Curt Doolittle

Form: Outline

  • THE PURPOSE OF PRIVATIZATION? (important evolutionary hierarchy) 1) To prohibit

    THE PURPOSE OF PRIVATIZATION?

    (important evolutionary hierarchy)

    1) To prohibit consumption (create a commons – the ongoing production of a good or service).

    2) To increase cooperation by reducing opportunity for conflict.

    3) To eliminate rents and fictions on use of such resources in production.

    4) To create efficient organizational use of these resources through competition.

    5) To permit rational planning (economic calculation) and therefore complex production.

    6) To provide individuals with incentives to produce in order to survive without parasitism, and thereby reducing the incentive to cooperate.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-02 03:07:00 UTC

  • Full Spectrum Incremental Pacification

    Full Spectrum of Pacification: 1 – Reproductive limitation. 2 – Incremental Suppression. 3 – Physical Removal. 4 – Genetic Pacification (Hanging). 5 – Culling (Casualties).

  • Full Spectrum Incremental Pacification

    Full Spectrum of Pacification: 1 – Reproductive limitation. 2 – Incremental Suppression. 3 – Physical Removal. 4 – Genetic Pacification (Hanging). 5 – Culling (Casualties).

  • (Interview Brief)

    INTERVIEW BRIEF PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT: In Propertarian Institute interviews, we are just having a video of two people having a conversation. It does not have to be structured. The purpose of this document is for you to have a general idea of what I might talk about so ideas are not new to you when I cover them. This is not a ‘script’; it’s a ‘brief’. We are just going to talk about the subject naturally, as if we are having one of our usual conversations. I will try to cover all the points I have sketched out (I never do cover them all – we always find interesting side conversations instead), and we cover them in no particular order, and then near the end will try to wrap it all up into something actionable. AUDIENCE The very-informed, very knowledgeable, and passionately curious in libertarian and conservative (and sometimes progressive) political spectra. POSITIONING Technically, while we often use the language of philosophy, we are actually talking about the subject of political economy: the informal and informal institutions that facilitate or impede cooperation, and the resulting prosperity or lack of it. TIME APPROX 2.5 HOURS FROM SET UP TO WRAP UP Shooting is usually 1.5 to 1. Most of these conversations take an hour to produce forty minutes of video. “STUFF THAT HAPPENS” We usually have to do multiple takes of the introduction because it takes us a bit to become comfortable. As we progress it will become more conversational and we will be less aware of the cameras. If I lose my train of thought (it happens), or if I make a mistake (or the interviewer does, or the crew does) we will PREPARATION read this document. The morning or evening before we should just talk through the subject over coffee or dinner. Best is the evening before. You will have time to sleep on it. This usually ends up with you asking more interesting questions on the behalf of the audience. FOR THE CAMERA AND SOUND CREW I am far worse than a professional actor. I am very easily distracted. Every time you get up and move around you make me drop all the mental cards I am juggling, and these are often very complex cards, and it makes me angry as hell. Most of the re-shooting we have had to do is because the camera or sound crew has to move around. So, sorry. You can’t. Bring enough people and equipment that you can stay still during the video process. EQUIPMENT Three Camera Interview. Usually one or two overhead lights, and one or two backlights. We can do a two camera shoot if we film the opening and closing shots, but it is harder on the audience without frequent wide shots. We cannot do single camera shoots because the questions are too hard and time consuming to reconstruct. THE LOCATION Two chairs, table, fireside chat model. See the multitude of Charlie Rose shows on YouTube for how to ‘do interviews right’. Reasonably quiet. We have used restaurants, coffee houses, homes, and studios. DELIVERABLE A single ‘Rough Cut’ MP4 at no less that 30fps HD. And the source video of the three camera. For those that do not understand the term ‘rough cut’ it means you open and close with a wide shot, then cut between all three cameras cameras ignoring **what’s** being said, and simply try to keep the audience engaged in who’s speaking. This is standard interview editing. When we receive the video we will add titles, effects, and edit the content for quality and time, and render and publish the final video. The reason is that the content is only editable by those of us who understand what’s being discussed and some ‘bad’ shots end up being necessary, while some ‘good shots’ DISTRIBUTION we distribute using YouTube channels, and web sites and Facebook links to the YouTube channels. — SAMPLE OPENING SCRIPT — TITLE “Trust and the Circumpolar People” HOST INTRODUCTION Face the camera. “Hello, I’m ___________, and I’m here in ___________ with my friend Curt Doolittle of the Propertarian institute.” (Ad-lib… All we really need is both our names and the location). Today we’re going to talk about _____________. HOST QUESTION Something on the order of: “Curt, _____________________” (Ad-lib here….. the interviewer represents the audience, so just hold a conversation as you normally would, and interject whenever you feel you want to add something or clarify something.) CURT ANSWERS Thanks (host), and thanks for having me. (continued)

