Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • None Of Us Is Equal

    We are unequal. We grant each other the pretense of equality in order to discover the truth, through discourse and debate, that is free of error, bias, suggestion, obscurantism, and deceit. We grant each other equality under the law to assist one another in cooperating productively and without conflict and retaliation across our various stations and abilities. We grant each other equal access to the market, by the equality of money and prices, because we all buy entry into the market by forgoing opportunities for violence, theft, and fraud, despite our differences in wealth. It is through these three equalities of opportunity that we cooperate despite our inequalities of interest, ability, value to one another, and wealth. But we are in no way equal.

  • What Are The Major Differences Between American And German Culture?

    AN EXPLANATION OF OUR DIFFERENCES

    1. There is a reason the stock market is in America, the bond market in the UK, manufacturing in Germany, and Military in Russia: risk – love of risk, pragmatic risk, fear of risk, and dread of risk. This risk perception is (as is true everywhere on earth) a reflection of military prowess and the number of hostile or competing borders.
    2. North Sea Civilization (German Hanseatic) was cut short by the discovery of the Americas. This forced a change in anglo civilization, and between the expansion of the British Empire, it’s emphasis on finance and trade rather than territory, and its nearly monopoly on military power, so that by 1830 anglo commercial and naval civilization had divorced from german craftsman and martial civilization. The change was institutionalized under Disraeli, who changed the empire from a Burkian moral one – of domestication of man – to a purely puritan/cosmopolitan commercial one.
    3. The American culture is purely commercial. Everyone is always ‘serving a customer’. Americans have no other culture than commerce, and never have had. We have no aristocracy to imitate. So our ‘manners’ are not those of the hearth, or the church, or the court – but of the market.
    4. Americans are highly mobile, and have been ‘integrating’ people from different regions for centuries. The american ‘market’ culture evolved to use market manners as the way of signaling against pretense, against status signaling, and in favor of equality. There is a reason why the world capital of advertising is in NY, and media in LA. Everyone sells.
    5. The American population was, until the immigration revision act of 1965 designed to expand the voting base of left-leaning government, roughly half anglo-descendent and half german-descendant. There was an even chance early in that americans would end up speaking either german or english. The upper caste (puritan) was english and dutch and drove the change.
    6. German culture today is heavily influence (wrongly) by the guilt over the world wars. Instead, in retrospect, we can see that it was the Hansa that dragged Europe out of the middle ages and caused the second empirical civilization after ancient Greece. And the Hansa civilization was cut short by the economic opportunity of conquering and populating the new continents. But the germanic expansion that would rid us of muslim and mongol influence was truncated by Anglo Atlantic civilization. And it was, perhaps, the greatest mistake in history after Alexander’s failure to return to Greece.

    Germans are no longer the heart of Europe, because to function as a Core State of a civilization you must lead in not only commerce, but in military, in rule, and in thought leadership. To do this requires not accommodation but expansion. Not pragmatism but evolution.

    The anglo method has been a failure. Why? Athens -> Sparta -> Rome. UK -> Germany -> America(DC). Navy (commercial) -> Army (civil) -> Empire(expansion)

    The Athens-UK, fought with Sparta-Germany, resulting in Rome-USA. But our civilization is germanic, hanseatic, and armies hold territory and culture. Navies just make it all more profitable. This is why american thought leadership in strategic affairs wants america out of Europe. So Germany will restore herself to her prior position, and we can attempt (slowly) to repair our catastrophic mistake.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

    https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-major-differences-between-American-and-German-culture

  • What Are The Major Differences Between American And German Culture?

    AN EXPLANATION OF OUR DIFFERENCES

    1. There is a reason the stock market is in America, the bond market in the UK, manufacturing in Germany, and Military in Russia: risk – love of risk, pragmatic risk, fear of risk, and dread of risk. This risk perception is (as is true everywhere on earth) a reflection of military prowess and the number of hostile or competing borders.
    2. North Sea Civilization (German Hanseatic) was cut short by the discovery of the Americas. This forced a change in anglo civilization, and between the expansion of the British Empire, it’s emphasis on finance and trade rather than territory, and its nearly monopoly on military power, so that by 1830 anglo commercial and naval civilization had divorced from german craftsman and martial civilization. The change was institutionalized under Disraeli, who changed the empire from a Burkian moral one – of domestication of man – to a purely puritan/cosmopolitan commercial one.
    3. The American culture is purely commercial. Everyone is always ‘serving a customer’. Americans have no other culture than commerce, and never have had. We have no aristocracy to imitate. So our ‘manners’ are not those of the hearth, or the church, or the court – but of the market.
    4. Americans are highly mobile, and have been ‘integrating’ people from different regions for centuries. The american ‘market’ culture evolved to use market manners as the way of signaling against pretense, against status signaling, and in favor of equality. There is a reason why the world capital of advertising is in NY, and media in LA. Everyone sells.
    5. The American population was, until the immigration revision act of 1965 designed to expand the voting base of left-leaning government, roughly half anglo-descendent and half german-descendant. There was an even chance early in that americans would end up speaking either german or english. The upper caste (puritan) was english and dutch and drove the change.
    6. German culture today is heavily influence (wrongly) by the guilt over the world wars. Instead, in retrospect, we can see that it was the Hansa that dragged Europe out of the middle ages and caused the second empirical civilization after ancient Greece. And the Hansa civilization was cut short by the economic opportunity of conquering and populating the new continents. But the germanic expansion that would rid us of muslim and mongol influence was truncated by Anglo Atlantic civilization. And it was, perhaps, the greatest mistake in history after Alexander’s failure to return to Greece.

