Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • “THE TALK” FOR WOMEN —RE: “In priority she is higher for us and her children a

    “THE TALK” FOR WOMEN

    —RE: “In priority she is higher for us and her children are higher for her.” I Had this fight many times. I am a monster apparently.” — Jerrick Harald

    1) I am a man. You are a woman. We are different. We are not the same. We are not equal. We are compatible. In our compatibility we can make each other better and happier than each of us can be alone. We have interests. I have interests. You have interests. We have shared interests. You likely cannot understand many of my interests. I will appreciate your interests. You can only appreciate that my interests that differ from yours are as important to me as those that differ from mine are as important to you. I am a man. I have a man’s interests. And I will devote my time to my interests, you will devote your time to your interests, and we will devote our time to our shared interests. Hopefully we have and we create many shared interests.

    2) If you want a woman to live with, get your mother or a sister, or share a home with another woman – one that you will fight with all the time for alpha bitch status. If you want a compliant male to share a home with, to tread your wants first among others, and to treat your children first among all others, then you need to understand that the price of that compliance is a man, and a man is not a woman. So you cannot have the luxury of both a man and a woman unless you can coerce your mother to live with you, since she is the only woman who will not try to dominate you for the benefit of herself and her children – if you’re lucky. I am a man.

    3) You women have a tribe of children. We men have a tribe of women and their children. We both gain a tribal monopoly thru marriage. I fight no other men for dominance and priority for sex and affection. You fight no other women for dominance and priority for you and your children. This is the smallest tribe we can both construct under which we are both alphas and both obtain what we require for survival and reproduction.

    4) So, I am not a life support system for a vagina or its outputs. I am a man. I assist in making your life better than it would be otherwise; and you assist in making my life better than it would be otherwise. Either a relationship is of continuous value to me, in sex, affection, care, friendship, economic utility, and late life insurance, or it is not. I expect you to find the same.

    5) My function as a man, is to provide defense, resources, friendship, affection, care, sex, and to manipulate the exterior world for your benefit in exchange for friendship, affection, care, sex, and your manipulation of the nest for my benefit.

    6) I am not a girlfriend. I am a man. I solve problems. I understand facts, not experiences. I gain nothing from experiences – they merely confuse and annoy me. I cannot share many of your feelings, I can only appreciate and respect them. I try to make you happy in exchange for rewards of appreciation. I enjoy making you happy. I listen for ways to make you happy. I prefer if you do not ask me to guess. And I prefer that you ask rather than expect me to remember. And while you train children by reminding, every time you nag me I take it as a criticism not help.

    7) This is honestly spoken. This is truth. We can color this truth in romantic promises so that our emotions convey additional weight. However, everything else is just a comforting lie, and comforting lies are a means of obtaining what one desires without paying for it, or constructing a promise that current asymmetries will be paid for with future returns.

    8) Women lie for resources and status and men lie for sex. But there is no reason to lie unless we try to obtain an unearned discount.

    9) But history illustrates that men are more sentimental and loyal than women in all walks of life. And if you will enter into this agreement with me for the long term, I will enter into it with you for the long term, and I will not break it if you do not break it.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-10 14:50:00 UTC

  • COMEY AND OBAMA’S FACILITATION OF MUSLIM INVASION 1. Before he bombed the Boston

    COMEY AND OBAMA’S FACILITATION OF MUSLIM INVASION

    1. Before he bombed the Boston Marathon, the FBI interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev but let him go. Russia sent the Obama Administration a second warning, but the FBI opted against investigating him again.

    2. Shortly after the NSA scandal exploded in 2013, the FBI was exposed conducting its own data mining on innocent Americans; the agency, Bloomberg reported, retains that material for decades (even if no wrongdoing is found).

    3. The FBI had possession of emails sent by Nidal Hasan saying he wanted to kill his fellow soldiers to protect the Taliban — but didn’t intervene, leading many critics to argue the tragedy that resulted in the death of 31 Americans at Fort Hood could have been prevented.