  • (Interview Brief)

    INTERVIEW BRIEF PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT: In Propertarian Institute interviews, we are just having a video of two people having a conversation. It does not have to be structured. The purpose of this document is for you to have a general idea of what I might talk about so ideas are not new to you when I cover them. This is not a ‘script’; it’s a ‘brief’. We are just going to talk about the subject naturally, as if we are having one of our usual conversations. I will try to cover all the points I have sketched out (I never do cover them all – we always find interesting side conversations instead), and we cover them in no particular order, and then near the end will try to wrap it all up into something actionable. AUDIENCE The very-informed, very knowledgeable, and passionately curious in libertarian and conservative (and sometimes progressive) political spectra. POSITIONING Technically, while we often use the language of philosophy, we are actually talking about the subject of political economy: the informal and informal institutions that facilitate or impede cooperation, and the resulting prosperity or lack of it. TIME APPROX 2.5 HOURS FROM SET UP TO WRAP UP Shooting is usually 1.5 to 1. Most of these conversations take an hour to produce forty minutes of video. “STUFF THAT HAPPENS” We usually have to do multiple takes of the introduction because it takes us a bit to become comfortable. As we progress it will become more conversational and we will be less aware of the cameras. If I lose my train of thought (it happens), or if I make a mistake (or the interviewer does, or the crew does) we will PREPARATION read this document. The morning or evening before we should just talk through the subject over coffee or dinner. Best is the evening before. You will have time to sleep on it. This usually ends up with you asking more interesting questions on the behalf of the audience. FOR THE CAMERA AND SOUND CREW I am far worse than a professional actor. I am very easily distracted. Every time you get up and move around you make me drop all the mental cards I am juggling, and these are often very complex cards, and it makes me angry as hell. Most of the re-shooting we have had to do is because the camera or sound crew has to move around. So, sorry. You can’t. Bring enough people and equipment that you can stay still during the video process. EQUIPMENT Three Camera Interview. Usually one or two overhead lights, and one or two backlights. We can do a two camera shoot if we film the opening and closing shots, but it is harder on the audience without frequent wide shots. We cannot do single camera shoots because the questions are too hard and time consuming to reconstruct. THE LOCATION Two chairs, table, fireside chat model. See the multitude of Charlie Rose shows on YouTube for how to ‘do interviews right’. Reasonably quiet. We have used restaurants, coffee houses, homes, and studios. DELIVERABLE A single ‘Rough Cut’ MP4 at no less that 30fps HD. And the source video of the three camera. For those that do not understand the term ‘rough cut’ it means you open and close with a wide shot, then cut between all three cameras cameras ignoring **what’s** being said, and simply try to keep the audience engaged in who’s speaking. This is standard interview editing. When we receive the video we will add titles, effects, and edit the content for quality and time, and render and publish the final video. The reason is that the content is only editable by those of us who understand what’s being discussed and some ‘bad’ shots end up being necessary, while some ‘good shots’ DISTRIBUTION we distribute using YouTube channels, and web sites and Facebook links to the YouTube channels. — SAMPLE OPENING SCRIPT — TITLE “Trust and the Circumpolar People” HOST INTRODUCTION Face the camera. “Hello, I’m ___________, and I’m here in ___________ with my friend Curt Doolittle of the Propertarian institute.” (Ad-lib… All we really need is both our names and the location). Today we’re going to talk about _____________. HOST QUESTION Something on the order of: “Curt, _____________________” (Ad-lib here….. the interviewer represents the audience, so just hold a conversation as you normally would, and interject whenever you feel you want to add something or clarify something.) CURT ANSWERS Thanks (host), and thanks for having me. (continued)

  • Racism: Race, Class, Culture, Signals, Politics, and Genetic Pacification

    RACISM: RACE, CLASS, CULTURE, SIGNALS, POLITICS, GENETIC PACIFICATION

    (a) people act as racial blocks to obtain power over other people – this is in their interests. (b) minorities largely are irrelevant as long as they cannot obtain political power – ie: democracy – and live within their ‘quarters’ (neighborhoods); (c) the origin of friction is not race it is the value of in-group vs out-group status signals and differences in cultural rules that suppress different degrees of parasitism: normative incommensurability; (d) where the problem of conflict is not culture it is desirability for reproduction and therefore status signals in group vs out group; (e) where the problem is not desirability it is impulsivity, and the consequences of impulsivity (spontaneous, loud, rude, crude, violent), which hinders cooperation between less impulsive and more impulsive groups.

