Nationalism, Tribalism, Familialism are all the best POLITICAL criteria for decidability in matters of commons, just as individualism is the best criteria for decidability in matters of the individual. I don’t like “anti-anyone” other than perhaps I am pretty much against religions that are incompatible with natural law, and are justified by means incompatible with physical law. I prefer limiting immigration to the ‘highly’ skilled (I don’t include IT in that category – IT will be analogous to any other trade soon enough). And I am against the importation of calculators, managers, laborers, and underclasses, in all cases. Precisely because they may increase short-term profits at the expense of long-term genetic, institutional, and normative costs. But if we retain Nationalism, Tribalism, and Familialism in Political policy (positive production of commons) and Individualism in Legal policy (negative resolution of differences), then this forces groups to pay their own way genetically, institutionally, and normatively. And by doing so raise their family, tribe, and nation to transcendence. We do not make better people so much as we eliminate those people who are a detriment to the better people. And it is this reality that we must come to terms with in this century. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine</div>
Form: Mini Essay
-
The Age of Transformation
During the Age of Transformation (Karen Armstrong, Marijia Gimbutas) the military strategy the group used to resist or conquer out-groups determined, and set in mental stone: in myth, tradition, law, literature, norm and value, the consequential metaphysics (assumptions and values) of each civilization. And they survive to this day. In no small part because we have exercised the eugenic or dysgenic values in each of those eras, and to no small degree bred for adaptation to those strategies. Iranian, Egyptian, Chinese Armies in the river plains European warrior aristocracy and its militias. Steppe tribal raiders. Diasporic traders and wandering herdsmen, gypsies, and pirates. What we are apparently afraid to face, is that the long term de-civilizing consequences that have led to India and the muslim world, and africa, and now to south america can also be brought here to the upper lattitudes because of our use of fossil fuel heating and air conditioning. Demographic distributions matter more than excellences. No genius can reorganize a society of these imbalances without a return to either working class command economies, or it’s predecessor slavery. It’s simple math. They are too relatively unproductive to generate a concentration of wealth necessary for a voluntary organization of production (capitalism) to create marginal (decidable and influential) differences in reward necessary to form the various networks of hierarchies that as a collective can survive competition. Man was not oppressed by aristocracy. Man and Woman were domesticated, like every other feral animal, through a continuous process of eugenics that suppressed the lower class reproduction and redistributed reproduction upward, while at the same time increasing the scope of parasitic prohibitions that we call laws, and incrementally forcing everyone into productive activities in order to survive. We sent to war, hung, or starved the rest.
-
The Age of Transformation
During the Age of Transformation (Karen Armstrong, Marijia Gimbutas) the military strategy the group used to resist or conquer out-groups determined, and set in mental stone: in myth, tradition, law, literature, norm and value, the consequential metaphysics (assumptions and values) of each civilization. And they survive to this day. In no small part because we have exercised the eugenic or dysgenic values in each of those eras, and to no small degree bred for adaptation to those strategies. Iranian, Egyptian, Chinese Armies in the river plains European warrior aristocracy and its militias. Steppe tribal raiders. Diasporic traders and wandering herdsmen, gypsies, and pirates. What we are apparently afraid to face, is that the long term de-civilizing consequences that have led to India and the muslim world, and africa, and now to south america can also be brought here to the upper lattitudes because of our use of fossil fuel heating and air conditioning. Demographic distributions matter more than excellences. No genius can reorganize a society of these imbalances without a return to either working class command economies, or it’s predecessor slavery. It’s simple math. They are too relatively unproductive to generate a concentration of wealth necessary for a voluntary organization of production (capitalism) to create marginal (decidable and influential) differences in reward necessary to form the various networks of hierarchies that as a collective can survive competition. Man was not oppressed by aristocracy. Man and Woman were domesticated, like every other feral animal, through a continuous process of eugenics that suppressed the lower class reproduction and redistributed reproduction upward, while at the same time increasing the scope of parasitic prohibitions that we call laws, and incrementally forcing everyone into productive activities in order to survive. We sent to war, hung, or starved the rest.
-
How Did I End Up In This Intellectual Market Position?