    4. During the Obama Administration, the FBI claimed that two private jets were being used primarily for counterterrorism, when in fact they were mostly being used for Eric Holder and Robert Mueller’s business and personal travel.

    5. When the FBI demanded Apple create a “backdoor” that would allow law enforcement agencies to unlock the cell phones of various suspects, the company refused, sparking a battle between the feds and America’s biggest tech company. What makes this incident indicative of Comey’s questionable management of the agency is that a) The FBI jumped the gun, as they were indeed ultimately able to crack the San Bernardino terrorist’s phone, and b) Almost every other major national security figure sided with Apple (from former CIA Director General Petraeus to former CIA Director James Woolsey to former director of the NSA, General Michael Hayden), warning that such a “crack” would inevitably wind up in the wrong hands.

    6. In 2015, the FBI conducted a controversial raid on a Texas political meeting, finger printing, photographing, and seizing phones from attendees (some in the group believe in restoring Texas as an independent constitutional republic).

    7. During its investigation into Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified material, the FBI made an unusual deal in which Clinton aides were both given immunity and allowed to destroy their laptops.

    8. The father of the radical Islamist who detonated a backpack bomb in New York City in 2016 alerted the FBI to his son’s radicalization. The FBI, however, cleared Ahmad Khan Rahami after a brief interview.

    9. The FBI also investigated the terrorist who killed 49 people and wounded 53 more at the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, Fla. Despite a more than 10-month investigation of Omar Mateen — during which Mateen admitting lying to agents — the FBI opted against pressing further and closed its case.

    10. CBS recently reported that when two terrorists sought to kill Americans attending the “Draw Muhammad” event in Garland, Texas, the FBI not only had an understanding an attack was coming, but actually had an undercover agent traveling with the Islamists, Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi. The FBI has refused to comment on why the agent on the scene did not intervene during the attack.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-10 13:03:00 UTC

  • MARRIAGE? Lets go thru the logic: (a) human life cycle averaged at ~40, Peak fer

    MARRIAGE?

    Lets go thru the logic:

    (a) human life cycle averaged at ~40, Peak fertility ~21/22, and the average woman bearing six or more children, only half of which survived to adulthood, and only half of which survived to 50. Those surviving to 50 could live quite long.

    (b) pairing-off evolved to reduce conflict (Nash optimum)

    (c) family evolved in response to property and inheritance.

    (d) family increasingly reduced in size in response to property and inheritance.

    (e) hypothesis: as life span increases we would expect to see serial marriages to exist for every reproduction cycle under which one is still fit enough to reproduce. In other words, we should be seeing two and three marriages(matings) with increasing frequency, with the duration of marriages a function of mutual interest in property and capital. IOW we should see male rotation of exceptional females at the peak of the pyramid (true), absolute nuclear families at the top of the pyramid(true), nuclear families below them (true), serial marriage below them (true), and serial mating (single mother hood) below them (true), and a dramatic increase in the diversity of economic conditions because of these differences (seems true). IOW: the poor are wealthy enough that they can survive without marriage if we redistribute to them. And as a consequence we should see increasing conflict again between classes, and breed ourselves into India-Brazil-like castes (appears to be happening).

    (f) Argument: small homogenous nation-states (kin) with active suppression of underclass (non self supporting) reproduction, and heavy redistribution, where women bear three or more children on average, but preferably four, should, over time, produce transcendence. Whether or not we use the institution of marriage is … irrelevant. The more important question argument is that to bear children one must form a corporation that insures that they are not a burden to society, yet one must bear children in order to earn access to that society, and its proceeds. It is difficult to argue distributions of marriage from longer term to shorter term will not exist. The primary concern is that one cannot bear children and force others to bear their costs.

    Further:

    So the equilibrium between promiscuity and commitment is determined by property, and property is determined by agency, and agency is determined by reproductive value and personality traits (industriousness, openness etc.)

    IOW, relationship structure is determined by economic necessity.