    It’s irrational to seek to overcome these frictions. In otherwords, it is not rational to expect people to behave otherwise to competitiors in those cases where they are in fact competitors not cooperators.

    Genetic culling (genetic pacification, eugenic reproduction) matters. That is bcause conflict is largely a problem OF CLASS and CULTURE not of race. The problem is the distribution of numbers between the classes between the races. if you see upper and middle class people of various colors in the same room they are still more positive and trusting to in-group members, but they cause fewer political problems with outgroup members.

    All groups reject out-group competitors. Whether within race or without. Upper class whites (me) don’t like to spend too much time with lower class whites. They like it even less with lower classes of other groups over whom they have no signaling value to exchange to moderate conflicts.s

    I am keenly aware when traveling, or doing business, or participating in intellectual forums, when I am the white minority, and how people treat me, just as anyone else is. In Hartford (which is a black city) I felt it. For many years I worked in predominantly jewish companies and felt it. In academia I feel an outlier. In business I feel an outlier. We all feel kin selection unless we are privileged by circumstance, and in peer classes.

    Hence the only way to avoid racism is to homogenize the classes and cultures such that racial signals are neither valuable nor detrimental.

    We can tolerate racial mixture (it merely affects reproductive desirability). We can tolerate some class mixture within the same group. But mixing race, culture and class differences is more cross group competition for individuals in each group to rationally choose egalitarianism.

    As an intellectual I prefer to judge people only on intellectual and moral merits. As member of my family and tribe I place greater value on the perpetuation, improvement and expansion of of mine than that of others. As a business man, I prefer to see everyone as equal in potential to generate wealth. As a politician I am keenly aware that internal conflict and competition are constraints upon in-group status signals (harmony), economic prosperity, the construction of commons, and the competitive success of the group is predicated on the least diverse, most

    If groups are not willing to practice culling (genetic pacification, eugenic reproduction) then they are merely lying when they say they want equality – what they want is to win, and to weaken their competitors through appeal via suggestion to pathological altruism.

    So from this perspective, racists are not the problem. The failure of groups to genetically pacify their underclasses is the challenge to overcome.

    Anyway, that is where I end up today.

    I have seen the change in american in my lifetime, and it is tragic. I am sitting here in Estonia and I see the damage done by the Russians and that the Russians constitute the lower (trailer park) classes. I can see in Sweden, Denmark, England and Norway that they have no intellectual recollection of their history of genetic pacification and therefore do not appreciate the suicide mission they are engaging in. The Chinese are perfectly aware of it. The were just less successful than the west because of their large numbers. THe hindus use class. The Brazillians have been most successful in the opposite: elimination of racism, interbreeding. And that has resulted in recreating the caste and poverty of india.

    There are only three choices: hindu castes bcause of genetic diversity, aristocratic equality through genetic pacification, or asian tyranny to force homogeniety of behavior.

    As usual, I would say that complaints about out-groups are admissions of in-group failure to resist competition from the range of strategies of others.

    Curt







    • Frank Castle In an effort to make things safe and fair we perpetuate/exacerbate weakness and flaws. Thereby creating a system in which we need more government intervention to maintain safety and fairness. All the while creating more problems increasing the need for more and more government. We truly need a new system.












      Are there only 3 choices?







    • Eli Harman One reason the lower classes are racist is that they are in direct competition for resources they don’t create: jobs, handouts, etc… the middle and upper classes don’t have to argue about who gets how much pie. They can make pie.
















    • Lou Kiss. Correct me if I’m wrong. One cannot change one’s race, but one can change one’s class for better or worse. What it takes is examination of conscience and revision of behaviour. Hence, we all have the potential to rise up to moral aristocracy but the individual must do it for himself.













