failed experiment outside of producing a constantly rotating senate (oligarchy), and monarchy is clearly superior at the conduct of war and the production of durable commons. But liberalism is simply a scheme for reaping the highest returns from the population given that money, prices, and markets allow the population to be self governing, and corruption limited and inexpensive. The problem with absolutism is that it’s highly error prone at the expense of easy replacement by Regicide – usually by the Regent’s own family. The problem with non-kin absolutism (corporatism), is that it sorts for the most malincentivized leadership. The optimum government is one that, like the roman, concentrates power for war, and redistributes power for normal times, and redistributes income from windfalls. The search for monopoly is merely the naive and not very bright youthful mind searching for that which it can comprehend.

  • Liberalism vs Absolutism

    October 9th, 2018 9:19 AM LIBERALISM VS ABSOLUTISM As usual, the study of Philosophy is almost always used as simply a reformation of the study of Theology. In that sense, it’s a sophism of the pre-scientific period, or a pseudoscience in the present. 1 – Morality (rules of good (non-retaliatory), and bad (retaliatory) display word and deed) (a) morality can refer to objective (reciprocal) as in international conflict and law, (b) traditional (contextual) as in civilizational/national/political rules in favor of group evolutionary strategy, (c)normative (contextual) as in class, locality, and disciplinary in favor of social political and commercial cooperation, (d) conflated with legal (which is common). In all cases, from intuition, to norm, to law, all moral rules reflect the incentives and rewards necessary in the given competitive order. 2 – Liberalism (european), Classical Liberalism(american), Conservatism(Anglo) (center-right) vs Anarchism(jewish), Libertinism(Jewish), Libertarianism(anglo/continental) (center-Left), (a) the purpose of tolerating liberalism is to generate increasing revenues because those revenues increase the state (authoritarian) power, just as the purpose of tolerating theology is to decrease costs and increased revenue through discounts on the cost of suppression. (b) the problem with authoritarian regimes is that the bureaucracy not the authority ends up ruling, maximizing rents, and consuming the profits that make externalization of power possible. (c) the problem (…) 50 more examples here I won’t waste my time on. CONCLUDING Liberalism (market society) isn’t beneficial because it is moral, or because it’s ‘legitimate’ in someone’s mind, but because it is the cheapest means of producing COMPETITIVE POWER at the lowest administrative cost, with the greatest opportunity to suppress rents, providing the rulers with the greatest opportunity to exert power. Democracy is rather ridiculous and certainly a failed experiment outside of producing a constantly rotating senate (oligarchy), and monarchy is clearly superior at the conduct of war and the production of durable commons. But liberalism is simply a scheme for reaping the highest returns from the population given that money, prices, and markets allow the population to be self governing, and corruption limited and inexpensive. The problem with absolutism is that it’s highly error prone at the expense of easy replacement by Regicide – usually by the Regent’s own family. The problem with non-kin absolutism (corporatism), is that it sorts for the most malincentivized leadership. The optimum government is one that, like the roman, concentrates power for war, and redistributes power for normal times, and redistributes income from windfalls. The search for monopoly is merely the naive and not very bright youthful mind searching for that which it can comprehend.

