Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • EVOLUTIONARY ORIGINS OF MORAL INTUITIONS Humans are demonstrably amoral (both pr

    EVOLUTIONARY ORIGINS OF MORAL INTUITIONS

    Humans are demonstrably amoral (both predatory and productive) as we see fit in the moment. If this was not true we would not need so many institutions to train people on the one hand; and manners, norms, traditions and laws to assist us in cooperating; and parents, neighbors, police, judges, generals and soldiers to insure those manners, norms, traditions, and laws.

    We feel (almost all of us) the instinct to lie/cheat/steal/kill, just as we feel (almost all of us) the instinct to tell the truth, to transact honestly, to avoid imposition of costs, and avoid harm. Just as we feel (almost all of us) the instinct to invest in future cooperation and engage in signaling.

    The simple truth is that we are so exceptional at creating manners, ethics, morals, traditions, laws and institutions of their defense, that it is almost always inadvisable to violate them rather than engage in productive cooperation, no matter how limited the value or returns on cooperation are to us.

    That evolution has provided us with the emotions of pride and fulfillment and shame and fear, when we demonstrate those moral and immoral actions, is simply evolution’s expansion of offspring-defense to the rest of the band, and tribe (now community).

    And the value of that expansion of that trait of kin-selection to what we call ‘morality’ is the result of nothing more than the danger of being outcast versus the (absurdly high) rewards of cooperation.

    Language evolved (it appears) to increase the (absurdly high) rewards of cooperation.

    The adage “many hands make light work” doesn’t include a metric, but Adam Smith gave us one: divsion of labor does not merely increase linearly, but logarithmically such that the labor of one person when spread to ten is on the order of ten THOUSAND times more productive.

    In simple terms the better your language(correspondence), the better your verbal ability (iq), the better your division of labor (institutions of property), ad the greater your suppression of free riding, parasitism and predation (crime), the faster you will produce, the more calories you will capture in relation to output, and the more offspring you can afford, the more advanced tools and weapons you can produce.

    Hence why tolerance for milk (40% increase in calories form the same production) plus horse+wheel+plus bronze), allowed a small population north of the black sea to spread from spain to china.

    ANd why guns, germs, steel, law, and accounting allowed a small population to rapidly rule and transform the world.

    The primary problem is that we wish to remain children with a steady state and little stress, when it is the continuous conquest of stresses that provides evolutionary adaptation and innovation.

    In other words, our moral sensations are evolutionarily correct, but our work sensations are evolutionarily counter-productive. You cannot save your way out of poverty, nor avoid work your way into prosperity.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-21 14:34:00 UTC

  • WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE? by James Santagata It is very simple. It builds linearly

    WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE?

    by James Santagata

    It is very simple. It builds linearly. In the beginning you have a variety of people, but often the most vocal are never the best ,as the best are not attracted or vocal and/or the costs vs benefits are out of whack.

    Over time, as objectives, reasoning, and so on mature and gel, it grows but initially it is somewhat blind rage and guerilla warfare, dank memes, short cogent logical posts, challenges, marches and some street fights.

    This serves to shift overton window far to the right,even if it ends up to still be true left. And it shifts again and again.

    The opponents have to go the opposite way, more left, which makes the gap more clear and triggers more to the left and more to the right.

    As that happens intra-party conflicts happen but as they are settled, detractors are silenced, shamed or flushed.

    As it grows, the numbers and quality improve (jumping ahead, the danger is and the fact is, once successful, the charismatic opportunists make a showing).

    At some point, it hits an inflection point and shifts to be non-linear growth and nonlinear reach and impact.

    First exponential 10^1, 10^2, 10^3 and then finally geometric, base and exponent both increase. 10^1, 20^2, 40^4, 80^16, etc.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-21 13:09:00 UTC

  • Natural Law vs Social Construct

    by John Mark “Xyz is a social construct” carries no testable content. What they mean to say is “Human groups don’t actually need xyz to be successful. People have told us we need xyz but we would be better off without it.” Insert “legislation” or “rule of law based on natural law of reciprocity” for “xyz” and we have a testable statement. As far as I know, rule of law based on natural law of reciprocity with full accounting (of all forms of property) can and would adapt to social conditions – meaning that regardless of what actions people are taking in a polity, such a system of law would provide legal recourse and restitution for individuals or groups who experienced others violating reciprocity in dealings with them.

