Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • THE CASE FOR COMPENSATORY EUGENICS Well, politics like economics is counter intu

    THE CASE FOR COMPENSATORY EUGENICS

    Well, politics like economics is counter intuitive, and in some sense wrong: humans flock to opportunities; humans defect when it’s in their interests, and the central problem is limiting the opportunities that they can flock and defect to, to those that are productive rather than parasitic – which preserves cooperation, at least among others than the underclasses that have no choice. And the only means of protecting against parasitism is competition. And the only means of mediating that competition is the common law of tort – meaning, the common law of non-parasitism.

    In most of history, we lacked control of birth, had high infant mortality, required an entire multi-generational family, if not a clan, to provide sufficient productivity to survive, and as such offspring, despite high mortality, were both a necessity and relatively uncontrollable consequence of sex between people for whom sex, food and other people were the most available forms of entertainment (And release from toil). Agrarians work far harder than pastoralists, who work harder than hunter gatherers. We work less hard but we also lack the benefits of socialization, (sex), and intergenerational protection. In other words, socialization and mindfulness decrease with rates of production.

    The very idea that competition creates harmony at the expense of the underclass is not novel. However, we are no longer producing only malthusian surpluses, we no longer require intergenerational families for insurance, we are no longer prisoners of accidental reproduction, and no longer face high child mortality.

    So, it’s actually pretty simple to pay the unproductive not to reproduce. And this continuously eliminates the unproductive, those who lack ability, and those who lack agency, from the population.

    Now, I do not know why anyone would object to this particular issue other than some sort of status signaling. but then, I don’t understand why status signaling, should not be limited to truthful expression any less than all other forms of truthful express, if in fact, the individual is economically supported by the community.

    The real reason for opposition is the female basalt intuition that sees the world as equal rather than a distribution, and as such fears she lacks the merit to reproduce, and that if she does reproduce this might expose her to conflict with other females, or subject her children to risk because of reproductive inequality.

    The other reason is the priesthood and intellectual salesman’s loss of market share. Since without an underclass the priesthood eventually disappears and turns into public intellectuals. And public intellectuals again lose market share, because the suppression of moral hazard, fictionalism, falsehood, deprives them of the ability to advocate for underclass parasitism.

    At present levels of human ability a distribution around 125, with 2/3 of the is probably the maximum, and probably desirable. I really don’t see any reason that number can’t move higher, but it can’t probably move without direct manipulation of the genome.

    That said, the benefits are LOGARITHMIC above 105.

    The future will be determined, like the present, by the size of our underclasses. The only competitive advantage any society possesses other than territorial resource, is SMALLER UNDERCLASSES.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-03 10:32:00 UTC

  • ANCIENT FAMILY HISTORY IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WAS HANDED DOWN. (family history n

    ANCIENT FAMILY HISTORY IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WAS HANDED DOWN.

    (family history nonsense)

    Growing up we were told that our most distant ancestor had some crime or other that he apologized for, and gave money to Mont St Michelle. That wasn’t true at all. He merely gave witness to the legal proceedings. Fun with the “telephone game” of family history.

    The other was that one gave all his possession to a monastery. But of course, that’s what you did when you joined one.

    (Not that a am really sure of anything prior to 1350. Nor is anyone else for that matter. I’m still trying to get hold of something I can trust between the time the family disappears from the south of england, and … it sure looks like, moves north and then west. Always have property. Seems they were always literate. My ‘intuition’ tells me there was a little fortune seeking military nonsense going on in scotland and that this maybe didn’t turn out as they’d hoped, and resettled in the west.)

    This is the other axis I want to check. But I don’t think we can distinguish that clearly yet:

    THE HUSMERAE

    The Husmerae were a tribe or clan in Anglo-Saxon England, possibly forming an early settlement of the Hwicce subkingdom. The Husmerae settled on the banks of the River Stour, prior to 736.[1] They probably took their name from Usmere, a pool on the boundary of Wolverley whose name in preserved in Ismere House in Churchill, Worcestershire.[2]

    The tribe is mentioned only in the Ismere Diploma of 734, and subsequent charters relating to the same property until 964, when Usmere occurs on the boundary of Cookley in Wolverley.[1][3] This charter was for the foundation of a coenubium (minster). That minster was probably at Kidderminster, quite probably occupying the site of the parish church there.[4]

    Although the Husmerae may have been of West Saxon origin, settling into the area some time after the West Saxon defeat of the Britons at the Battle of Dyrham in 577, the Ismere Diploma suggests that Husmerae is the ancient name for area, although uncertainty over its provenance leave the origins of the name open to question [5]

    —-

    HWICCE

    Hwicce (Old English: /ʍi:kt͡ʃe/ [hw-eek-chay]) was a tribal kingdom in Anglo-Saxon England. According to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, the kingdom was established in 577, after the Battle of Deorham. After 628, the kingdom became a client or sub-kingdom of Mercia as a result of the Battle of Cirencester.

