Form: Mini Essay

  • What Do You Think Of Americans Who Deny The Existence Of The Massive Red State/blue State Cultural Division In The Nation?

    The most honest answer is not to create a false frame of ‘we’ and instead break it by voting patterns (see Pew Research) for an empirical analysis not one of confirming existing priors by guessing correlations.

    1. Roughly speaking, the north-south divide present since the civil war remains.
    2. Primarily, people vote by two criteria: Race, Religion and Marital status.

    In other words, people vote their reproductive strategies.  Which should be obvious.

    1. White men vote red and always have voted as such. 
    2. White married women vote predominantly red and have voted as such.
    3. White single women vote predominantly blue by the largest margin (again obvious)
    4. Everyone else votes by race (blue) against the white absolute nuclear family.


    Ever since the South abandoned it’s post-reconstruction prohibition on the Republican party (the party of Lincoln, and the party against slavery, and against the expansion of the souther alliance into the western territories), the parties have increasingly shifted demographically to reflect white absolute nuclear families – with the family as the central unit of reproduction, production, and education that preserve capital (red)  – against the traditional, serial-marriage, and single mother (fatherless) families that cannot preserve capital in the homestead.

    People retain their reproductive strategies, family structures, moral codes and norms across many generations.  It takes about 400 years to rotate a family upward in social and economic class. (yep. sorry.)  The four waves of British Isle immigrants still use the family structures, norms, and values that they did prior to migration.  The germans still use theirs.  The Italians theres. The french theirs.  Et al.

    No one assimilates morally or normatively at all.  We assimilate commercially, and commercialism is america’s cultural tradition. But politically we never assimilate at all. Why?  Because political action by nature of its imprecision is a demonstrated preference of a moral, not empirical not commercial bias.  And when we call upon our intuitions in the face of overwhelming choices, we do what nature evolved us to do: decide by our reproductive strategies.

    Why?  For impolitic reasons: largely speaking northern Europeans eradicated their lower classes through a combination of manorialism, delated reproduction, and aggressive hanging of 1/2-1% of the troublemakers per year. And anyone who understands the theory of compound interest will likely understand the tremendous genetic impact of that process over the 1000 years of hanging, and the 3500 years of agrarianism. Effectively, all northern europeans are members of the middle class, and protestant – what is called ‘the Hanjal line’.  The catholics represent largely the unmodified natural distribution of the classes, practicing traditional families.  The africans that came as slaves have returned (thanks to 60’s progressives) to their traditional serial marriages (70% of all births to single mothers).

    Correlation is not causation.  Humans are unequal. We carry our tribal histories with us in our genes, in our family structures, in our  morals and norms, because these were and remain, reproductive strategies.
     
    As such all votes are demographic votes. No one assimilates. No one changes. Some reproduce more, some reproduce less, and he who reproduces more than others eventually wins. No one is converted. No one is persuaded. No one is convinced. At least no one sufficiently convince to alter his political action sufficiently to affect outcomes.

    Net is, all our political debate is a victorian parlor game.  Nothing more.  We are, in matters beyond our direct perception, such as political choice, mere puppets to our genes. 

    If that doesn’t sour you on the irrelevance of democratic choice nothing will: in the end, over time, the class that reproduces most wins. And because majoritarian rule forces a monopoly of control, the lower classes with greatest reproduction win. And under redistribution, we transfer rates of reproduction from the middle class to the lower.  And therefore transfer our future to the most numerous of the lower classes.

    Diversity decreases trust, decreases economic velocity, increases political conflict and increases demand for a totalitarian state as arbiter of differences.

    Americans, Canadians, and Australians have a higher standard of living for the sole reason that the anglos used advanced weaponry (including germs) to conquer primitive peoples and sell of the land and unexploited resources to generations of immigrants. It has absolutely nothing to do with our way of life other than the initial immigrants from Britain practiced common law (which is empirical), and were almost entirely from the genetic middle classes (the french in Quebec are from the lower class, hence aside from their Catholicism and french love of authority, their difference with english Canada).  The germans were not a problem to integrate, and so we never hear about the challenge of german immigration despite the fact that the majority of white america is of german ancestry not British.  That is because they were not a problem.  Everyone else was. If you trace supreme court decisions they reflect the religion and class of the person voting.

    It hurts. It’s true. That’s all there is to it.

    The only thing that melts in our non-existent melting pot, is rule of law.  Everything else is just an expression of the ongoing battle between our genes that we call class, race, and religious competition.

    Democracy is sufficient means of deciding how to make use of scarce resources among multiple priorities.  It is an insufficient means of deciding how to make use of scarce or plentiful resource of any kind between competing interests.

    Science very often tells us what we don’t want to hear.
    The democratic era, in the future, will be seen as a pseudoscientific one.
    Just as the Religious era is seen as a mystical one.
    They’re both networks of falsehoods.
    Comfortable lies.