      Curt Doolittle ^correct.




     

  • Racism: Race, Class, Culture, Signals, Politics, and Genetic Pacification

    RACISM: RACE, CLASS, CULTURE, SIGNALS, POLITICS, GENETIC PACIFICATION

    (a) people act as racial blocks to obtain power over other people – this is in their interests. (b) minorities largely are irrelevant as long as they cannot obtain political power – ie: democracy – and live within their ‘quarters’ (neighborhoods); (c) the origin of friction is not race it is the value of in-group vs out-group status signals and differences in cultural rules that suppress different degrees of parasitism: normative incommensurability; (d) where the problem of conflict is not culture it is desirability for reproduction and therefore status signals in group vs out group; (e) where the problem is not desirability it is impulsivity, and the consequences of impulsivity (spontaneous, loud, rude, crude, violent), which hinders cooperation between less impulsive and more impulsive groups.

    It’s irrational to seek to overcome these frictions. In otherwords, it is not rational to expect people to behave otherwise to competitiors in those cases where they are in fact competitors not cooperators.

    Genetic culling (genetic pacification, eugenic reproduction) matters. That is bcause conflict is largely a problem OF CLASS and CULTURE not of race. The problem is the distribution of numbers between the classes between the races. if you see upper and middle class people of various colors in the same room they are still more positive and trusting to in-group members, but they cause fewer political problems with outgroup members.

    All groups reject out-group competitors. Whether within race or without. Upper class whites (me) don’t like to spend too much time with lower class whites. They like it even less with lower classes of other groups over whom they have no signaling value to exchange to moderate conflicts.s

    I am keenly aware when traveling, or doing business, or participating in intellectual forums, when I am the white minority, and how people treat me, just as anyone else is. In Hartford (which is a black city) I felt it. For many years I worked in predominantly jewish companies and felt it. In academia I feel an outlier. In business I feel an outlier. We all feel kin selection unless we are privileged by circumstance, and in peer classes.

    Hence the only way to avoid racism is to homogenize the classes and cultures such that racial signals are neither valuable nor detrimental.

    We can tolerate racial mixture (it merely affects reproductive desirability). We can tolerate some class mixture within the same group. But mixing race, culture and class differences is more cross group competition for individuals in each group to rationally choose egalitarianism.

    As an intellectual I prefer to judge people only on intellectual and moral merits. As member of my family and tribe I place greater value on the perpetuation, improvement and expansion of of mine than that of others. As a business man, I prefer to see everyone as equal in potential to generate wealth. As a politician I am keenly aware that internal conflict and competition are constraints upon in-group status signals (harmony), economic prosperity, the construction of commons, and the competitive success of the group is predicated on the least diverse, most

    If groups are not willing to practice culling (genetic pacification, eugenic reproduction) then they are merely lying when they say they want equality – what they want is to win, and to weaken their competitors through appeal via suggestion to pathological altruism.

    So from this perspective, racists are not the problem. The failure of groups to genetically pacify their underclasses is the challenge to overcome.

    Anyway, that is where I end up today.

    I have seen the change in american in my lifetime, and it is tragic. I am sitting here in Estonia and I see the damage done by the Russians and that the Russians constitute the lower (trailer park) classes. I can see in Sweden, Denmark, England and Norway that they have no intellectual recollection of their history of genetic pacification and therefore do not appreciate the suicide mission they are engaging in. The Chinese are perfectly aware of it. The were just less successful than the west because of their large numbers. THe hindus use class. The Brazillians have been most successful in the opposite: elimination of racism, interbreeding. And that has resulted in recreating the caste and poverty of india.

    There are only three choices: hindu castes bcause of genetic diversity, aristocratic equality through genetic pacification, or asian tyranny to force homogeniety of behavior.

    As usual, I would say that complaints about out-groups are admissions of in-group failure to resist competition from the range of strategies of others.

    Curt







    • Frank Castle In an effort to make things safe and fair we perpetuate/exacerbate weakness and flaws. Thereby creating a system in which we need more government intervention to maintain safety and fairness. All the while creating more problems increasing the need for more and more government. We truly need a new system.












      Are there only 3 choices?







    • Eli Harman One reason the lower classes are racist is that they are in direct competition for resources they don’t create: jobs, handouts, etc… the middle and upper classes don’t have to argue about who gets how much pie. They can make pie.
















