Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • ON THE FUTURE OF THE WESTERN “POLYTHEISTIC” SOCIAL ORDER I am trying to find a w

    ON THE FUTURE OF THE WESTERN “POLYTHEISTIC” SOCIAL ORDER

    I am trying to find a way to talk about the fact that we have never had a conflationary system of thought (monotheism) in the west, and have always had separation of church (peasantry) and state (nobility) and burgher/freeman (commerce). And taht the church (religion), the burgher (philosophy), and the state (law) all competed with their own narratives.

    The problem is the BINDING narrative. If christianity fails as teh binding narrative, how do we replace that binding narrative, yet preserve christianity for the underclasses (the weak) who need it?

    Germanicized christianity, even latinized christianity, differs from byzantine christianity, differs from judaism, differs from islamism, differs from egyptian and prior eras’ shamanism.

    Germanized christianity always possessed ALL models of thought, from the aristocratic and martial law, to the philosophy, to the religion of the poor. But we used each in its place. And christianity did serve as the majority doctrine since the vast majority of people were poor and ignorant. When that is true, it’s easy for the martial/legal, and the philosophical/commercial to ‘go along’ with the civic bingding narrative and rituals.

    The question is, now that the majority are not poor and ignorant, what is the binding narrative under which we can still make use of science, law, philosophy and christianity?

    I mean. christianity is fucking ridiculous. Church isn’t. Myth, Festival, Ritual, Discipline aren’t. They’re necessary. The content of jesus’ philosophy is trivial. The magical shit is nonsense. nothing but jewish and syrian and byzantine lies. the natural law that the church inherited from the romans and the stoics, and the science that the modern era inherited from the greeks and the engineering from romans is all there for us to use. History is there for us to use.

    By any measure we have ‘discovered’ that we, and less so the chinese, are ‘right’ and that everyone else is not only wrong but catastrophically and degeneratively wrong.

    So, how do we modernize the church, retain jesus’s (valuable teaching) but achieve in the modern world what Acquinas achieved in the ancient? how do we modernize the teachings of jesus, and the ancient lessons of babylonians so that they are compatible with the ancient lessons of the european peoples in greek, roman, germanic form?

    How do I start with sovereignty, agency, natural law, markets in everything and the transcendence of man of our ancestors, and include jesus’ advice that if we increase the size of our kin, but our understanding that there is a limit of our kin to those who are in fact our genetic kin, that we will be buying options on future cooperation that together make us more competitively powerful than all alternatives?

    There is only one ‘story’ of such a thing.

    IT IS THE STORY OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION FROM THE YAMNA TO TODAY, and the lionization of all those who demonstrated their continuance of it, and the demonization of all those who impeded or harmed it.

    And the semites and iranians (byzantines) seem to have done been those who impeded it.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-29 11:41:00 UTC

  • THE ECONOMICS OF TIME AND MORALITY (important) (profound) (read more than once)

    THE ECONOMICS OF TIME AND MORALITY

    (important) (profound) (read more than once)

    Under Propertarianism’s Rule of Law by Natural Law, Soros could never have come into existence, could never attack western civilization; could never escape justice; and the takeover of the Universities in the 60’s impossible; the prosecution of communists in the 50’s successful; the and the import of the Frankfurt School impossible.

    Why? Truth, Reciprocity, Existential Possibility.

    Free markets are a lie. There exist no scale independent theories, and likewise, there exist no scale independent markets. They are another cosmopolitan invention. A moral pretense by which to engage in immoral actions.

    The requirement that we not impose costs by externality upon the investments of others causing the loss of capital in territorial, physical, institutional, cultural, normative, informational, familial, and genetic assets limits markets.

    Markets allow us to create opportunity through proximity, informational, informal and formal institutions, and physical infrastructure as a common good. Market opportunities are produced as a common good. We can then serve the common good by converting opportunity into exchanges, the performance of which, creates more than it consumes by the service of the coincidence of wants.

    We create opportunities for temporal compression through the division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, and advocacy, and seize them through the identification of a coincidence of wants, thereby converting the potential for temporal compression into the existential compression of time. And it is through this temporal compression that we, collectively, in increasing scales, constantly reduce the cost of existence, and defeat the dark forces of time, ignorance, and scarcity.

    If you understand this you will understand all of human civilization, and the reason we have achieved what no other creatures have achieved.

    We must defeat the dark forces of time, ignorance, distance, and scarcity, and we do so through cooperation, and we cooperate through the incremental suppression of the imposition of costs on one another upon life, body, kin, possessions, and interests, in the form of violence, theft, fraud, falsehood, conspiracy, rents and free-riding.

    We accomplish this incremental suppression by the demand for a warranty of due diligence for our products(materials), services(actions), and information(speech) and the prosecution, restitution, punishment, ostracization, or execution, of those who circumvent that Warranty of Reciprocity by production, action, or speech.