(irony) [A]s a libertarian, my prescriptions were often Friedmanite solutions to social democratic preferences. As an alt right libertarian I advocate paying the lower classes not to reproduce at replacement levels, and to limit immigration to 115 and above IQ’s in technical disciplines. The reason being that I prefer to live in a high trust society with many commons and high redistribution, including ‘dividends’ on the economy (variable and unpredictable basic income) because the labor market pricing structure is out of balance with productivity. And I have come to understand that ‘retirement’ and ‘delayed adulthood’ are catastrophes. The single reason I’m associated with the ‘hard’ right is that I’ve come out so aggressively against the great lies of the 19th and 20th century. And that those great lies are just deception constructed as a pseudoscientific version of the prior deception constructed in Judeo-Christian-Muslim mysticism. But that’s not my central argument. I also state that the enlightenment philosophies from all European cultures: Anglo(Empirical/Legal), French(Moral), and German(rationalist) philosophies were equally false and contradictory to what made Europa exceptional and ‘faster than the rest’. It’s true the anglo and german philosophical frameworks were false, but at least they were beneficial, while the french and Jewish frameworks were catastrophes for mankind. I’m happy I’ve given young men a language with which to communicate the feelings of their internal voices. And I’m proud that I succeeded in my life’s ambition: to create a language for the rational, scientific comparison of ethical, political, and group competitive strategies. So our generation is armed to the rhetorical teeth so to speak. But let’s not lose sight of the broader insight, that TRUTHFULNESS dictated that I return the philosophy of liberty to its aristocratic origins as the TRADITIONAL DISCIPLINE – if not science – of the western aristocratic excellence in the application of organized violence to domesticate mankind by the incremental suppression of parasitism – thus forcing him into productive labor in order to survive and reproduce, and converting the proceeds from our efforts into Truth, Goodness, and Beauty. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine
-
How Did I End Up In This Intellectual Market Position?
(irony) [A]s a libertarian, my prescriptions were often Friedmanite solutions to social democratic preferences. As an alt right libertarian I advocate paying the lower classes not to reproduce at replacement levels, and to limit immigration to 115 and above IQ’s in technical disciplines. The reason being that I prefer to live in a high trust society with many commons and high redistribution, including ‘dividends’ on the economy (variable and unpredictable basic income) because the labor market pricing structure is out of balance with productivity. And I have come to understand that ‘retirement’ and ‘delayed adulthood’ are catastrophes. The single reason I’m associated with the ‘hard’ right is that I’ve come out so aggressively against the great lies of the 19th and 20th century. And that those great lies are just deception constructed as a pseudoscientific version of the prior deception constructed in Judeo-Christian-Muslim mysticism. But that’s not my central argument. I also state that the enlightenment philosophies from all European cultures: Anglo(Empirical/Legal), French(Moral), and German(rationalist) philosophies were equally false and contradictory to what made Europa exceptional and ‘faster than the rest’. It’s true the anglo and german philosophical frameworks were false, but at least they were beneficial, while the french and Jewish frameworks were catastrophes for mankind. I’m happy I’ve given young men a language with which to communicate the feelings of their internal voices. And I’m proud that I succeeded in my life’s ambition: to create a language for the rational, scientific comparison of ethical, political, and group competitive strategies. So our generation is armed to the rhetorical teeth so to speak. But let’s not lose sight of the broader insight, that TRUTHFULNESS dictated that I return the philosophy of liberty to its aristocratic origins as the TRADITIONAL DISCIPLINE – if not science – of the western aristocratic excellence in the application of organized violence to domesticate mankind by the incremental suppression of parasitism – thus forcing him into productive labor in order to survive and reproduce, and converting the proceeds from our efforts into Truth, Goodness, and Beauty. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine
-
Political Models As Religions: Steady-state Fallacy
***Religions evolve slowly and normatively. Common, discovered, laws evolve rapidly in response to new discoveries of methods of parasitism. Between durable religion and tactical law, Political Models serve only as organizational tools that we use to advance our strategies. In our case, that strategy is liberty. We do not fear liberty. We can compete on merit. It’s those that cannot compete on merit that fear a condition of liberty. So it is rational to say you ‘are’ a member of a religion, and rational to say that to achieve liberty in the current context you suggest we employ one political model or another. But to grant political models the same constancy as religion is to de-facto cast political models as mystical religions independent of world circumstances, instead of operational tools by which we modify the world’s circumstances in pursuit of the political conditions we prefer. Steady-state political orders are as fictional a theory as an evenly rotating economy. Neither exists or can.*** Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine
-
Political Models As Religions: Steady-state Fallacy