    The truth is quite simple.  We are super-predators that have found that competition through economics productivity is superior to competition through direct violence.

    Western utopianism ended with the abandonment of communism that had held the rest of the world in regressive poverty. We were able to enjoy luxury goods because of privileges granted to us by our predecessors.  The spoils of democracy (and any r-selected behavior) are luxury goods, not beneficial goods.

    Time to give up pseudoscience, the same way we gave up mysticism.

    As painful as it may be.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

    https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-think-of-Americans-who-deny-the-existence-of-the-massive-red-state-blue-state-cultural-division-in-the-nation

  • DUELS (worth repeating) You aren’t honor bound to accept one. You’re threatened

    DUELS

    (worth repeating)

    You aren’t honor bound to accept one. You’re threatened that if you impugn the honor of another you will apologize, or fight to prove the truth of your statement, or die by murder for doing neither.

    While positioned as trial by combat, the principle is ancient: “put up or shut up.”

    My position on dueling is that the court is one weapon that is available to us in such matters, and that reputation is in fact, a critical asset in one’s inventory.

    The reason dueling was outlawed was that men hired substitutes (mercenaries) and it became a means of murder rather than suppression of gossip or test of truth telling.

    The reason it was originally promoted, was the equivalent of ‘take it outside’. It allowed men to ‘cool off’ before getting in a fight, and hopefully allow cooler heads to prevail. Also it was quite heavily regulated, with the intention to harm not so much to kill.

    Challenging a man to a duel ends a conversation very quickly since it can escalate in to a very risky life or death proposition. Also, today’s guns are very dangerous by comparison. If we can fight, use sticks and bats, use knives, use swords, use guns, or use courts, then I suspect there would be a lot more truth telling, and a lot less gossip, and a lot more civility in this world.

    And those who ‘cheat’ us, would be put to death in vast numbers.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-24 16:53:00 UTC

  • NO AUTHORITIES, NO MONOPOLIES. ONLY MARKETS An old friend from Ottawa Canada who

    NO AUTHORITIES, NO MONOPOLIES. ONLY MARKETS

    An old friend from Ottawa Canada who I both respect and like very much, inspired me to explain my research program in contextual terms. I think it’s worth repeating.

    —” I should say that I still view your politics, views on society, and race to be profound anathema to everything I believe in – but I miss the challenges you presented too.”—

    You see, I sympathize with moral men, seeking to do good, from any point of the political compass, any tribe, any race. I just prefer that we seek to find voluntary means of voluntary exchange to construct commons, rather than to find authoritarian monopolies with which to construct commons. Any ideology under majoritarian rule is by definition an authoritarian position that advances one’s interests against those of others. I don’t seek my authority, any one else’s, nor to tolerate the authority of others.

    Hence my research program goals:



    I do my job. It’s only by the truth that we create a market for compromise between reproductive strategies, that is free of fraud.

    To a very large degree, that is what I see myself engaged in the process of doing: creating a formal logic of social science independent of experiential valuation – a valuation that is nothing more than a measure of agreement or disagreement with reproductive strategy over which we have little or no control, and even less influence.

    I know it is easy to look at my contrarianism as an appeal for an opposite position – but I am the opposite of a totalitarian – in fact, I seek to construct a market for the exchange of commons that forces compromises and exchanges rather than the current continuous reinforcement of extremes that is caused by majoritarian monopoly representative democracy. I seek to restore a market of exchanges between the classes that existed prior to classical liberalism.

    Moreover, the hard right has picked up on my work and is running with it. And the truth is, they are fine with the compromise. What they are not fine with is a perpetuation of postmodern propaganda and lying, cultural conquest, genocide of their people, and a second conversion of rome to a second pseudoscientific rather than mystical christianity.

    So my “no more lies” is a campaign for ending a century and a half of lying, propaganda, and pseudoscience. And restoring rule of law, a market for commons, and the norm of truth telling.

    Which, is somewhat difficult of a position to oppose without justifying nearly any action no matter how extreme of one’s opposition.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-24 15:28:00 UTC

  • Employees vastly overestimate the profitability of any business. They have no id

    Employees vastly overestimate the profitability of any business. They have no idea how hard it is to defeat the rate of inflation. Its very hard to create an organization that produces sustainable profitability across cyclical booms and busts, as well as ordinary competition. They are intentionally made ignorant by the socialist ambitions of the members of the educational system and academy.

    In some businesses, like professional services, it is relatively easy to attribute both revenue and expenses to the individuals in the organization. But what about the overhead staff who generate no revenue?