    Germans are no longer the heart of Europe, because to function as a Core State of a civilization you must lead in not only commerce, but in military, in rule, and in thought leadership. To do this requires not accommodation but expansion. Not pragmatism but evolution.

    The anglo method has been a failure. Why? Athens -> Sparta -> Rome. UK -> Germany -> America(DC). Navy (commercial) -> Army (civil) -> Empire(expansion)

    The Athens-UK, fought with Sparta-Germany, resulting in Rome-USA. But our civilization is germanic, hanseatic, and armies hold territory and culture. Navies just make it all more profitable. This is why american thought leadership in strategic affairs wants america out of Europe. So Germany will restore herself to her prior position, and we can attempt (slowly) to repair our catastrophic mistake.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

    https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-major-differences-between-American-and-German-culture

  • Can We Complete The Germanic Project? Finally?

    CAN WE COMPLETE THE GERMANIC PROJECT? FINALLY? —“We will complete the system of German Idealism.”—Z.A. Corbett i used to be against it, but now i see that we need both law, literature, and poetry. and that my work merely is the science underneath the literature and poetry. And that we require the entire corpus of science, law, literature, and aesthetics in order to provide each ‘method of sense’, from the intellectual to the political to the religio-spiritual a consistent message. This is what I learned from the study of religion. Successful religions do all. The issue is conflation. We cannot break the western tradition of conflation. So instead of one narrative mythos, we must have layers, from the scientific to the purely aesthetic. This is how we preserve western uniqueness but obtain the virtue of religions. So, the germans failed to resist christianity, they failed in the reformation to overthrow it, they failed in the enlightenment. they failed in the romantic period, they failed with national socialism. So hopefull this time we all will reunite germanic (eruopean) civilization. not by ONE Method. But by the POLYTHEISTIC method, of LAYERS of different forms of argument, rather than attempting anglo analytic alone, german rational alone, italian poetic alone, and russian literary alone. WE CAN FINALLY DO IT (I THINK).

  • Can We Complete The Germanic Project? Finally?

    CAN WE COMPLETE THE GERMANIC PROJECT? FINALLY? —“We will complete the system of German Idealism.”—Z.A. Corbett i used to be against it, but now i see that we need both law, literature, and poetry. and that my work merely is the science underneath the literature and poetry. And that we require the entire corpus of science, law, literature, and aesthetics in order to provide each ‘method of sense’, from the intellectual to the political to the religio-spiritual a consistent message. This is what I learned from the study of religion. Successful religions do all. The issue is conflation. We cannot break the western tradition of conflation. So instead of one narrative mythos, we must have layers, from the scientific to the purely aesthetic. This is how we preserve western uniqueness but obtain the virtue of religions. So, the germans failed to resist christianity, they failed in the reformation to overthrow it, they failed in the enlightenment. they failed in the romantic period, they failed with national socialism. So hopefull this time we all will reunite germanic (eruopean) civilization. not by ONE Method. But by the POLYTHEISTIC method, of LAYERS of different forms of argument, rather than attempting anglo analytic alone, german rational alone, italian poetic alone, and russian literary alone. WE CAN FINALLY DO IT (I THINK).

  • The Bourgeoise Society Has Been A Catastrophe.