  • The Economics of Association in Heterogeneous Polities

    October 9th, 2018 12:27 AM WHY WHITE PRIVILEGE? HERE IS THE CORRECT ANSWER: THE ECONOMICS OF ASSOCIATION IN HETEROGENEOUS POLITIES [I]t’s because ethnic europeans, particularly northern europeans, largely because of geography and culture came out of the dark ages first, had the enlightenment first, developed the first fully middle class civilization first, and did so both genetically, culturally, and institutionally, by using militias due to weak central governments, individual sovereignty because of militias, rule of law not rule by discretion, manorialism’s suppression of underclass rates of reproduction, and by aggressive hanging of criminal population for 1000 years, and as a consequence producing the highest trust society, with the highest trust population. So, in commerce and politics ethnic europeans have obtained a premium for their (earned) reputation for relative trustworthiness and work ethic (middle class public behavior), and they preserve the premium through intergenerational transfer of those habits, norms, traditions, and values. The problem is that high trust polities and a ‘deserved’ reputation for high trust is extremely expensive and no other people so far have been able to produce it except the Japanese and Koreans. This is the reason for the west’s higher standard of living. The rest is due to demographic distributions, meaning that the vast majority of ethnic europeans are within one degree of the genetic middle class (meaning that they can learn to use technology independently by reading), whereas the vast majority of peoples who complain about the reputational advantage of ethnic europeans are from groups with historically larger underclasses, and therefore, lower medians, where cultural norms are determined by the median, and we are all judged by ‘averages (median) of our group”. Why? Because stereotypes are the most accurate measurement in the social sciences. They are verified or falsified every day in ever personal interaction. We are all punished for (experience discounts), and privileged for (experience premiums) our identities: manners, ethics, morals, habits, body language, hygiene, speech pattern, vocabulary, dress, fitness, and everything else. To lose your discount or gain a premium, change your group’s sexual, social, economic, intellectual, and market value, by changing your group’s demographics, habits, manners, ethics, morals, traditions, values, rituals so that they are ALSO middle class (market) rather than whatever tradition you come from. it’s not complicated. Before the 1964 immigration act, everyone who came to america did it. The lesson is that people are not scarce. Individuals are not special.Humans by and large are a commodity. There are, if anything, far too many of us. People must work hard to find some way of providing value to others so that they are useful in the marketplace for sexual, social, economic, political cooperation. And because value is rare, and people are not scarce, all people are careful in making the best investments that they can. And they invest in what they can see. Hence why jews and asians do better than ethnic europeans in american university acceptance, but no one criticizes them. While whites are criticized daily, and experience reverse discrimination in the academy, politics, and the media, while preserving their economic advantage in the work place, and their social status. So, it’s not a privilege, it’s a cultural premium for 1350 years of suppression of underclass reproduction and downward expansion of the middle class. And training your children to do what is uncomfortable in order to obtain long term benefits of conforming to middle class behaviors. And it’s almost impossible to alter for that reason. People from other cultures or ethnicities assume white identity is arbitrary but it is merely the universal adaptation of middle class market behavior on a civilizational scale. Join the middle class by acting as middle class, and getting others with your identity to act middle class. It’s not complicated, but it’s terribly difficult, which is why so few cultures can do it without many generations of middle class civilization.

  • The Economics of Association in Heterogeneous Polities

    October 9th, 2018 12:27 AM WHY WHITE PRIVILEGE? HERE IS THE CORRECT ANSWER: THE ECONOMICS OF ASSOCIATION IN HETEROGENEOUS POLITIES [I]t’s because ethnic europeans, particularly northern europeans, largely because of geography and culture came out of the dark ages first, had the enlightenment first, developed the first fully middle class civilization first, and did so both genetically, culturally, and institutionally, by using militias due to weak central governments, individual sovereignty because of militias, rule of law not rule by discretion, manorialism’s suppression of underclass rates of reproduction, and by aggressive hanging of criminal population for 1000 years, and as a consequence producing the highest trust society, with the highest trust population. So, in commerce and politics ethnic europeans have obtained a premium for their (earned) reputation for relative trustworthiness and work ethic (middle class public behavior), and they preserve the premium through intergenerational transfer of those habits, norms, traditions, and values. The problem is that high trust polities and a ‘deserved’ reputation for high trust is extremely expensive and no other people so far have been able to produce it except the Japanese and Koreans. This is the reason for the west’s higher standard of living. The rest is due to demographic distributions, meaning that the vast majority of ethnic europeans are within one degree of the genetic middle class (meaning that they can learn to use technology independently by reading), whereas the vast majority of peoples who complain about the reputational advantage of ethnic europeans are from groups with historically larger underclasses, and therefore, lower medians, where cultural norms are determined by the median, and we are all judged by ‘averages (median) of our group”. Why? Because stereotypes are the most accurate measurement in the social sciences. They are verified or falsified every day in ever personal interaction. We are all punished for (experience discounts), and privileged for (experience premiums) our identities: manners, ethics, morals, habits, body language, hygiene, speech pattern, vocabulary, dress, fitness, and everything else. To lose your discount or gain a premium, change your group’s sexual, social, economic, intellectual, and market value, by changing your group’s demographics, habits, manners, ethics, morals, traditions, values, rituals so that they are ALSO middle class (market) rather than whatever tradition you come from. it’s not complicated. Before the 1964 immigration act, everyone who came to america did it. The lesson is that people are not scarce. Individuals are not special.Humans by and large are a commodity. There are, if anything, far too many of us. People must work hard to find some way of providing value to others so that they are useful in the marketplace for sexual, social, economic, political cooperation. And because value is rare, and people are not scarce, all people are careful in making the best investments that they can. And they invest in what they can see. Hence why jews and asians do better than ethnic europeans in american university acceptance, but no one criticizes them. While whites are criticized daily, and experience reverse discrimination in the academy, politics, and the media, while preserving their economic advantage in the work place, and their social status. So, it’s not a privilege, it’s a cultural premium for 1350 years of suppression of underclass reproduction and downward expansion of the middle class. And training your children to do what is uncomfortable in order to obtain long term benefits of conforming to middle class behaviors. And it’s almost impossible to alter for that reason. People from other cultures or ethnicities assume white identity is arbitrary but it is merely the universal adaptation of middle class market behavior on a civilizational scale. Join the middle class by acting as middle class, and getting others with your identity to act middle class. It’s not complicated, but it’s terribly difficult, which is why so few cultures can do it without many generations of middle class civilization.