  • Natural Law vs Social Construct

    by John Mark “Xyz is a social construct” carries no testable content. What they mean to say is “Human groups don’t actually need xyz to be successful. People have told us we need xyz but we would be better off without it.” Insert “legislation” or “rule of law based on natural law of reciprocity” for “xyz” and we have a testable statement. As far as I know, rule of law based on natural law of reciprocity with full accounting (of all forms of property) can and would adapt to social conditions – meaning that regardless of what actions people are taking in a polity, such a system of law would provide legal recourse and restitution for individuals or groups who experienced others violating reciprocity in dealings with them.

  • THE PROBLEM WITH OPPOSITION TO PROPERTARIANISM Social Democracy -> Classical lib

    THE PROBLEM WITH OPPOSITION TO PROPERTARIANISM

    Social Democracy -> Classical liberalism -> Libertarianism -> Anarcho Capitalism -> Neo-Reaction -> Propertarianism -> Fascism

    The progress of our understanding from optimism and ignorance to pessimism and certainty.

    The problem with Propertarianism for other groups is that it’s law not literature, and as law it is unforgiving (intolerant) of falsehood, pretenses of knowledge or goodness whereas almost every other method of argument makes use of pretenses of truth, knowledge, and good in order to achieve an end that does NOT require truth, knowledge, and reciprocity.

    Why? Because we rally around (politically and socially) discounts that are obtained by use of falsehoods, pretenses, and irreciprocity.

    So the question is always and everywhere, why one would pursue one’s ends (power) by means of discounting using falsehood, pretense, and irreciprocity (fraud), rather than pursue them honestly and restitutionally (restitution) by violence, or honestly and predatorily (predation) by violence – other than (a) one has no chance of achieving other by coercion or violence.

    In other words, why pursue a failure other than to avoid action in pursuit of a success?

    All we ask in propertarianism is to impose reciprocity by violence as a means of restitution.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-20 10:52:00 UTC

  • So the germans haven’t been far out of aristocracy, they had developed the first

    So the germans haven’t been far out of aristocracy, they had developed the first professional bureaucracies in Europe, and had them before democracy.

    So they never rebelled against the aristocracy, and trust their government.

    The French rebelled against aristocracy and church.

    The English against the continent in general and did not have the fracture or diversity of the French, and the Americans against the aristocracy but not the church.

    So the “Demand for Authority” took very different routes across the european plain given the path to modernity.

    But (as Candice Mary is trying to get to) the maternalism (heavy in France, less so in Germany, non-existent in the slavic lands, and still dominating the south, …. that demand is constant over time.

    And was constant in old (south eastern) Europe in antiquity since they had the least admixture from the north…. ok. ok. I can start to see how this works now.

    (Why is it that you, more than anyone, point me in the right direction when I am off?) thank you.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-19 13:06:00 UTC

  • We Are Being Men. but We Are Converging

    (Read This) (Revolution Comes) —“It’s astonishing the Right has grown so much – and so much during an economic boom.”— John Reeves We are just being men….. many packs, each with a set of leaders, each with cognitive frames mirroring our experiences, all from a hierarchy of economic and social classes, coalescing on a viable strategy under which we can combine arms. To some degree in these matters we are as slow as we see women organize for small endeavors. While under duress we are much faster (insensitive). When SOMETIMES working on large programs across many tribes we are faced with the same problem that individual women ALWAYS face within groups: risk of dissassociation and resentment that impedes future cooperation. ( Candice Mary, see this paragraph) So we are being men, but we are moving slowly, beuause without an urgency to force our hands, we are acting like cautious women. That said, we are converging on a solution and that solution is revolution, and we all are beginning to understand that it is not only possible, but preferable, and the most preferable of the options. —“Right now we have the luxury to contemplate different ideas, follow different diets etc. One day we won’t have that luxury anymore and we’ll be forced to unite on the basis of what’s truly important, fundamental and realistic (rather than idealistic).”—@Ivar Diederik (Repeating:) If we remove the wealth and order, then the tolerance, like the dam will end, and the natural pressure of the conflict will produce deterministic ends. Never has an empire been so fragile, because never has an empire undermined it’s culture, it’s demographics, and it’s militia (men), at the same time as it has infra structurally, industrially(production), economically(trade), financially(debt and dependence on the dollar), militarily (lost use of the post-communist peace as a means of military transformation) , and politically over extended (bet on a failed strategy of globalism in the face of universal historical balance of powers). All we have to do is break the momentum that preserves the illusion of competence. The greater the fragility the less strength is required. 10K will be enough 100k a risk reduction, 1m a labor reduction, and 10M a time reduction. Numbers buy us comforts but we don’t need them to win. The undomesticated animals will do everything that we don’t need to – chaos.