    Nov 18, 2016 12:52pm There is a vast difference between the scientific enlightenment which was a tremendous success, and the classical liberal seizure of political power through the various revolutions against the aristocracy and the monarchies. Yes we can blame the aristocracy from failing to evolve the organization of the state and incorporate the bourgeoisie. And yes we can blame the bourgeoisie for failing by incorporating the proletariat and women into the house of commons. But in the present, of the Marxist proletariat(worldwide), the classical liberal bourgeoisie, the ‘liberal’ priesthood (20th century), and the martial aristocracy(antiquity to 1800), all have failed except the martial aristocracy. And more frighteningly, they have failed quickly, and in succession. The aristocracy created markets in every aspect of life: freedom, marriage, commerce, commons, dispute resolution, and rule. But failed to abandon their rents and accommodate the finance and merchant class when commerce rather than agrarian territory evolved to the central source of production. The classical liberal bourgeoisie tried to make the market everything, at the expense of the tribe. They tried to create a monopoly of the entrepreneurial classes. And they failed. They destroyed the family and community as a unit of production. They brought people to capital rather than capital to people. Even if the primary beneficiaries of their financial order were the common people’ The Marxists proletarians resisted the bourgeoise’s impact on home and family – and committed the greatest crimes in human history by trying to take over rule from the bourgeoisie. They tried to create a monopoly of the laboring classes. And they failed. They destroyed entire nations, tribes, families, economies and traditions. Worst of all they destroyed all trust. The secular priesthood we call ‘liberals’ or ‘the cathedral’ tried to take over from the Marxists, in pursuit of a global secular religion consisting of utopian promises, pseudoscience, and faith in the persistent expansion of technology – and destroyed the entirety of western civilization in less than a century. They tried to create a monopoly of the secular priestly caste. And they failed. They failed because they treated as equal in potential and demand people who are not. As the classical liberals destroyed the family as a unit of production, the liberals destroyed the nation as a unit of production. But only the martial aristocracy forced the creation of markets in everything by the total prohibition of monopoly – even a monopoly of rule – by resisting all unification and federalization until Napoleon used fiat credit to create ‘total war’ and forced them to relent out of defense. Only the monarchy created markets for the voluntary production, distribution, and exchange of goods, services, information, and commons, between the classes. And only the aristocracy understood that each class’ attempt to create monopolies would lead to a breakdown of the cooperation between the ‘estates of the realm’ – what we call today ‘the social classes’. Aristocracy creates a monopoly: the prevention of monopoly by the enforcement of markets.

  • The Bourgeoise Society Has Been A Catastrophe.

    Nov 18, 2016 12:52pm There is a vast difference between the scientific enlightenment which was a tremendous success, and the classical liberal seizure of political power through the various revolutions against the aristocracy and the monarchies. Yes we can blame the aristocracy from failing to evolve the organization of the state and incorporate the bourgeoisie. And yes we can blame the bourgeoisie for failing by incorporating the proletariat and women into the house of commons. But in the present, of the Marxist proletariat(worldwide), the classical liberal bourgeoisie, the ‘liberal’ priesthood (20th century), and the martial aristocracy(antiquity to 1800), all have failed except the martial aristocracy. And more frighteningly, they have failed quickly, and in succession. The aristocracy created markets in every aspect of life: freedom, marriage, commerce, commons, dispute resolution, and rule. But failed to abandon their rents and accommodate the finance and merchant class when commerce rather than agrarian territory evolved to the central source of production. The classical liberal bourgeoisie tried to make the market everything, at the expense of the tribe. They tried to create a monopoly of the entrepreneurial classes. And they failed. They destroyed the family and community as a unit of production. They brought people to capital rather than capital to people. Even if the primary beneficiaries of their financial order were the common people’ The Marxists proletarians resisted the bourgeoise’s impact on home and family – and committed the greatest crimes in human history by trying to take over rule from the bourgeoisie. They tried to create a monopoly of the laboring classes. And they failed. They destroyed entire nations, tribes, families, economies and traditions. Worst of all they destroyed all trust. The secular priesthood we call ‘liberals’ or ‘the cathedral’ tried to take over from the Marxists, in pursuit of a global secular religion consisting of utopian promises, pseudoscience, and faith in the persistent expansion of technology – and destroyed the entirety of western civilization in less than a century. They tried to create a monopoly of the secular priestly caste. And they failed. They failed because they treated as equal in potential and demand people who are not. As the classical liberals destroyed the family as a unit of production, the liberals destroyed the nation as a unit of production. But only the martial aristocracy forced the creation of markets in everything by the total prohibition of monopoly – even a monopoly of rule – by resisting all unification and federalization until Napoleon used fiat credit to create ‘total war’ and forced them to relent out of defense. Only the monarchy created markets for the voluntary production, distribution, and exchange of goods, services, information, and commons, between the classes. And only the aristocracy understood that each class’ attempt to create monopolies would lead to a breakdown of the cooperation between the ‘estates of the realm’ – what we call today ‘the social classes’. Aristocracy creates a monopoly: the prevention of monopoly by the enforcement of markets.