    • Lou Kiss. Correct me if I’m wrong. One cannot change one’s race, but one can change one’s class for better or worse. What it takes is examination of conscience and revision of behaviour. Hence, we all have the potential to rise up to moral aristocracy but the individual must do it for himself.













      Curt Doolittle ^correct.




     

  • Full Spectrum: Reproductive limitation. Incremental Suppression. Physical Remova

    Full Spectrum: Reproductive limitation. Incremental Suppression. Physical Removal. Genetic Pacification (Hanging). Culling (Casualties).

    Source date (UTC): 2015-08-20 14:15:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/634368124855418880

  • BRIEF (SCRIPT) PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT: In these interviews, we are just having

    BRIEF (SCRIPT)

    PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT:

    In these interviews, we are just having a conversation. It does not have to be structured. The purpose of this document is (a) for me to organize my thoughts ahead of time so I remember the points to cover and how to tie it all together at the end, (b) for you to have a general idea of what I might talk about so ideas are not new to you when I cover them.

    BUT, this is not a ‘script’; it’s a ‘brief’. We are just going to talk about the subject naturally, as if we are having one of our usual conversations. I will try to cover all the points in this document (I never do cover them all – we always find interesting side conversations instead), and we cover them in no particular order, and then near the end will try to wrap it all up into something actionable.

    For this topic, that means that **American utopianism and Russian nihilism are equal fallacies that we can overcome**. And that we can unite Anglo, Germanic, Slavic, and Russian circumpolar civilizations if we overcome the fallacies of the enlightenment visions of man, and accept scientific evidence of man.

    AUDIENCE

    The very-informed, very knowledgeable, and passionately curious in libertarian and conservative (and sometimes progressive) political spectra.

    POSITIONING

    Technically, while we often use the language of philosophy, we are actually talking about the subject of political economy: the informal and informal institutions that facilitate or impede cooperation, and the resulting prosperity or lack of it.

    TIME APPROX 2.5 HOURS FROM SET UP TO WRAP UP

    Shooting is usually 1.5 to 1. Most of these conversations take an hour to produce forty minutes of video.

    “STUFF THAT HAPPENS”

    We usually have to do multiple takes of the introduction because it takes us a bit to become comfortable. As we progress it will become more conversational and we will be less aware of the cameras. If I lose my train of thought (it happens), or if I make a mistake (or the interviewer does, or the crew does) we will

    PREPARATION

    read this document. The morning or evening before we should just talk through the subject over coffee or dinner. Best is the evening before. You will have time to sleep on it. This usually ends up with you asking more interesting questions on the behalf of the audience.

    FOR THE CAMERA AND SOUND CREW

    I honestly don’t care about your ‘needs’. Every time you get up and move around you make me drop all the mental cards I am juggling, and these are often very complex cards, and it makes me angry as hell. Most of the re-shooting we have had to do is because the camera or sound crew has to move around. Sorry. You can’t. So bring enough people and equipment that you can stay still during the video process.

    EQUIPMENT

    Three Camera Interview. Usually one or two overhead lights, and one or two backlights. We can do a two camera shoot if we film the opening and closing shots, but it is harder on the audience without frequent wide shots. We cannot do single camera shoots because the questions are too hard and time consuming to reconstruct.

    THE LOCATION

    Two chairs, table, fireside chat model. See the multitude of Charlie Rose shows on YouTube for how to ‘do interviews right’. Reasonably quiet. We have used restaurants, coffee houses, homes, and studios.

    DELIVERABLE

    A single ‘Rough Cut’ MP4 at no less that 30fps HD. And the source video of the three camera. For those that do not understand the term ‘rough cut’ it means you open and close with a wide shot, then cut between all three cameras cameras ignoring **what’s** being said, and simply try to keep the audience engaged in who’s speaking. This is standard interview editing. When we receive the video we will add titles, effects, and edit the content for quality and time, and render and publish the final video. The reason is that the content is only editable by those of us who understand what’s being discussed and some ‘bad’ shots end up being necessary, while some ‘good shots’

    DISTRIBUTION

    we distribute using YouTube channels, and web sites and Facebook links to the YouTube channels.

    — SCRIPT —

    TITLE

    “Trust and the Circumpolar People”

    DON INTRODUCTION

    Face the camera. “Hello, I’m Don Finnegan, and I’m here in the beautiful old-town of Tallinn Estonia with my friend Curt Doolittle of the Propertarian institute.”