    This leaves us with no option but to participate in voluntary markets under which we limit our productions, actions, and speech to that which consists of productive, fully informed (truthful), warrantied, voluntary transfer, free of imposition of cost upon the life, kin, possessions, and interests of others by externality.

    This explains the entirety of human existence.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Natural Law of Reciprocity

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Scripture of Nobility

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-29 09:23:00 UTC

  • When you are teaching people an advanced subject like testimonialism, acqusition

    When you are teaching people an advanced subject like testimonialism, acqusitionism, propertarianism, or market government, one of the most common pitfalls a professor must avoid, is anchoring the student and freezing his innovations, while at the same time, gently correcting errors so that he or she continues to advance, but does not become dependent upon you. This is extremely difficult.

    The second problem is getting them past their limits. They generally hit their limits when they surpass the use of the technology (subject) to justify prior dispositions, and instead must now abandon their intuitions and priors – and rely on the logic of the system exclusively without the ability to test against the intuitions provided by their priors

    It’s at this point they generally freeze or fail, or grow frustrated, because they do not realize that they have been relying upon intuition, and merely learning a superior means of justifying their priors until now. Making the leap from using a logic to justify one’s priors, to the full dependence upon that logic despite it’s falsification of your priors is difficult – and more difficult the older you are (it certainly was hard for me).

    So some people progress fastest because they are simply learning how to justify priors, and can rely on testing propositions against memory and intuition. Others progress more slowly because they must constantly reform their intuitions and priors. The problem for the former is that they tend to have become used to ‘easy’ adoption of the technology and instead of incremental adjustment they must do all the work of self transition at once. This is why it is somewhat easier for us aspies because we actually tend to have few intuitionistic priors, and are more comfortable with fully rational or empirical statements independent upon reliance upon intuitions and priors.

    I can, by temperament, identify who will hit the wall, but not when – until I see it starting to occur. But it is almost impossible to break people through that wall. They must do it on their own. And in my experience, most of them fail.

    ( Unfortunately, some of them direct their frustration at me. This is understandable. It is however, unwarranted. )

    So what can I learn from this? Well, it is one thing to look for participants to help me advance the work, and another to ask people learn a complete system. Luckily there are some people who are not bound by priors. Although very small in number. I can help people by completing the work rather than asking them to participate. This eliminates me as the axis, makes the courseware the axis.

    But in the end, truth is merciless to priors.

    And few people are sufficiently transcendent, and possess sufficient agency to abandon their priors – especially those who have invested so heavily in the argumentative justification of them.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-28 19:42:00 UTC

  • IF CHRISTIANITY IS DEAD, WE STILL HAVE A PROBLEM Christianity as we know it is d

    IF CHRISTIANITY IS DEAD, WE STILL HAVE A PROBLEM

    Christianity as we know it is dead. The philosophy is exceptional as it seems to create commercial prosperity everywhere it goes. The narratives and the rituals

    So assuming the word ‘philosophy’ means ‘method of decision making’, then of the spectrum of Religion, Political philosophy, Ethical Philosophy, Personal Philosophy, Law, and Science, I would state that transcendence, sovereignty, natural law, male stoicism/female epicureanism, the common empirical law, and Testimonialism are probably the optimum combination for those who wish to LEAD humanity, rather than be led by some other strategy.

    But natural law is skeptical, and incomplete without christian optimism. In other words, christian optimism tells us that if enough of us invest in trust, and tolerate minor losses, we will produce it, and produce outsized gains.

    The problem we face, is we need a binding narrative, and we must distill it from our many authors into our own ‘bible’. Because we learn from loose general principle, to more specific general rule, to more precise rules of science. And without the binding narrative it appears to be very difficult to bind general rules and precise rules of science into a portfolio of decisions across the entire possible spectrum in which we must make decisions.

    I have been struggling with this problem for two years now and while I have my ups and downs, the problem remains the same: without an effort equal to the council of nicea, or the first american constitutional convention, or a frankfurt school, it will be difficult to produce a ‘bible’ of western civilization – a ‘book’ that is necessary if only as a means of defense against the semitic technologies of deception that arose from the innovation of abrahamic deceit. And a ritual that is costly so that men defend the law in that book against all attacks.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-28 17:27:00 UTC

  • In evaluating our medieval religion, we need to separate the strategy, the philo

    In evaluating our medieval religion, we need to separate the strategy, the philosophy, the mythology, the administration, and the rule.

    And then we must compare it to the alternatives developed in the ancient world, and our traditional religions prior to their destruction by the ancient world.

    The christian religion was a source of ignorance by providing a false high context narrative that impeded the advancement of knowledge, and imposing the ability to rule by deceit.

    The church was a source of (weak) administration.