    The Tribal Hidage assessed Hwicce at 7000 hides, which would give it a similar sized economy to the kingdoms of Essex and Sussex.

    The exact boundaries of the kingdom remain uncertain, though it is likely that they coincided with those of the old Diocese of Worcester, founded in 679–80, the early bishops of which bore the title Episcopus Hwicciorum. The kingdom would therefore have included Worcestershire except the northwestern tip, Gloucestershire except the Forest of Dean, the southwestern half of Warwickshire, the neighbourhood of Bath north of the Avon, plus small parts of Herefordshire, Shropshire, Staffordshire and north-west Wiltshire.[1][2]

    —-

    ABBEY OF MONT ST. MICHEL, FOR BENEDICTINE MONKS, IN THE DIOCESE OF AVRANCHES.

    [Original Charters in Archives of La Manche, (fn. 1) and in private hands; Cartulary in Public Library of Avranches, No. 210. (fn. 2) ]

    [? 1085–1087.]

    (Original in archives. (fn. 46)

    Trans. Vol. II.

    fo. 247.) 718. Charter of William (Wilgelmus) son of Hugh de Silliaco. For forgiveness of all the misdeeds of himself, his predecessors and his successors, he grants in the time of William (Wilgelmi) king of the English, of Hoel bishop of Le Mans, of Ubert the vicomte and of Geoffrey de Mayenne (Mahena), to the monks of St. Michael, for the brotherhood and the prayers of St. Michael and the monks his servants, all the dues on his land of the monks’ demesne [to be enjoyed] as their own in peace, Ralf the monk and Andrew receiving them, on behalf of that house with a green branch of thorn (cum spine viridi ramo), Oldeburga (sic) allowing the gift on behalf of (loco) his other sons and accepting the benefits [of brotherhood] for them.

    Testimonio Willelmi de Vernico, et Amelini forestarii, et Berardi de Silliaco; Warini filii Rogeri; Radulfi de Dolieta; Erberti de Orca; Thebaldi capellani; Droconi[s] de Sancto Christoforo; Fulconi[s] Droardi, etc.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-02 21:50:00 UTC

  • On the Future of The British Isles (if Not All Scandinavia)

    Economic consumption is, like drugs, or religion, a comforting method of personal, familial, cultural, and political suicide. Some people think about their near term experiences, some about their children’s, some of their peoples long term horizons. (ie: the left, the libertarian, the right.) That which is unique about anglo civilization is incompatible with the faustian bargain that the french-and-german have chosen. The united states will have a second civil war soon because we have resisted returning to the european model of different states, and tried to preserve our inherited british empire in a world where we no longer possess economic and technological asymmetry. Meanwhile Europe, following the USA, assumes that she will achieve american economic and military prowess through unity. This might be possible if divided into protestant, catholic, orthodox civilizations just as american continuity might be possible if divided into Germanic (central), Scotts Irish(southern), Anglo (new england), white “Coastal Islanders” (seattle, portland, san francisco), and Jewish (New york city, Los Angeles). The fact is that the Han, Korean, and Japanese have won the argument: Homogeneity wins over the long term. Ethnicity wins over diversity. Executive government wins over democracy. When I watch the japanese and koreans and now the chinese, I still remember when we were like that – rather than a house, a thousand times divided. The value is not scale but smallness. The only value to scale is war. Small polities produce political, economic, and social equality -because they can. Move capital to people not people to capital. Equilibrate differences in production through trade negotiation. MOST IMPORTANTLY In the coming technological era, when not only phiysical labor but clerical labor is no longer productive, political economic and social asymmetry will increase dramatically, and the returns on popllitical control even more exacerbated than modern medieval and ancient eras. Ergo *the greatest advantage any demographic possesses is homogeneity and a continuously shrinking under class, lower class, and laboring class.* Let each group pay the costs of continuous modernization rather than burdening others. Thi sis the only way to create cooperative rather competing politics and norms. The future is Switzerland or the Levant/India/Brazil/South America. The Anglo Peoples, during the period of expansion, produced a continuous civilization of our own. Britain can either return to her leadership of our people, or continue to decline into a client state of either germany or america. We are not capable of holding the flag any longer. We have been invaded by the third world. And we will now have a civil ar to separate from them.
    Apr 02, 2018 12:16pm