    (Ad-lib… All we really need is both our names and the location).

    Today we’re going to talk about the Circumpolar People: Anglo, Germanic, Slavic, and Russian civilizations, and why we’ve been in conflict, and how we can end that conflict.

    DON QUESTION

    Something on the order of: “Curt, you’ve been critical of Russia over the invasion of Ukraine and the Seizure of the Crimean Peninsula, and Russia’s use of propaganda…..”

    (Ad-lib here….. the interviewer represents the audience, so just hold a conversation as you normally would, and interject whenever you feel you want to add something or clarify something.)

    CURT ANSWERS

    Thanks Don, and thanks for having me.

    (Ad-lib….) My problem with his actions are:

    PART 1 – CRITICISMS

    UNNECESSARY

    1) It was unnecessary, since Ukraine would have happily ceded the territory in exchange for discounts on energy (especially if it was stated that it’s strategic and we really can’t afford not to have it). The Russian ‘resettlement’ of Russians into Ukraine (the equivalent of the west bank) had divided the country, and there had been years of discussion that the country was hampered by the baggage of Russian and ex-soviet corruption.

    POSTWAR CONSENSUS

    2) It broke the postwar consensus and demonstrated to the whole world that nuclear weapons are the only means of securing borders. So it was the deciding factor in nuclear proliferation going forward.

    INFLUENTIAL, UNITING, LEADER

    3) Putin was emerging as the world’s most influential leader, and the only legitimate critic of the west. He had begun uniting western conservatives. And he threw it all away out of impulsive fear. Now Russians will yet again pay for the hubris of their leaders. And the rest of us will pay for yet another delay in uniting our peoples.

    UNIFICATION OF RUSSIA AND GERMANY

    4) It prevented the unification of Russian resources, labor, and martial culture from unifying with German technology and rule of law. And while the Anglo sphere has been trying to prevent this perhaps for centuries, it turns out that the Germans were right about the nature of man, and the Anglos were wrong, and that if we could unite Russia and Germany we could reunite Anglo and German civilization and achieve Gorbachev’s vision of a circumpolar Christian civilization across the entire top of the globe. And I think that this failure might be as catastrophic as the fall of Constantinople, and the Islamization of North Africa.

    ( PART II – SOLUTIONS)

    DON – IMPOSSIBLE?

    Don: Well, is that vision impossible now?

    CURT ANSWERS

    Well, yes, it’s possible – we’re all European pagan Christian Aristotelians. But to make that obvious lets tell a few stories,

    STOCK MARKET…

    1) Why is the top stock market, and top technological innovation in America, the top bond market in the UK, the best engineering in Germany, and the best military in Russia? Why do the different countries specialize in that division of labor?

    RULE OF LAW

    2) Why do Americans use rule of law bordering on formal logic, brits use rule of law in the tradition of common law, the French and Germans use Napoleonic rule of law, and the Russians rule BY law? American law permits people to do anything but resolves all conflicts that occur. Anglo law is more regulatory up front, and resolves conflicts. German law, as Napoleonic, heavily regulates the front of any process, and then resolves conflicts that remain. Russian law is rule by not of law, and is… merely a command structure. Chinese law traditionally is not comparable with western law in any sense in that there are no material limits to the state’s dictates.

    JURY JUDGE SYSTEMS

    3) Why do Americans and brits use a single judge and a twelve-person jury, and why are courts forums for debates conducted in front of a jury who decides? Why do the French not use such a system, nor jury (except in rare cases), and why do authorities attempt to judge the claims. Why in German courts do defendants appeal to a judge rather than a jury for decisions? Why are Russian courts adversarial (as in the Anglo model, and before a jury, but nearly 80% of people do not expect a fair trail because of pervasive bribery of both jurors and jurists? (HT to Putin for the dramatic increase in the trust in the courts.) Why did or do some countries use multiple judges and no jury?

    SPEEDING TICKET TRUTH / AND ACCIDENTS

    4) If you go to court in America over a speeding ticket that you deserve, what are the chances your friend or relative will tell the truth. Britain? Germany? France? Italy? Russia? China? Saudi Arabia?

    LIAR AND WHO BELIEVES IT?