  • THINK TANKS -vs- LIBERAL PROTESTS —“The Kochs fund conservative think tanks wh

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/george-soross-march-on-washington-1538951025CONSERVATIVE THINK TANKS -vs- LIBERAL PROTESTS

    —“The Kochs fund conservative think tanks whose members publish thoughtful papers on current issues. The Kochs also fund a lot of PBS series and are involved in other educational endeavors. There is no comparison between what these philanthropists do and what Soros does.”—

    SOROS’ CONTRIVED MEDIA CIRCUS IN WASHINGTON:

    By Asra Q. Nomani

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/george-soross-march-on-washington-1538951025

    In a series of tweets and rally comments, President Trump described the crowd as “an angry left-wing mob” of “professional protesters who are handed expensive signs” and “paid for by [George] Soros and others.” Mr. Trump’s detractors accused him of engaging in conspiracy theories, and even of anti-Semitism against Mr. Soros, a billionaire donor to liberal causes. ( … )

    I started following the money for the “resistance” when it was born, hours after Election Day 2016. I have organized my findings in a spreadsheet I have made public.

    HERE IS THE DOC: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1zYoQoffWRAHrECq2PDshlPvNpNDSLtdmNjtW-gUuhqw/edit?usp=sharing

    At least 50 of the largest organizations that participated as “partners” in the Jan. 21, 2017, Women’s March had received grants from Mr. Soros’s Open Society Foundations or similar funds in the “House of Soros,” as his philanthropic empire was once called internally. The number of Soros-backed partners has grown to at least 80. At least 20 of the largest groups that led the Saturday anti-Kavanaugh protests have been Open Society grantees.

    On Saturday I also studied the fine print on the signs as protesters waved them defiantly at the Capitol and the high court. They came from a familiar list of Democratic interest groups that have received millions from Mr. Soros: the American Civil Liberties Union, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice America, the Center for Popular Democracy, Human Rights Campaign and on and on. MoveOn.org http://MoveOn.org , a Democratic organizing and lobbying group founded with Soros money, sent its army of partisan followers regular missives that led them to a Google form to ask for train tickets and places to stay.

    Under a ginkgo tree on the East Lawn of the Capitol, Center for Popular Democracy field marshals put protesters through a “training” Saturday morning. “Are you ready to be arrested?” she asks. “Yes!” the crowd shouts, although one woman asks quietly: “For what?”

    “If not,” the field marshal orders, “stand in line for the visitor’s gallery so an experienced protester can go inside and yell.” One organizer hands out tickets to the Senate visitors gallery for the express purpose of violating the law. That they did—the proceedings were repeatedly interrupted by shrieks from the gallery.

    The agitators even have help with their handmade signs. Across the street from the Supreme Court, a woman uses supplies provided by UltraViolet Action to write, in Spanish: “No more rapists in power.”