  • On the Future of The British Isles (if Not All Scandinavia)

    Economic consumption is, like drugs, or religion, a comforting method of personal, familial, cultural, and political suicide. Some people think about their near term experiences, some about their children’s, some of their peoples long term horizons. (ie: the left, the libertarian, the right.) That which is unique about anglo civilization is incompatible with the faustian bargain that the french-and-german have chosen. The united states will have a second civil war soon because we have resisted returning to the european model of different states, and tried to preserve our inherited british empire in a world where we no longer possess economic and technological asymmetry. Meanwhile Europe, following the USA, assumes that she will achieve american economic and military prowess through unity. This might be possible if divided into protestant, catholic, orthodox civilizations just as american continuity might be possible if divided into Germanic (central), Scotts Irish(southern), Anglo (new england), white “Coastal Islanders” (seattle, portland, san francisco), and Jewish (New york city, Los Angeles). The fact is that the Han, Korean, and Japanese have won the argument: Homogeneity wins over the long term. Ethnicity wins over diversity. Executive government wins over democracy. When I watch the japanese and koreans and now the chinese, I still remember when we were like that – rather than a house, a thousand times divided. The value is not scale but smallness. The only value to scale is war. Small polities produce political, economic, and social equality -because they can. Move capital to people not people to capital. Equilibrate differences in production through trade negotiation. MOST IMPORTANTLY In the coming technological era, when not only phiysical labor but clerical labor is no longer productive, political economic and social asymmetry will increase dramatically, and the returns on popllitical control even more exacerbated than modern medieval and ancient eras. Ergo *the greatest advantage any demographic possesses is homogeneity and a continuously shrinking under class, lower class, and laboring class.* Let each group pay the costs of continuous modernization rather than burdening others. Thi sis the only way to create cooperative rather competing politics and norms. The future is Switzerland or the Levant/India/Brazil/South America. The Anglo Peoples, during the period of expansion, produced a continuous civilization of our own. Britain can either return to her leadership of our people, or continue to decline into a client state of either germany or america. We are not capable of holding the flag any longer. We have been invaded by the third world. And we will now have a civil ar to separate from them.
    Apr 02, 2018 12:16pm

  • We All Make the Mistake of Harmony Rather than Reciprocity

    Even though they are most like us, East Asians made a few mistakes in history – principally beginning with confucius not solving the problem of politics because it would be offensive. and worse, converting from their original empirical rule, to moral rule, when their civilization got so large that they overwhelmed their institutions. and worse, when they resisted technological innovation as ‘disruptive’. and worse when mao tried to stop the separation of ruling but poor north from wealthy south. Love of harmony is actually a catastrophic mistake. Instead, love reciprocity. We made the same mistake with christianity. Not submission but reciprocity. And you know, that’s all I do right? Try to restore Violence, Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Natural Law, and Markets in Everything. Nietzche wasn’t right you know. He understood the problem. He just was entirely wrong about what to do with it. You cannot produce harmony via positive, but via negative: by demand for reciprocity you will produce continuously evolutionary harmony at the expense of the current status quo – and thereby prevent rents and calcification that enventually produce vulnerability to competitors and shocks.
    Apr 02, 2018 2:05pm

  • WE ALL MAKE THE MISTAKE OF HARMONY RATHER THAN RECIPROCITY Even though they are

    WE ALL MAKE THE MISTAKE OF HARMONY RATHER THAN RECIPROCITY

    Even though they are most like us, East Asians made a few mistakes in history – principally beginning with confucius not solving the problem of politics because it would be offensive. and worse, converting from their original empirical rule, to moral rule, when their civilization got so large that they overwhelmed their institutions. and worse, when they resisted technological innovation as ‘disruptive’. and worse when mao tried to stop the separation of ruling but poor north from wealthy south.

    Love of harmony is actually a catastrophic mistake.

    Instead, love reciprocity.

    We made the same mistake with christianity. Not submission but reciprocity.

    And you know, that’s all I do right? Try to restore Violence, Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Natural Law, and Markets in Everything.

    Nietzche wasn’t right you know. He understood the problem. He just was entirely wrong about what to do with it.