    In the current era, my anticipation, is that marriage weaponizes reproduction against serial marriage peoples. And government taxation and redistribution weaponizes underclass reproduction against the middle and upper classes.

    We domesticated women for a reason. Civilization resulted from the use of manufactured capital to create property by which to control female reproduction, and limit dysgenia.

    Remember good breeding doesn’t make good genes so much as prevent their regression toward the mean.

    Given the need for decidability in order to answer questions of this depth, I choose transcendence, excellence, agency, and beauty: which is a way of saying ‘excellence’. Or in more scientific terms “superior genetic information yielding greater control over the universe in shorter periods of time”. It is hard to argue with this choice.

    (This is just a ‘taste’. I could write on this subject of equilibria rather than ‘goods’ forever, and I could write on gender equilibria nearly as long.)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-10 11:39:00 UTC

  • YOU KNOW, ‘AUTIST’ IS A COMPLIMENT? (read a little toungue-in-cheek) You know, w

    YOU KNOW, ‘AUTIST’ IS A COMPLIMENT?

    (read a little toungue-in-cheek)

    You know, when you attempt to use the label “autist” as a criticism, you’re just demonstrating that you’re only half-way between female, and male.

    That’s what autism is, right? The extreme male brain. Yep. Look it up.

    So you know, I don’t take it as an insult that you’re still governed by perception, intuition, analogy, storytelling rather than measurements.

    I still love you, because you are my kin, you wish to cooperate, and you are my brothers in arms.

    But you know, crazy chicks, solipsistic chicks, cognitively biased chicks, betas, ‘intuitionistic’ males, rational males, and autistic males describes a spectrum from the most impulsive measurement, to the most scientific measurement.

    I see us in a division of knowledge and labor. Because we are in one. But we are also in a division of gender bias. And a we are in a division of gender bias because of our differences in reproductive strategy. And that difference in reproductive strategy is partly achieved by a difference in brain structure. The more synthetic the more impulsive and feminine, and the more analytic the more rational and masculine.

    Yes, we see a lot of ‘fuked up ness’ in the academy, and that is because higher intelligence comes with certain privileges that bias the minds of people of higher intelligence, and the school, academy, state, liberal order provides incentives for the overeducated, and not so smart (island 120) crowd, as well as those who are compensated by those incentives.

    However, if you look into the military, the legal, and the commercial, and the financial, where we have ACTUAL responsibility rather than moral CLAIMS to wisdom, you find that the greatest minds are always conservative, and the lesser minds are always progressive.

    Always. Look it up. Yep.

    I am aware that my family has been a member of the middle martial and managerial class for all of recorded history. I am aware of my biases. I am aware of my ‘aspiness’ and the prevalence of ‘aspieness’ in my family tree.

    So I know my biases.

    But I also know that when you can understand advanced concepts and do so quickly without instruction, without explanation, without anything more than suggestion, that this is the most empirical test of both intelligence, analytical ability and the extreme male brain.

    So when you use the label ‘autist’ or whatever, I’ll agree that extreme brains pursue extreme experiments. I’ll agree that most experiments fail. I’ll agree that it is possible that my experimental investigation will fail like many other philosophers of failed.

    Unfortunately, for it to fail, you have to provide a criticism of it that does not, by your utterance, prove it.

    😉

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-09 13:02:00 UTC

  • PROPERTARIANISM FOR FASHY FRIENDS by Joel Davis Some ‘Fashy’ friends asked me to

    PROPERTARIANISM FOR FASHY FRIENDS

    by Joel Davis

    Some ‘Fashy’ friends asked me to explain Propertarianism.

    Essentially, ‘Propertarianism’ is an attempt at unifying the social sciences.

    When attempting to reason a political system from this unified science, those of us who, in my opinion, really understand it, all seem to come to the same conclusion: Market Fascism (Meritocratic Aristocracy) provides the only possible, logical and scientific solution.

    By Market fascism we mean ‘markets in everything, and intolerance for anything else’.