    Just as in economics, the only measure of anything is the number of hours of effort individuals must work (in each economic class) to pay for the cost of a good. (Any statement of price differences is not only nonsense, but very likely misleading, unless expressed in this metric: hours of work needed to purchase the good or service.) Time is the human currency. By using the division of knowledge and labor, money and prices, credit and interest, we are able to concentrate our efforts and produce far more per moment than we could on our own. In this sense we are not wealthier than cave men. we have merely used the division of labor to make everything almost infinitely cheaper.

    The way to do that is to distribute all costs and expenses to all employees by one algorithm or another – showing them their total loaded cost (at least EBITDA). The way to determine how much an employee contributes or costs, is to determine the amount of time it takes the people who produce revenue to pay for the salaries of those who perform indirect functions.

    Most people who are raised in our left-wing education system simply have no idea how little money is actually present at any given time: our “cash flow”.

    Or that when a company says it does X million dollars in revenue, that it’s lucky to hit triple the rate of inflation in profits.

    My experience is that trust increases rapidly with education in the work place. For years I have given ‘the money talk’ that is the only material exposure to the operation of business in the world that most students have ever had.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-24 06:59:00 UTC

  • Peak Human and Dysgenic Policy

    (good read) [P]eak Human 1) The history of man is of the evolution of increasing levels of aggression, exterminating the prior family, tribe, race, species. 2) The history of western man is the incremental suppression of free riding, idleness, impulsivity and aggression by violence. 3) The success of the west in ancient and modern eras was by truthfulness, productivity, martial excellence, and aggressive eugenic suppression. 4)”Pareto is Everywhere”. A population above the median IQ of 106 is necessary for libertarian modernity. Lost via dysgenia. 5) The problem for any tribe is to raise top 20% over ~122. Economic velocity, trust, morality decrease rapidly with losses. 6) Asymmetry of property is necessary to construct the voluntary organization of production. Inequality is a necessary good. 7) Current leftist economic theory attempts to discover the minimum inequality necessary for the preservation of incentives. 8) Under the assumption that the increased risk and decreased flexibility and increased busts can be limited by fiat credit. 9) The result is r-selected dysgenia and decreasing ability in the pool (slightly offset by improvements via education in sciences) given that 10) the unemployability problem increases with the Flynn effect – meaning that even if we find additional ways of improving demonstrated human intelligence we cannot move employment further up the curve without decreasing rates of dysgenic underclass reproduction. 11) We cannot both have immigration and transfer of reproduction from our best to our worst. 12) We increase unemployability and increase inequality, and construct a dysgenic caste system on the south american and hindu model, rather than an ever-increasing-equality under the eugenic western aristocratic model. 13) We have recreated the problem of the roman conquest which is increasing productivity through trade to the point where the upper classes cannot withstand shocks because we are in insufficient numbers. 14) The limit to any right to profit is that which imposes an intertemporal cost on the genetics, commons, institutions, norms of the polity. Theft from the future may be profitable, but it is merely theft. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Peak Human and Dysgenic Policy

    (good read) [P]eak Human 1) The history of man is of the evolution of increasing levels of aggression, exterminating the prior family, tribe, race, species. 2) The history of western man is the incremental suppression of free riding, idleness, impulsivity and aggression by violence. 3) The success of the west in ancient and modern eras was by truthfulness, productivity, martial excellence, and aggressive eugenic suppression. 4)”Pareto is Everywhere”. A population above the median IQ of 106 is necessary for libertarian modernity. Lost via dysgenia. 5) The problem for any tribe is to raise top 20% over ~122. Economic velocity, trust, morality decrease rapidly with losses. 6) Asymmetry of property is necessary to construct the voluntary organization of production. Inequality is a necessary good. 7) Current leftist economic theory attempts to discover the minimum inequality necessary for the preservation of incentives. 8) Under the assumption that the increased risk and decreased flexibility and increased busts can be limited by fiat credit. 9) The result is r-selected dysgenia and decreasing ability in the pool (slightly offset by improvements via education in sciences) given that 10) the unemployability problem increases with the Flynn effect – meaning that even if we find additional ways of improving demonstrated human intelligence we cannot move employment further up the curve without decreasing rates of dysgenic underclass reproduction. 11) We cannot both have immigration and transfer of reproduction from our best to our worst. 12) We increase unemployability and increase inequality, and construct a dysgenic caste system on the south american and hindu model, rather than an ever-increasing-equality under the eugenic western aristocratic model. 13) We have recreated the problem of the roman conquest which is increasing productivity through trade to the point where the upper classes cannot withstand shocks because we are in insufficient numbers. 14) The limit to any right to profit is that which imposes an intertemporal cost on the genetics, commons, institutions, norms of the polity. Theft from the future may be profitable, but it is merely theft. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Unification of the Circumpolar People

    (trigger warning) [I]f the Russian president simply ceases his perpetual lying and propaganda, and speaks straight, and does not seek to expand the borders, then Russia will become the leader of the world. Russia is a low trust high corruption society plagued by the problem of oil wealth that must be used to bribe people into compliance with the state. But this is also an advantage: no appeal to popular female sentiment and signaling privilege from the academy. THE DIVISION OF CIRCUMPOLAR COGNITIVE LABOR

    • American Utopian High Trust Risk (gambling) – invention
    • British Moralizing high trust (risk taking) – banking
    • German Duty high trust duty (planning) – industry
    • Eastern European low trust low risk – labor
    • Russian nihilistic very low trust – military
    • Chinese perpetual adoration of deception and face as a deliberate strategy of conflict avoidance until amassing overwhelming force. – ie: deceit.