    Back on the Capitol lawn, people from Megaphone Strategies, a public-relations firm founded by former Obama adviser Van Jones, manage interview requests from USA Today and other news outlets. Women’s March lieutenants exchange T-shirts for completed “Legal Support Sheets” with information in case of arrest.

    Suddenly everyone stands to walk in unison to the Capitol steps. When they arrive, the few Capitol Police officers on the scene silently watch them. The protesters walk up the stairs—though they don’t “storm” them, as the leaders have claimed. There are no barricades, no phalanx of armed police.

    Rethink Media created a “social media strategy sheet” back in August for anti-Kavanaugh protesters. One talking point: “Kavanaugh was hand-picked by dark money groups and their billionaire backers.” Rethink Media is itself a Soros grantee, and Saturday’s protests and unlawful disruptions were part of a well-funded, orchestrated network that books buses, hotel rooms and churches for such agitation.

    MoveOn.org http://MoveOn.org wrote a guide, “How to Bird Dog”—harass officials in public places—in the spring of 2017, in preparation for town-hall meetings during a congressional recess. Over the past year, I have dialed in to MoveOn.org http://MoveOn.org ’s Sunday evening phone calls where they plan the operations and tell their “troublemakers” how to corner lawmakers. I still get alerts for their planning sessions. The last ones have been to # stopKavanaugh.

    MoveOn.org http://MoveOn.org announced that its call the night after Justice Kavanaugh’s confirmation would feature Ana Maria Archila, the Colombia-born sexual-assault victim who cornered Sen. Jeff Flake in a Senate elevator last month while a confederate screamed “Look at me!” She is co-executive director of the Center for Popular Democracy. Her salary was listed as $156,333, with a bonus of $21,378, in a recent Internal Revenue Service 990 form.

    What I have pieced together is an open secret but one that journalists tend to avoid. Many (including me) sympathize with the liberal causes Open Society champions. Some have been paid Open Society Fellows or grantees. And many are put off by conservative anti-Soros rhetoric, which gets truculent at times.

    Mr. Soros, much like the Koch brothers, funds causes he cares about. There’s nothing wrong with that, but democracy is better served if we follow the money on the right and left and find solutions where they are likeliest to lie: in the middle.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-08 21:19:00 UTC

  • The Difference Between Understanding(knowledge) and Use (craft)

    October 8th, 2018 2:28 PM THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN UNDERSTANDING(KNOWLEDGE) AND USE (CRAFT) I just thought of a good analogy. Mathematicians do amazing things without having any idea why their craft performs as it does. Then we have this nonsense of the contortions of the logical foundations of mathematics, that once you understand them, are ridiculous. Not false, just ridiculous – because the foundations of mathematics are TRIVIAL. But the whole host of nonsense we call mathematics doesn’t stop us from using the CRAFT of mathematics, any more than adding ancestor’s bones to a crucible of iron doesn’t explain why the extra carbon can produce low grade steel. It didn’t stop people from making steel. The same is true of the LAW. People conflate the ethical, moral, legal, and necessary law (natural law) all the time as what they intuit as ‘wrong’. Yet a minority of laws, moral norms, social norms, customs, traditions are in fact ethical, and moral under natural law because our various polities, groups, cultures, and civilizations used different portfolios of rights and obligations to preserve the social order regardless of its morality – survival is not a moral question. So we just habituate all sorts of means of calculating, from math and logic to laws, and norms, we produce vocabularies that help us do what we do in the context that we do it in, and we lose, if we ever new, which mostly we don’t, the ‘science’ and ‘logic’ in the rich weave of normative rules that we use on a day to day basis. It’s a small minority of us that must learn, recall, use, persist, and evolve those fundamental ideas that allow us to manufacture those normative ideas in useful form. Goods, Services, and Information are all products. The thing is, that goods are easy to charge for, services less so, and information hardly useful at all except in dispute resolution.