    We also start without the presumption that there is superior value in cooperation at any cost. There isn’t value to cooperation at any cost. So, the first question the philosophy asks is this; “Why shouldn’t I use force against others?”. Why shouldn’t I engage in violence, harm, theft, fraud, free riding, conspiracy, invasion, and conquest?

    And, to answer this question, we rely upon the obvious rationality. But what determines rationality? Marginal utility (total costs/total benefits). We use force against others when we perceive it to be marginally profitable to do so, as if we didn’t perceive the use of force to provide us with benefits which outweighed the costs of using it, why would we?

    And, as all law and therefore government fundamentally consists of the application of force (as laws without force are merely words), either to resolve a conflict, or to enforce a behavior through threat, essentially what we are asking is, “what should the law be?”, or “what form of government should we use if we are to choose to cooperate rather than prey upon one another?”.

    By reason (marginal utility) we not only understand why and how governments govern as they do, we may also determine what form of government benefits us the most, and how to achieve it.

    The question then becomes, how do we measure the marginal utility of force? The answer is property.

    (Hence why we call it “Propertarianism”)

    Why?

    To first answer that question we must first define ‘property’. We can possess things without the consent of others, by defending them. We can hold property by the consent of others, and together, defend abuses of it. We can create an insurer of our property and grant one another rights to use this insurer to defend and restore abuses of it.

    Our property, whether held by possession, norm of property, or property rights defended by an insurer, is something we control the use of. It is the best unit by which we may measure the marginal utility of force because control is by definition the application of force in the successful pursuit of consequences, and why would we pursue consequences unless we desired them? And, why would we desire consequences that we didn’t perceive as net beneficial?

    Thus, we appropriate interests in kin, mates, relationships, goods, services, information, institutions, and polities in pursuit of marginal utility.

    In light of this, what strategy will we maximize our marginal utility? Game Theory has given us an answer, the answer is reciprocity.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tit_for_tat

    Game Theory demonstrates that if we can negotiate mutually beneficial exchanges with others (cooperate), this is of greater long-term marginal profitability than using force to gain unreciprocated benefits (conflict). The marginal utility of violence only rises higher than the marginal utility of peace when the net cost of peace rises higher than the net cost of violence (when mutually beneficial exchange cannot be negotiated).

    Therefore, we desire maximum cooperation within our society and between our society and other societies, to enable our society to gain maximum collective marginal utility, as by cooperating with our society, in return it will therefore be able to provide ourselves and our kin with maximum marginal utility.

    However, for cooperation to reach optimum levels, all those who consume greater benefits than they contribute (free-riders) must be forced to reciprocate to preserve the marginal utility of cooperation, if you can get something for free why pay for it?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-operation_(evolution)

    Thus, we shouldn’t use force against people who are marginally beneficial to cooperate with or marginally neutral to leave alone, as the costs of force would outweigh the benefits. However, we should use force against people who are marginally costly (if they are either straight up aggressive, or free-riders).

    Therefore, by raising the costs of free-riding and aggression against our kin, we maximize the incentive to either find some way to benefit us or ‘stay out of our way’.

    How do we maximize the costs of free-riding and aggression against our kin?

    By establishing the most powerful form of sovereignty we can. We can establish the most powerful form of sovereignty that we can through the application of reciprocity to the common law. The common law discovers new means of violating reciprocity with every case it adjudicates. It’s purely empirical. Evolutionary. Unplanned. We can stop every form of parasitism from murder, harm, theft, fraud, free riding, conspiracy, and invasion, to conquest.

    By establishing sovereignty using the natural law of reciprocity to provide decidability in the common law, we leave people no alternative to survive but self production, and markets in everything.

    Therefore, we advocate a Martial Aristocracy which charges the maximum price it can in return for its’ protection (taxation), this maximum is determined by the threshold at which excessive taxation causes the market to diminish more than its’ protection is worth (as if you raise taxes too high, you stifle the economy and the amount of money people have left to pay taxes diminishes).