    You cannot produce harmony via positive, but via negative: by demand for reciprocity you will produce continuously evolutionary harmony at the expense of the current status quo – and thereby prevent rents and calcification that enventually produce vulnerability to competitors and shocks.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-02 14:05:00 UTC

  • PEAK HUMAN? —“Are there any morphological differences between the brain of a h

    PEAK HUMAN?

    —“Are there any morphological differences between the brain of a highly intelligent person and a person with average intelligence?”—

    Three positive factors:

    1 – greater neurogenesis

    2 – greater neural density

    3 – greater white matter (reduced friction)

    Three negative factors

    4 – Lack of defect in biochemistry (or other illness)

    5 – Lack of defect in personality trait (brain structure and chemistry)

    6 – Lack of defect due to trauma (of any kind).

    And one less obvious:

    7 – False knowledge or beliefs (non-correspondence). Certain sets of ideas are incredibly attractive but entirely destructive to our ability to think.

    We should note that so far, (as most of us expected)

    a) intelligence is influenced by a very large number of genes.

    b) unfortunately most influences are negative not positive.

    HOWEVER

    That means:

    c) that potential intelligence does not require we increase any substantial capacity.

    d) that potential intelligence can be incrementally increased by cumulative, specific, genetic corrections.

    AND

    f) Ot seems likely that intelligence then developed a long time ago by accident but through reproduction we have not been able to produce dominance in intelligence without controlled reproduction (like we do with animals),

    OR

    g) Or the innate possibility was there originally and we have actually devolved from it. This hypothesis isn’t as strange as it originally sounds. Its entirely possible that the rapid increases in our ability to communicate produced greater selection pressure on verbal ability than it did intelligence, and we began to function more as a collective (social) intelligence than individually intelligent agents who imitated each other. The relationship between brain size and intelligence isn’t linear but it exists, and we have smaller (less expensive) brains than both Neanderthals and Cro Magnon’s for example.

    In other words, we might have passed peak genetic ability in the past but because of verbal communication reduced the cost and size of our brains, and as such, increased the survival of our weakest.

    We don’t know yet.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-02 13:15:00 UTC

  • ON THE FUTURE OF THE BRITISH ISLES (IF NOT ALL SCANDINAVIA) Economic consumption

    ON THE FUTURE OF THE BRITISH ISLES (IF NOT ALL SCANDINAVIA)

    Economic consumption is, like drugs, or religion, a comforting method of personal, familial, cultural, and political suicide.

    Some people think about their near term experiences, some about their children’s, some of their peoples long term horizons. (ie: the left, the libertarian, the right.)

    That which is unique about anglo civilization is incompatible with the faustian bargain that the french-and-german have chosen.

    The united states will have a second civil war soon because we have resisted returning to the european model of different states, and tried to preserve our inherited british empire in a world where we no longer possess economic and technological asymmetry.

    Meanwhile Europe, following the USA, assumes that she will achieve american economic and military prowess through unity. This might be possible if divided into protestant, catholic, orthodox civilizations just as american continuity might be possible if divided into Germanic (central), Scotts Irish(southern), Anglo (new england), white “Coastal Islanders” (seattle, portland, san francisco), and Jewish (New york city, Los Angeles).

    The fact is that the Han, Korean, and Japanese have won the argument: Homogeneity wins over the long term. Ethnicity wins over diversity. Executive government wins over democracy.

    When I watch the japanese and koreans and now the chinese, I still remember when we were like that – rather than a house, a thousand times divided.

    The value is not scale but smallness.

    The only value to scale is war.

    Small polities produce political, economic, and social equality -because they can.

    Move capital to people not people to capital.

    Equilibrate differences in production through trade negotiation.

    MOST IMPORTANTLY

    In the coming technological era, when not only phiysical labor but clerical labor is no longer productive, political economic and social asymmetry will increase dramatically, and the returns on popllitical control even more exacerbated than modern medieval and ancient eras.

    Ergo *the greatest advantage any demographic possesses is homogeneity and a continuously shrinking under class, lower class, and laboring class.*

    Let each group pay the costs of continuous modernization rather than burdening others. Thi sis the only way to create cooperative rather competing politics and norms.

    The future is Switzerland or the Levant/India/Brazil/South America.

    The Anglo Peoples, during the period of expansion, produced a continuous civilization of our own. Britain can either return to her leadership of our people, or continue to decline into a client state of either germany or america.

    We are not capable of holding the flag any longer.

    We have been invaded by the third world.