    My feeling, evolving over the past decade, is that we should unite against the muslim world which is the existential threat to the circumpolar order. Christian Africa is not a threat. The muslim world is the intellectual cancer of the lower standard deviation that threatens both authoritarian, social democratic (mediterranean and eastern european) and libertarian (hanjal-saxon-british-protestant) civilizations. We tell people to be tolerant when we should unite to eliminate islam just as we united to eliminate babylon and marxism. Much of islam was christian and it was undoubtably a better place as such. (I will certainly get hammered for this one. But it’s where I’m ending up.) Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Unification of the Circumpolar People

    (trigger warning) [I]f the Russian president simply ceases his perpetual lying and propaganda, and speaks straight, and does not seek to expand the borders, then Russia will become the leader of the world. Russia is a low trust high corruption society plagued by the problem of oil wealth that must be used to bribe people into compliance with the state. But this is also an advantage: no appeal to popular female sentiment and signaling privilege from the academy. THE DIVISION OF CIRCUMPOLAR COGNITIVE LABOR

    • American Utopian High Trust Risk (gambling) – invention
    • British Moralizing high trust (risk taking) – banking
    • German Duty high trust duty (planning) – industry
    • Eastern European low trust low risk – labor
    • Russian nihilistic very low trust – military
    • Chinese perpetual adoration of deception and face as a deliberate strategy of conflict avoidance until amassing overwhelming force. – ie: deceit.

    My feeling, evolving over the past decade, is that we should unite against the muslim world which is the existential threat to the circumpolar order. Christian Africa is not a threat. The muslim world is the intellectual cancer of the lower standard deviation that threatens both authoritarian, social democratic (mediterranean and eastern european) and libertarian (hanjal-saxon-british-protestant) civilizations. We tell people to be tolerant when we should unite to eliminate islam just as we united to eliminate babylon and marxism. Much of islam was christian and it was undoubtably a better place as such. (I will certainly get hammered for this one. But it’s where I’m ending up.) Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • True Enough? Imagine A Grammar That Promised Truth Content

    (worth repeating) (extension of hierarchy of truth) (interesting for language geeks)***The purpose of science is not to convey the experience but to provide decidability in matters of dispute over existence regardless of experience.*** [L]ets note the difference between the following points of view. 1 existence, 2 experience of the universe, 3 utility in determining one’s action, 4 observation of an action and consequences 5 justification of the results of one’s action, 6 warranty in recommendation of action*, 7 and decidability in conflict*, …describes a spectrum of problems we must understand. Our grammar does not readily address these differences, and our problem of the verb to-be exacerbates the problem since ‘is’ evolved specifically to avoid the problem of articulating this spectrum, thereby allowing the audience to infer it. I work on the last two*. I think humans are pretty good at experience and utility. And some of us are pretty good at justificatoin. Largely, since justification is the language of morality, most people tend to use moral language. Imagine a language that required you address these seven degrees of truth in one’s grammar. Imagine the kind of self awareness one would need to avoid conflation of each of them. We have enough problem with people saying “it’s true for me” when they mean that it is sufficiently useful for me to act”.

  • True Enough? Imagine A Grammar That Promised Truth Content

    (worth repeating) (extension of hierarchy of truth) (interesting for language geeks)***The purpose of science is not to convey the experience but to provide decidability in matters of dispute over existence regardless of experience.*** [L]ets note the difference between the following points of view. 1 existence, 2 experience of the universe, 3 utility in determining one’s action, 4 observation of an action and consequences 5 justification of the results of one’s action, 6 warranty in recommendation of action*, 7 and decidability in conflict*, …describes a spectrum of problems we must understand. Our grammar does not readily address these differences, and our problem of the verb to-be exacerbates the problem since ‘is’ evolved specifically to avoid the problem of articulating this spectrum, thereby allowing the audience to infer it. I work on the last two*. I think humans are pretty good at experience and utility. And some of us are pretty good at justificatoin. Largely, since justification is the language of morality, most people tend to use moral language. Imagine a language that required you address these seven degrees of truth in one’s grammar. Imagine the kind of self awareness one would need to avoid conflation of each of them. We have enough problem with people saying “it’s true for me” when they mean that it is sufficiently useful for me to act”.