    6) A few days ago I asked a Russian woman if two people are talking, and one tells a lie and the other believes it, who was ‘wrong’? She said the person who believed the lie. This is unbelievable to an American. Yet an American will stretch the truth in a sales pitch, while a German will not, and a Finn will be horrified by it? Why is idealism so prevalent in America, moral signaling at the level of pandering absurdity in Britain, absolute mastery of subject matter so required in Germany, and cunning problem solving so heroic in Russia – while pseudoscience bordering on mysticism so common, and conspiracy theories so prevalent in Russia?

    AMERICANS AND RUSSIANS CAN”T UNDERSTAND EACH OTHER

    When a Russian politician hears an American politician they assume that he is lying because no one would be that naive, instead of utopian. When an American politician hears a Russian politician lie, he just assumes he’s malevolent tyrannist rather than desperately trying to keep the wolves at bay. They can’t understand each other. When any western politician hears a Chinese we know it’s a lie because that’s their natural form of communication since sun Tzu: delay and deceive. Or Islamic courts which .. aren’t worth discussing.

    A Russian cannot imagine that not only to Americans believe this stuff, but that they think it is good for everyone: an aristocracy of everyone. An American cannot imagine a Russian who lives in a vast country, with enemies south and east (and imagined enemies west), a hostile climate, and have been occupied and enslaved for most of their history.

    EXTERNALITIES: UTOPIAN VS NIHILIST

    But utopianism produces externalities that are beneficial for the economy, and nihilism produces externalities that are damaging for the economy. Both nihilism and utopianism are fallacies. They are excuses for not doing the good German work of gathering the facts and assuming you know nothing at all other than the facts.

    (PERSONAL INTERJECTION)

    So I will say this: I would rather have American peers in court and business, and Russian, and eastern European family and friends at home. Which is pretty much how my life is today.

    (PART THREE: THE DIVISION OF LABOR AND EXCHANGE VS UNIVERSALISM AND MONOPOLY)

    MY CAMPAIGN AGINST UNIVERSALISM

    I think people who follow me know my criticism of the enlightenment’s universalism, and my preference for a division of perception, cognition, knowledge advocacy and labor. I think it’s WONDERFUL that the circumpolar people have divided their labors. There is one problem preventing us from unifying, and that is American utopianism and Russian corruption. We have got to fix this if we are to unite Anglo invention, German engineering, and Russian intellectual and military excellence.

    GORBACHEV HAD THE RIGHT IDEA, THE OLIGARCHS RUINED IT, PUTIN BANISHED THEM AND STARTED THE REFORM, AND THEN HE FLINCHED.

    He wants to restore the Soviet Union, instead of uniting all of us under Russian military, Anglo law, and German discipline. Why are the Chinese and the Muslims looking at their civilizations as a unit, and we are not? We have everything we need to preserve Christendom, our histories and our ambitions.

    WESTERN OUTLIERS: UTOPIANISM AND NIHILISM

    The outliers are American utopianism (neo-puritanism, postmodernism, democratic secular humanism) and Russian nihilism and distrust.

    KILLING OFF THE FALLACIES OF THE ENLIGHTENMENT UNIVERSALISM – Of any cultural strategy, and instead, replace it with a division of knowledge and labor at the gender, individual, cultural and civilizational levels.

    I am trying to kill off the fallacies of the enlightenment and unify Christendom. In an effort to save it. Russia is an integral part of that plan. Because with Russia the division of labor necessary for our very rich civilization is possible.

    UNIVERSALISM: division of labor across Christendom rather than any one group’s strategy as universal. Anglo Island, German River, and Russian Steppe

    DEMOCRACY

    Russians are correct, that democracy is a cancerous idea that has failed not only the rest of the world, but the countries that promote it. It is merely mob rule. And Russians are surrounded by MOBS. They are not stupid. We are island people. We can afford the illusion.

    EMPIRE

    Americans should broker a deal between Germany and Russia for the defense of Eurasia.

    MORE MOB REDUCTION

    Westerners above the Hanja line suppressed the underclasses through more than a millennium of genetic pacification. Russians are surrounded by people who have done the opposite: weaponized reproduction of the underclasses.

    CAPITALISM

    Putin failed to diversify the economy because it was too attractive to restore the Russian empire WITH CONTROL rather than to unite the circumpolar peoples AT RISK. Americans had nearly abandoned Europe assuming that Russia would gradually reform and America could withdraw from Europe. Putin would have been the most powerful man in Eurasia.