    Thus, we seek the most powerful government possible, and we may achieve this through taxing the freest markets possible as much as possible.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-09 11:43:00 UTC

  • THE UTILITY OF ‘RELIGION’ (ALL) I’ve tried to explain over the past few months,

    THE UTILITY OF ‘RELIGION’

    (ALL)

    I’ve tried to explain over the past few months, that ‘religion’ provides a set of personal, interpersonal, social, and political services necessary for cooperation to ‘scale’.

    I’ve tried to explain that we humans have invented a number of ‘technologies’ for providing those services. And I’ve listed those technologies to demonstrate that non-dishonest (non lies) technologies successfully provide these services.

    I’ve stated that for the personal discipline, original stoicism is best, and original buddhism second best.

    That for personal rituals shintoism (Ancestor ‘celebration’) is best. ( I reject the use of rituals for personal discipline because they enforce stasis rather than adaptation and invention)

    That for political mythology: history, hero, and ancestor ‘celebration’, and teachings on a regular (if not weekly) basis. (continuous reinforcement of heroic individuals and families and clans).

    That holidays, feasts, sports, theatre, music, (and lots of them) are necessary and must be participatory.

    That for ‘spiritual’ religion, nature (universe) celebration, that generates sacredness for earth and commons is necessary.

    None of these things require falsehoods. All of these things either work, or have worked.

    Abrahamism, whether supernatural, pseudo-rational, or pseudoscientific, is the great lie that must be cleansed from the human experience, if we are to transcend.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-09 10:04:00 UTC

  • SIZE OF GOVERNMENT? (AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT) Theoretically, as a rule of thumb,

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_sectorTHE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT? (AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT)

    Theoretically, as a rule of thumb, the maximum is 20%. As a rule of thumb, we can produce about a 20% surplus in the long term, and we can accelerate innovation and consumption to raise that number through debt at the cost of increased volatility and risk.

    The US govt is about 15% of the population but, that’s misleading since we use so many contractors. It’s useful for judging the political bias of the people. Everything I’ve read is that it hovers int the 20-22% range in total.

    %GDP is a better judge of government scale. OECD countries range from about 35 to 55%, with the USA hovering near the low end (34%) but this includes financial magic because of petrodollar demand. France is at the high end with 55%. The general western consensus is that between 40-50 is the liberal ideal. And in total taxation we all reach that number.

    But that assumes that the government employees obtain total compensation equal to but not more than the general population.

    My suggestion (My Demand) is that not all countries need be the same, and as such those that suppress the reproduction of the underclass can most easily (and very rapidly) decrease the cost of ALL government burden, and thereby increase the returns of all shareholders (citizens).

    The USA was designed to exit the parasitism of the upper and lower classes by creating a middle class and upper middle class society on new territory. This is the only form of society in which democratic participation can survive. And this experiment has been under attack – successfully.

    The attack has been achieved by replacing arguments over rule of law (morality) with arguments over consumption (economics).

    The best thing we can do is restore rule of law, natural law, common law of reciprocity in not only goods, and services, but information. And therefore restore markets in everything.

    The best thing you can do for your people is eliminate non-professional immigration, and eliminate underclass reproduction. Period. End of story.

    Like all things: as complexity increases, Via-Negativa defeats via-positiva.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-09 10:03:00 UTC

  • A MANIFESTO FOR THE RETURN TO ARISTOCRACY: YOU LACK COERCIVE POWER OVER YOURSELV

    A MANIFESTO FOR THE RETURN TO ARISTOCRACY: YOU LACK COERCIVE POWER OVER YOURSELVES, SO YOU MAY NOT HOLD COERCIVE POWER OVER OTHERS.

    The only reason not to kill, enslave, beat, or take from you is if you agree at least to avoid parasitism, and at best to engage in reciprocally rewarding cooperation.