  • Kin, Class, Caste: Models And Functions

    Nov 19, 2016 11:50am KIN, CLASS, CASTE: MODELS AND FUNCTIONS Kinship System (oligarchy)(small nation states), Class System (informal institution – markets) or Caste System (formal institution – religion and laws), exist universally in all nations, states, and empires. Without exception. It’s arguable the entire world operates as a caste system with whites arguably the minority aristocracy, followed by east Asians, then Hindus, then steppes, then Arabs, then the darker races. The data in every walk of life agrees with it. Just how it is. We see it in the patterns of relations in every walk of life. Why? because of (a) kin selection, (b) reproductive desirability, (c) commercial desirability (d) political desirability. kinship systems show the least diversity, class the next most diverse. Now, is a caste system superior or inferior to a class system? Well it depends upon the problems of managing the size of the underclass. The smaller the underclass the more useful kin and market orders. the larger the underclass the more useful the authoritarian and caste orders. All the warm climate states have the problem of the inability to reduce the relative size of the underclass and therefore create a voluntary organization of production using the proceeds of whatever they can produce. This means that any warm climate people unable to cull the lower classes will have permanent favelas and slums, and northern climes that eliminate lower classes will continue to prosper. There is a strange economics to the use of air conditioning. The hindus are … unnecessarily limited by the cast system and will do much better with the class system in the market order. However, it will mean (likely) degeneration into more Muslim frameworks more tolerable by leadership from the underclasses. Islam is suitable for rule of the ‘evil 80’s.’ Hinduism preserves the ability for a class to prevent expansion of rule by the evil 80’s.

  • Kin, Class, Caste: Models And Functions

    Nov 19, 2016 11:50am KIN, CLASS, CASTE: MODELS AND FUNCTIONS Kinship System (oligarchy)(small nation states), Class System (informal institution – markets) or Caste System (formal institution – religion and laws), exist universally in all nations, states, and empires. Without exception. It’s arguable the entire world operates as a caste system with whites arguably the minority aristocracy, followed by east Asians, then Hindus, then steppes, then Arabs, then the darker races. The data in every walk of life agrees with it. Just how it is. We see it in the patterns of relations in every walk of life. Why? because of (a) kin selection, (b) reproductive desirability, (c) commercial desirability (d) political desirability. kinship systems show the least diversity, class the next most diverse. Now, is a caste system superior or inferior to a class system? Well it depends upon the problems of managing the size of the underclass. The smaller the underclass the more useful kin and market orders. the larger the underclass the more useful the authoritarian and caste orders. All the warm climate states have the problem of the inability to reduce the relative size of the underclass and therefore create a voluntary organization of production using the proceeds of whatever they can produce. This means that any warm climate people unable to cull the lower classes will have permanent favelas and slums, and northern climes that eliminate lower classes will continue to prosper. There is a strange economics to the use of air conditioning. The hindus are … unnecessarily limited by the cast system and will do much better with the class system in the market order. However, it will mean (likely) degeneration into more Muslim frameworks more tolerable by leadership from the underclasses. Islam is suitable for rule of the ‘evil 80’s.’ Hinduism preserves the ability for a class to prevent expansion of rule by the evil 80’s.

  • In Praise of Taxes

    Nov 19, 2016 12:29pm IN PRAISE OF TAXES 😉 (rulership is a profession, and one we must return to) Assuming that taxes are used for the purpose of the creation and defense of the full spectrum of markets. And assuming we have juridical defense against taxes not used in creation and defense of those markets. And assuming that tax competition exists by freedom of exit and absence of collusion. And assuming one of the markets constructed is a market for commons. Then taxes are merely a commission on the use of violence to construct markets that enforce production and deny parasitism. In other words, the Aristocracy may profit via commissions on the construction, maintenance, and defense of markets just like the provider of any other form of good, service, or information. In fact, the wealth created by profits from the construction, maintenance and defense of markets, is possibly the most morally defensible form of profit a man, family, and clan, tribe, and race can demonstrate. So again, the libertarians, classical liberals, and progressive liberals, and Marxist socialist have been wrong. While the liberation from the mysticism of the church by the scientific enlightenment has been a boon for man, the attempts by the various other classes to create monopolies favoring their classes rather than markets for the cooperation between the classes, has been predicated on moral falsehoods, pseudoscience, and outright lies. Like the Spartans, Athenians, Romans, Germans, French, we must rule for our betterment and the betterment of man, or be ruled against our interests, and against the interests of man. Not only should we tax. We should revel in our taxes. We should maximize the returns on our shares. And continue to profit from the incremental domestication and eventual transcendence of man. We were mistaken. We need NO OTHER CAREER than rule. Rule and fee for rule, by commission on successful rule, is perhaps the greatest of our achievements, and a means by which we have, can, and shall profit. What must we do to return to rule? Restore Rule of Natural Law (Science) Restore the Judiciary. (Rule of Law) Restore the Monarchy. (Judge of last resort) Restore the Nobility (Governors) Restore the Knights (Regiments) Restore the Sheriffs. (Police) Restore the Militia (disaster, emergency, war) Restore the Artisans (artists and craftsmen) Restore the Laborers (of the commons) Restore the market for marriage Restore the market for commons Restore the market for rule.