***Religions evolve slowly and normatively. Common, discovered, laws evolve rapidly in response to new discoveries of methods of parasitism. Between durable religion and tactical law, Political Models serve only as organizational tools that we use to advance our strategies. In our case, that strategy is liberty. We do not fear liberty. We can compete on merit. It’s those that cannot compete on merit that fear a condition of liberty. So it is rational to say you ‘are’ a member of a religion, and rational to say that to achieve liberty in the current context you suggest we employ one political model or another. But to grant political models the same constancy as religion is to de-facto cast political models as mystical religions independent of world circumstances, instead of operational tools by which we modify the world’s circumstances in pursuit of the political conditions we prefer. Steady-state political orders are as fictional a theory as an evenly rotating economy. Neither exists or can.*** Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine
-
Yes, There Exists A Scientific Method
ACTUALLY, THERE IS A SCIENTIFIC METHOD. ITS JUST NOT PECULIAR TO SCIENCE. ITS THE UNIVERSAL EPISTEMIC METHOD, BUT ONLY SCIENTISTS PRACTICE IT WITH ANY DILIGENCE. Just as we can test axiomatic(declarative) systems for consistency dimension-by-dimension; Say, like: -> identity(pairing off) -> arithmetic(number), -> geometry(space), -> calculus (motion) -> equlibria (stocastics) -> And like: -> length,-> width,-> area,-> volume,-> change,-> motion -> We can also test theoretic (descriptive) systems, like: -> Reason, -> Rationalism, -> Logic, -> Empiricism We can test also each dimension of the entirety of reality: 1 – categorical consistency (identity) 2 – internal consistency (logic) 3 – external consistency (empiricism) 4 – existential possibility (operationalism) 5 – rational possibility (morality) 6 – scope accountability (full accounting, limits, and parsimony) So there is a scientific method, because scientists are the only ones who use it with any degree of discipline: “My warranty that I have done due diligence in testing categorical internal and external consistency, existential and rational possibility, and scope accountability.” If an individual has done due diligence against each dimension it is almost impossible for him to engage in: 1 – error 2 – bias 3 – wishful thinking 4 – suggestion 5 – overloading 6 – obscurantism 7 – pseudoscience 8 – deceit Given that our information is never complete, and if it is complete we speak in tautology not truth, then we can never know we speak the truth even if we do so. What we can know is that we have done due diligence against speaking falsehood. That is the best that we can do. And this is what it means to “Testify”. And that is what it means to be a member of western civilization: to learn to do such due diligence that whenever you speak, you give testimony. It may not be true but you warranty that you have done your duty not to state a falsehood. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine
-
Yes, There Exists A Scientific Method
ACTUALLY, THERE IS A SCIENTIFIC METHOD. ITS JUST NOT PECULIAR TO SCIENCE. ITS THE UNIVERSAL EPISTEMIC METHOD, BUT ONLY SCIENTISTS PRACTICE IT WITH ANY DILIGENCE. Just as we can test axiomatic(declarative) systems for consistency dimension-by-dimension; Say, like: -> identity(pairing off) -> arithmetic(number), -> geometry(space), -> calculus (motion) -> equlibria (stocastics) -> And like: -> length,-> width,-> area,-> volume,-> change,-> motion -> We can also test theoretic (descriptive) systems, like: -> Reason, -> Rationalism, -> Logic, -> Empiricism We can test also each dimension of the entirety of reality: 1 – categorical consistency (identity) 2 – internal consistency (logic) 3 – external consistency (empiricism) 4 – existential possibility (operationalism) 5 – rational possibility (morality) 6 – scope accountability (full accounting, limits, and parsimony) So there is a scientific method, because scientists are the only ones who use it with any degree of discipline: “My warranty that I have done due diligence in testing categorical internal and external consistency, existential and rational possibility, and scope accountability.” If an individual has done due diligence against each dimension it is almost impossible for him to engage in: 1 – error 2 – bias 3 – wishful thinking 4 – suggestion 5 – overloading 6 – obscurantism 7 – pseudoscience 8 – deceit Given that our information is never complete, and if it is complete we speak in tautology not truth, then we can never know we speak the truth even if we do so. What we can know is that we have done due diligence against speaking falsehood. That is the best that we can do. And this is what it means to “Testify”. And that is what it means to be a member of western civilization: to learn to do such due diligence that whenever you speak, you give testimony. It may not be true but you warranty that you have done your duty not to state a falsehood. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine
-
Propertarianism Gives Aspies A Language With Which To Discourse With Normals.
[W]orking with the intense-world model of autism, what we ‘aspies’ experience is a lot of localized (intense) but un-integrated phenomenon, and then we try to explain these intense phenomenon to others. Conversely, normals tend to explain the (diluted) single aggregate experience without having visibility into the (intense) localized phenomenon. It’s much easier for them to communicate the RESULTING experience that we DON”T have, than it is for us to communicate the SET of experiences we DO have. Unfortunately for them and fortunately for us, and therefore fortunately for all of us, just as we cannot inspect how we move our limbs – they just move, normals cannot inspect how they obtain those aggregates. We can inspect how we obtain those aggregates at the cost of losing the ability to communicate in aggregates. Or put differently, we speak in much higher information density with higher causal relation. They speak in lower information density with higher experiential description. One of the things I feel most proud of is giving us (intense world thinkers) a language that lets us communicate WITHOUT Experiential loading, in a language that while wordy is comprehensible both to us and to normals. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.