  • We Are Being Men. but We Are Converging

    (Read This) (Revolution Comes) —“It’s astonishing the Right has grown so much – and so much during an economic boom.”— John Reeves We are just being men….. many packs, each with a set of leaders, each with cognitive frames mirroring our experiences, all from a hierarchy of economic and social classes, coalescing on a viable strategy under which we can combine arms. To some degree in these matters we are as slow as we see women organize for small endeavors. While under duress we are much faster (insensitive). When SOMETIMES working on large programs across many tribes we are faced with the same problem that individual women ALWAYS face within groups: risk of dissassociation and resentment that impedes future cooperation. ( Candice Mary, see this paragraph) So we are being men, but we are moving slowly, beuause without an urgency to force our hands, we are acting like cautious women. That said, we are converging on a solution and that solution is revolution, and we all are beginning to understand that it is not only possible, but preferable, and the most preferable of the options. —“Right now we have the luxury to contemplate different ideas, follow different diets etc. One day we won’t have that luxury anymore and we’ll be forced to unite on the basis of what’s truly important, fundamental and realistic (rather than idealistic).”—@Ivar Diederik (Repeating:) If we remove the wealth and order, then the tolerance, like the dam will end, and the natural pressure of the conflict will produce deterministic ends. Never has an empire been so fragile, because never has an empire undermined it’s culture, it’s demographics, and it’s militia (men), at the same time as it has infra structurally, industrially(production), economically(trade), financially(debt and dependence on the dollar), militarily (lost use of the post-communist peace as a means of military transformation) , and politically over extended (bet on a failed strategy of globalism in the face of universal historical balance of powers). All we have to do is break the momentum that preserves the illusion of competence. The greater the fragility the less strength is required. 10K will be enough 100k a risk reduction, 1m a labor reduction, and 10M a time reduction. Numbers buy us comforts but we don’t need them to win. The undomesticated animals will do everything that we don’t need to – chaos.

  • The Problem with America’s “Policing”

    by Aaron Kahland The biggest problem is what America is policing. If peoples aren’t paying for a service, it is likely because it is a sh*t service. America polices ‘wars for democracy’ across the globe. America polices mass immigration into Western societies. E.g. Turkish presence in Germany is a direct result of US policy. America polices Saudi Arabian and Israeli interests in the Middle East. America polices Sunni aggression/expansion against more moderate, Shia societies (e.g. Bahrain, Syria) in the Arab World. America polices destablization in North Africa which causes mass migration. America polices prohibition in Central and South America which also contributes towards destructive migratory patterns into the US and Canada. America polices the Veiceroy status of Great Britain and Germany America policed the democratization / destruction of Rhodesia and South Africa

  • The Problem with America’s “Policing”

    by Aaron Kahland The biggest problem is what America is policing. If peoples aren’t paying for a service, it is likely because it is a sh*t service. America polices ‘wars for democracy’ across the globe. America polices mass immigration into Western societies. E.g. Turkish presence in Germany is a direct result of US policy. America polices Saudi Arabian and Israeli interests in the Middle East. America polices Sunni aggression/expansion against more moderate, Shia societies (e.g. Bahrain, Syria) in the Arab World. America polices destablization in North Africa which causes mass migration. America polices prohibition in Central and South America which also contributes towards destructive migratory patterns into the US and Canada. America polices the Veiceroy status of Great Britain and Germany America policed the democratization / destruction of Rhodesia and South Africa