  • The Difference Between Understanding(knowledge) and Use (craft)

    October 8th, 2018 2:28 PM THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN UNDERSTANDING(KNOWLEDGE) AND USE (CRAFT) I just thought of a good analogy. Mathematicians do amazing things without having any idea why their craft performs as it does. Then we have this nonsense of the contortions of the logical foundations of mathematics, that once you understand them, are ridiculous. Not false, just ridiculous – because the foundations of mathematics are TRIVIAL. But the whole host of nonsense we call mathematics doesn’t stop us from using the CRAFT of mathematics, any more than adding ancestor’s bones to a crucible of iron doesn’t explain why the extra carbon can produce low grade steel. It didn’t stop people from making steel. The same is true of the LAW. People conflate the ethical, moral, legal, and necessary law (natural law) all the time as what they intuit as ‘wrong’. Yet a minority of laws, moral norms, social norms, customs, traditions are in fact ethical, and moral under natural law because our various polities, groups, cultures, and civilizations used different portfolios of rights and obligations to preserve the social order regardless of its morality – survival is not a moral question. So we just habituate all sorts of means of calculating, from math and logic to laws, and norms, we produce vocabularies that help us do what we do in the context that we do it in, and we lose, if we ever new, which mostly we don’t, the ‘science’ and ‘logic’ in the rich weave of normative rules that we use on a day to day basis. It’s a small minority of us that must learn, recall, use, persist, and evolve those fundamental ideas that allow us to manufacture those normative ideas in useful form. Goods, Services, and Information are all products. The thing is, that goods are easy to charge for, services less so, and information hardly useful at all except in dispute resolution.

  • THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN UNDERSTANDING(KNOWLEDGE) AND USE (CRAFT) I just thought o

    THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN UNDERSTANDING(KNOWLEDGE) AND USE (CRAFT)

    I just thought of a good analogy.

    Mathematicians do amazing things without having any idea why their craft performs as it does. Then we have this nonsense of the contortions of the logical foundations of mathematics, that once you understand them, are ridiculous. Not false, just ridiculous – because the foundations of mathematics are TRIVIAL.

    But the whole host of nonsense we call mathematics doesn’t stop us from using the CRAFT of mathematics, any more than adding ancestor’s bones to a crucible of iron doesn’t explain why the extra carbon can produce low grade steel. It didn’t stop people from making steel.

    The same is true of the LAW. People conflate the ethical, moral, legal, and necessary law (natural law) all the time as what they intuit as ‘wrong’. Yet a minority of laws, moral norms, social norms, customs, traditions are in fact ethical, and moral under natural law because our various polities, groups, cultures, and civilizations used different portfolios of rights and obligations to preserve the social order regardless of its morality – survival is not a moral question.

    So we just habituate all sorts of means of calculating, from math and logic to laws, and norms, we produce vocabularies that help us do what we do in the context that we do it in, and we lose, if we ever new, which mostly we don’t, the ‘science’ and ‘logic’ in the rich weave of normative rules that we use on a day to day basis.

    It’s a small minority of us that must learn, recall, use, persist, and evolve those fundamental ideas that allow us to manufacture those normative ideas in useful form.

    Goods, Services, and Information are all products. The thing is, that goods are easy to charge for, services less so, and information hardly useful at all except in dispute resolution.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-08 14:28:00 UTC

  • Neither of the issues Stiglitz mentions will make any difference because the pro

    Neither of the issues Stiglitz mentions will make any difference because the problem we face is (a) human capital is no longer in reserve in europe, but underperforming from the third world, (b) we have concentrated all growth in a few immigrant cities that are all on the edge of bankruptcy, and these are so expensive they have become ovary graveyards; and (c) proximity creates hostility because of signaling competition and cannot be fixed. There is no reason that what failed in levantine/semitic civilization will not fail here in western civilization. (d) the reason that we are in decline is reproductive redistribution downward and a continuous drop in human capital because of it, and this is caused by (e) the consumption of all income produced the the addition of women into the workforce by taxation and redistribution to said underclasses, and (f) the financialization of the economy wherein trillions are extracted from working families but not under and upper classes, thereby creating the reproductive redistribution. On top of that (g) unions caused the industrial, technological, and job flight. GM alone is priced out of the market by intergenerational rents that cannot possibly be paid, and should never have been tolerated as a legal obligation.

    I can’t even believe he’s dishonest and incompetent enough to even make those two nonsense arguments.

    Hence why I write so much about economic pseudoscience, particularly via Krugman, Stiglitz, and DeLong.

    I am fairly sure they know what evil they do, and they do it precisely because it is evil.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-07 21:12:00 UTC