    The church’s philosophy was adequate for uniting european tribes. But it was not in any way a replacement for greco-roman civilization, or the megalithic-pagan civilization that both so diligently exterminated.

    The church was not in fact all that hostile to science.

    The state was an advocate, and investor in technology.

    The state and the people were more dependent upon law and technology than religion and the church.

    The church informational monopoly then as the academy/media/state monopoly now, tended to produce all the narratives – almost all of which are false histories.

    The restoration of our ancient civilization provided the restoration of our technological knowledge (low context high precision), but what we struggle with today, is providing the narrative (high context low precision) by which we identify and seize opportunities.

    Demonstrably our ancient religion (super-normalism), philosophy (stoicism and epicureanism), epistemology (science, reason, naturalism), cooperation(natural, common, law of torts), and virtues (heroism, truth, goodness and beauty), were superior to the medieval church’s.

    Demonstrably they are superior to all other cultural portfolios.

    Unfortunately, our technology needs a narrative. And the one provided by the cosmopolitans is … to put it bluntly… “Evil”.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-28 16:14:00 UTC

  • THROUGH BROTHERHOOD WE TRANSCEND OURSELVES, OUR PEOPLE, AND MAN It is only throu

    THROUGH BROTHERHOOD WE TRANSCEND OURSELVES, OUR PEOPLE, AND MAN

    It is only through the brotherhood of warriors that we can construct the contract of reciprocity, that insures our sovereignty, and as such, as a consequence of that sovereignty, we can only act and speak without violating that contract by use of the natural, common, law of sovereign men, a judicial ‘priesthood’ that masters and evolves the technology of that law, a market for freedom of association and disassociation; a market for reproduction(family); a market for the production of goods, services, and information; a market for the production of commons; a monarchy as a judge of contracts of last resort, and a market for polities under which each clan, tribe, and nation, can construct commons that assist every family, clan, tribe, and nation, in competing against the dark forces of time, ignorance, the vicissitudes of nature, and the devolutionary demands of the ‘lesser peoples’ of this world.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Natural Law of Reciprocity

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-28 13:34:00 UTC

  • WHY WERE WESTERNERS UNSUCCESSFUL AT EXPORTING ARYANISM (MARKETS) by Simon Ström

    WHY WERE WESTERNERS UNSUCCESSFUL AT EXPORTING ARYANISM (MARKETS)

    by Simon Ström

    By merely establishing rule, a small minority of conquerors do not have the resources to alter the basic fabric of social organization in a region that is already populous, wealthy and has a rigid socio-political system that works for them and is adapted to the local natural incentives.

    Like the Mongols in China or Iran, the conquerors are rather the ones who are subject to assimilation, although they might retain or even spread their language and symbolism as a function of its prestige.

    In order to permeate all society, the imposed, foreign evolutionary strategy must be carried by greater numbers than that, or at least powerful enough mechanisms of overcoming the inertia of “immunological rejection” of non-self cultural impulses.

    The lesser the primordial differences in genes, culture and natural incentives between conqueror and conquered, the lesser the need of great numbers in order to assimilate through elite dominance.

    1. Small minority conquest: dynastic turnover, insignificant gene flow and socio-cultural regression to the median. Examples: Yuan dynasty, Hittites, Gothic Spain, British Raj.

    (Early Indo-Aryans were close to 1, but gravitated somewhat toward 2)

    2. Sizable minority conquest: significant gene flow (amalgamation), socio-cultural regression to the mean. Examples: Corded Ware horizon, Roman Gaul, Latin America.

    3. Great majority conquest: displacement, insignificant or no gene flow, complete socio-cultural continuation of the conquerors. Examples: North America, Kosovo, West Bank (future).

    So the obstacles of exporting our strategy are:

    – They don’t want it. They can profit from modernization without Westernization.

    – Military dominance won’t cut it. You need to dominate kinship and the social fabric.

    – The cost of export is too great because we are too different. Rule might be profitable, but assimilation? Questionable. We have evolved to pursue our strategy for millennia, others have not.

    – Simon Ström

    From Curt:

    The problem with spreading our social order is (a) demographic distribution and (b) degree of civilization. In practice we should see Aryanism (markets for rule) expandable only into areas that did not have the ability to expand the underclass, and did not possess a large underclass, and face little tribal conflict.

    Conversely we should see the worst behavior among peoples who have expansive underclasses, the agrarian or pastoral ability to expand those underclasses, and lots of territorial competition from other kin groups.

    And that is what we see

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-28 08:23:00 UTC

  • As a few have noticed. I was making a fairly serious statement. Not the least of

    As a few have noticed. I was making a fairly serious statement. Not the least of which was de-christianizing the translation of the original quote (which, if I remember correctly was spoken in mongolian, written down phonetically using *chinese* characters, translated into persian, translated into german, and then translated into english. I’m not positive but most of the ‘secret history’ followed that route. )

    Now, in the context in which I made this post, I was trying to illustrate a few things at once:

    1) That hunting man and animal *is* his preferred profession. And that man is not Rousseauian. It is not surprising that all other variations of the semi-sentient apes were exterminated upon our arrival. Nor why the only competition the great plagues have had is Islam first and communism second.