    And we will now have a civil ar to separate from them.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-02 12:16:00 UTC

  • –“Curt: How Would You Explain Your Beliefs?”—

    https://propertarianinstitute.com/basic-concepts/
    Well, I .. I don’t use the word ‘belief’, because I don’t use the concept of ‘faith’, or the concept of ‘justification’. So I would instead, say “this is my understanding, or this is history as I understand it, or these are my understandings.” (I will explain some other time why resource and opportunity scarcity and lack of agency attract ‘beliefs’ and why resource and opportunity plenty and possession of agency attract ‘understandings’. Or you can ponder that on your own.) Let’s, for the sake of argument, say that: 1. my work consists of completing that thing we call the scientific method, and systematically applying it to the entire scope of human knowledge. 2. My ambition is to eliminate the propagation of falsehoods in the commons – particularly given that we’ve industrialized lying during the past century, and that this means of lying has been designed to undermine our civilization just as were judaism, christianity, and islam in the ancient world, and marxism, boazianism, freudianism, and Frankfurt and postmodern schools in the modern world. 3. my understanding of history is that western civilization evolved not first but fastest because we required a militia in our territory, and as a byproduct of organizing a militia, discovered what we think of today as scientific (or I call ‘testimonial’) truth – and as a consequence, markets in every aspect of life. 4. The rest of my work explains how to evolve our traditional system away from a second dark age, and continue the process of dragging humanity kicking and screaming out of ignorance, superstition, poverty, disease, and lack of agency. In historical context, let’s just say that almost all of the world is only partly through the scientific revolution, and that this will help humanity with understanding the ‘rest of the way’. ITS ALL AVAILABLE If you want an understanding of propertarianism, believe it or not, ‘its all there for the taking’. See … https://propertarianinstitute.com/basic-concepts/ And if you read …. https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/01/05/an-overview-of-propertarianism-for-serious-newbies/ … which includes a description of history and western civilization’s unique place in it. Then you will have a basic understanding. But this is like learning any other discipline – and is very close to learning a mixture of programming and law. The technical part is quite difficult. But you don’t need to understand it. All you need to understand is that small homogenous nationalist polities operating under what I call ‘perfect government’ will produce the desires of socialists, libertarians, and aristocrats, without providing any of the m with a monopoly that allows them to live parasitically upon the others.
    Mar 30, 2018 12:16pm

  • –“Curt: How Would You Explain Your Beliefs?”—

    https://propertarianinstitute.com/basic-concepts/
    Well, I .. I don’t use the word ‘belief’, because I don’t use the concept of ‘faith’, or the concept of ‘justification’. So I would instead, say “this is my understanding, or this is history as I understand it, or these are my understandings.” (I will explain some other time why resource and opportunity scarcity and lack of agency attract ‘beliefs’ and why resource and opportunity plenty and possession of agency attract ‘understandings’. Or you can ponder that on your own.) Let’s, for the sake of argument, say that: 1. my work consists of completing that thing we call the scientific method, and systematically applying it to the entire scope of human knowledge. 2. My ambition is to eliminate the propagation of falsehoods in the commons – particularly given that we’ve industrialized lying during the past century, and that this means of lying has been designed to undermine our civilization just as were judaism, christianity, and islam in the ancient world, and marxism, boazianism, freudianism, and Frankfurt and postmodern schools in the modern world. 3. my understanding of history is that western civilization evolved not first but fastest because we required a militia in our territory, and as a byproduct of organizing a militia, discovered what we think of today as scientific (or I call ‘testimonial’) truth – and as a consequence, markets in every aspect of life. 4. The rest of my work explains how to evolve our traditional system away from a second dark age, and continue the process of dragging humanity kicking and screaming out of ignorance, superstition, poverty, disease, and lack of agency. In historical context, let’s just say that almost all of the world is only partly through the scientific revolution, and that this will help humanity with understanding the ‘rest of the way’. ITS ALL AVAILABLE If you want an understanding of propertarianism, believe it or not, ‘its all there for the taking’. See … https://propertarianinstitute.com/basic-concepts/ And if you read …. https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/01/05/an-overview-of-propertarianism-for-serious-newbies/ … which includes a description of history and western civilization’s unique place in it. Then you will have a basic understanding. But this is like learning any other discipline – and is very close to learning a mixture of programming and law. The technical part is quite difficult. But you don’t need to understand it. All you need to understand is that small homogenous nationalist polities operating under what I call ‘perfect government’ will produce the desires of socialists, libertarians, and aristocrats, without providing any of the m with a monopoly that allows them to live parasitically upon the others.
    Mar 30, 2018 12:16pm