    One can walk away in silence, and mind his or her own business, and engage in boycott. This is, at a minimum, a failure to cooperate, and at a maximum, an attempt to separate and form a polity more desirous than the current one. But it is not a violation of reciprocity or sovereignty.

    But to engage in ridicule, shaming, rallying, straw men, double standards, conspiracy, propaganda, and advocacy of parasitism to actively violate sovereignty, reciprocity, meritocracy, and the transcendence of man, merely states that we are not longer cooperating, and you are engaging in parasitism and not yet engaging in violence.

    As such, as we are no longer cooperating, and you are engaging in parasitism, we no longer possess any incentive other than to engage in predation, including killing, enslaving, punishing, and taking.

    The only reason a state allows parasitism, ridicule, shaming, rallying and deceit, is to profit from the creation of conflict by expanding its totalitarian influence over that of reciprocity. The only reason not to kill, enslave, punish, and take from members of the state is if they eliminate means of parasitism, and allow markets to determine reward by merit.

    We have no reason any longer, to constrain our violence – violence that we pay the cost of forgoing the use of on a daily if not hourly basis, for the purpose of improving the lot of ourselves, our families, our kin, our nation, and mankind, by the imposition of sovereignty and the incremental evolution of agency.

    We spent over a century giving you license to join the aristocracy of meritocracy that constitutes western civilization. You have proven that you are unfit for that membership in the peerage of the sovereign. You lack agency, morality, ethical ability, character necessary for treatment as equal: as sovereigns, and therefore as ‘humans’. You are still an animal, unfit for subsidy, freedom, liberty or sovereignty.

    Our experiment was moral, ethical, and pursued out of honest belief in your ability. And our experiment failed. And so we return to our traditional rule, by and return you to domesticated animal conditions.

    We could blame you. But you are just animals. You lack the personal agency and the genetic sufficiency, to join the world of sovereign men.

    We will grant you protections under natural law, since you are capable, if disciplined, of cooperation.

    But you shall no longer hold coercive powers over others, because by your words and deeds, you demonstrably, lack the coercive power over yourselves.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Natural Law of Sovereigns

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Industrialization of Agency

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-08 08:01:00 UTC

  • America. The land of… Government is Killing Us.

    America: children, totally absent a mother’s attention, housed in and driven to boredom and immobility in schools, causing them extensive developmental brain damage, who then are so desperate for stimulation they cling to consumer goods, only to find later in life that they are alone, unwanted, unuseful, and easily buried and forgotten. America, the land where ‘decent’ and disciplined (moral) people work their assess off to pay absurd mortgage rates by borrowing from themselves (omfg), so that they can afford to move away from ‘indecent’ undisciplined (immoral) people, rather than paying trivial costs for trivial homes, where indecent people are prohibited from living. Make industrialization of home production unprofitable. And watch what happens….. America, the land of lonely people surrounded by consumer goods, taking opiates for physical pain and anti-depressants for mental pain. People who work long hours, without walking or running, under information saturation, and in artificial light saturation, in seasonally dark climates, will develop majority depressive symptoms in the population. Let me put it another way: the government is killing us.

  • America. The land of… Government is Killing Us.

    America: children, totally absent a mother’s attention, housed in and driven to boredom and immobility in schools, causing them extensive developmental brain damage, who then are so desperate for stimulation they cling to consumer goods, only to find later in life that they are alone, unwanted, unuseful, and easily buried and forgotten. America, the land where ‘decent’ and disciplined (moral) people work their assess off to pay absurd mortgage rates by borrowing from themselves (omfg), so that they can afford to move away from ‘indecent’ undisciplined (immoral) people, rather than paying trivial costs for trivial homes, where indecent people are prohibited from living. Make industrialization of home production unprofitable. And watch what happens….. America, the land of lonely people surrounded by consumer goods, taking opiates for physical pain and anti-depressants for mental pain. People who work long hours, without walking or running, under information saturation, and in artificial light saturation, in seasonally dark climates, will develop majority depressive symptoms in the population. Let me put it another way: the government is killing us.