    2) That we have spent a great deal of effort ‘regulating’ man’s preferred profession. And that the many achievements of man were made by suppressing that profession

    3) **BUT**, that to CHOOSE the method of suppressing that profession requires we preserve that profession: hunting, killing, destroying, and taking – we can construct many orders from enslavement on one end to markets on the other.

    4) And to preserve that profession such that we create the advanced order that we have in the ancient and modern worlds requires the Aryan (markets) and the Christian (the extirpation of hatred from the human heart.)

    5) Because there is a vast difference between predation and parasitism of the khan, and the conquest and rule of people by the production of markets through which they transcend the beast, the slave, the serf, the freeman, the civilian, the sovereign – and the god.

    What we have failed to learn (which I am so glad someone reminded me of yesterday) is that having conquered from spain to china, and from the arctic circle to egypt, and having tried to create markets in each of those region, that we failed among all but our own.

    Therefore the evidence suggests that there is something special about our kin group, tribe, and race that makes markets possible.

    But if we must preserve the Aryan and the Christian to rule by natural law, we must also preserve the warrior to obtain and hold the condition of natural law. And we must preserve the warrior hunter’s joy and lust in Aryan and Christian forms, so that those that cannot transcend cannot harm us. If they can harm must they can be weakened. If they cannot be weakened they can be exterminated.

    Not with hatred, and not for profit, but for defense.

    Not for defense of us alone. But for the defense of human kind.

    And the transcendence we are inspired to achieve.

    So as Allan Hernandez said above,

    (a) I want to cause you to attempt to disagree with this statement by stating it provocatively, (remember, this is the purpose of hyperbole that conservatives rely upon. the Asians use contradictions to cause you to think. Aristocracy uses hyperbole to cause you to think.

    (b) I want to force you to face a necessary truth: that violence is just a resource that we can use to create good by the incremental suppression of all means of parasitism – and that to incrementally suppress means of parasitism among hunters, requires that we maintain exceptional skill in hunting, killing, taking, destroying.

    (c) we created this world by mastering, professionalizing, and using violence to obtain and hold rule, through which we imposed markets, and the extirpation of hatred from the human heart.

    I experiment a lot. I run tests. All my arguments are tests. Each test constitutes an attempt to construct a proof. When they are complete (closed), parsimonious, and clear my tests are complete, and a proof constructed.

    But you should not dismiss the difference between an analytic list and an emotive or poetic bit of inspiration. They are attempts to make you (and i) think about those assumptions we hold, beliefs we hold, justifications we feel, and arguments we practice.

    So that not only are markets created, and not only is hatred extirpated, but that ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, pseudorationalism, and pseudoscience, are removed from our thoughts.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-28 08:12:00 UTC

  • A CLAIM OF SUPERIORITY ISN’T NECESSARY FOR ETHNOCENTRISM by Simon Ström A claim

    A CLAIM OF SUPERIORITY ISN’T NECESSARY FOR ETHNOCENTRISM

    by Simon Ström

    A claim of superiority is never necessary for making ethnocentrism a good strategy.

    Since members of an ethnic group share vested interest in each other’s genes, their instincts are more aligned toward cooperation by default.

    In concert with culture, fixed traits means we are designed to work together in a certain way by nature of our common recent origin, and there are even medical implications of miscegenation.

    Within the context of macro-ethnicity (race, subrace, tribe), the formation of nations, tribes and countries should be subject to the market.

    That is Aryanism: The formation of nations, tribes and countries should be subject to the market.

    And remember Aryanism didn’t evolve beyond that scale.

    Ancient Indo-Europeanization-by-conquest really only occurred within Europe, as IE migrations projecting onto densely populated Asian cultures didn’t have a great, or lasting, civilizational impact (Duchesne).

    Moreover, the only people you should ‘hate’ are internal enemies (=ostracizing their behavior). The others, you just deal with them reciprocally. That’s the approach of agency.

    – Simon Strom

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-27 17:52:00 UTC

  • ISLAM IS AN ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY You’re stupid if you think islam is primitive. I

    ISLAM IS AN ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY

    You’re stupid if you think islam is primitive. It is an advanced technology by which the people of lowest intellectual, emotional, and physical ability, can impose costs through raiding, parasitism, over-reproduction, immigration, conversion, and informational, social, cultural, economic, and institutional devolution. Islam is an informational virus that provides the worst genetic pool possible with psychological rewards while demanding the least physical, emotional, and mental discipline. Islam is the ultimate psychological, and intellectual hedonism.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-27 17:11:00 UTC