    ECONOMIES

    Why does the economic status of each of these countries reflect its nihilism(Russia), skepticism(Finland and Poland), realism(Germany), optimism(Britain), utopianism(America)?

    TRUST ISN”T AN EMOTIONAL, SPIRITUAL, OR RATIONALIST CONCEPT. TRUST ISN”T AN ACT OF FAITH, IT”S THE RESULT OF AGGRESSIVE APPLICATION OF RULE OF LAW

    (Discuss rule of law)

    UNIVERSAL DECIDABILITY IN LAW (suppression of parasitism)

    (Discuss decidability in law across heterogeneous polities)

    RULE OF LAW – ESPECIALLY IN THE STATE

    (discuss how France is Wrong) (‘Secret Shoppers’ : Using Entrapment. Bring in how we (marchenko) test security in the military.)

    CONTRACTUALISM IN GOVERNMENT AND RULE IN LAW

    (Regional variation in the production of commons)(Difference between universal rule, and regionalism in the production of commons)

    (PART IV – SOLUTIONS)

    BUT WE MUST TRUST ONE ANOTHER WITH “CHRISTIAN LOVE”. Not American utopianism, not Russian nihilism, but pure scientific judgment: trust produces economic velocity, and rule of law preserves it.

    ELIMINATE CORRUPTION BY USING TRUTH. RUSSIANS ARE SCIENTIFIC PEOPLE – USE IT.

    Russia must accelerate its program of suppression of corruption, and instead of frightening the populace in order to generate demand for the state’s authority, simply communicate to the (smart) Russian people precisely what it is we wish to accomplish.

    Russians are heroic like Americans. Russians need to use their macho to bravado heroism, and crush, punish and beat corruption, deceit and propaganda. But Russians DO NOT need democracy. We cannot spread the cancer of the west to Russia. We need rule of law. How we produce commons depends upon our local needs and traditions. Russia is a resource economy and needs central distribution of wealth and a diverse economy in services. American needs innovate; Canada needs its myth of character in order to sell off its continent to immigrants. Britain needs its absurd moralism to be the world’s Switzerland. Germany needs its ‘duty’ to engineer everything. And we all need Americans to adjudicate trade conflicts and Russians to police the air, land and seas.

    AMERICANS NEED TO STOP LYING IN PURSUIT OF UTOPIAN FALLACIES

    (Discuss how Americans **DO** lie in marketing, advertising, academia, and politics. And the collusion between state, media and academy in the great utopian American education scam.)

    ELIMINATE AMERICAN EMPIRE AND DIVIDE THE LABOR OF CHRISTENDOM

    We have failed the postwar era, in large part because of the Jewish neoconservatives on one end and the anglo-geman-neopuritan left on the other.

    We have to end the empire. Turn America into a domestic government, and preferably return to a federation of countries rather than a tyrannical government that we have today.

    (CLOSE)

    Source date (UTC): 2015-08-15 07:10:00 UTC

  • RACISM: RACE, CLASS, CULTURE, SIGNALS, POLITICS, GENETIC PACIFICATION (a) people

    RACISM: RACE, CLASS, CULTURE, SIGNALS, POLITICS, GENETIC PACIFICATION

    (a) people act as racial blocks to obtain power over other people – this is in their interests. (b) minorities largely are irrelevant as long as they cannot obtain political power – ie: democracy – and live within their ‘quarters’ (neighborhoods); (c) the origin of friction is not race it is the value of in-group vs out-group status signals and differences in cultural rules that suppress different degrees of parasitism: normative incommensurability; (d) where the problem of conflict is not culture it is desirability for reproduction and therefore status signals in group vs out group; (e) where the problem is not desirability it is impulsivity, and the consequences of impulsivity (spontaneous, loud, rude, crude, violent), which hinders cooperation between less impulsive and more impulsive groups.

    It’s irrational to seek to overcome these frictions. In otherwords, it is not rational to expect people to behave otherwise to competitiors in those cases where they are in fact competitors not cooperators.

    Genetic culling (genetic pacification, eugenic reproduction) matters. That is bcause conflict is largely a problem OF CLASS and CULTURE not of race. The problem is the distribution of numbers between the classes between the races. if you see upper and middle class people of various colors in the same room they are still more positive and trusting to in-group members, but they cause fewer political problems with outgroup members.

    All groups reject out-group competitors. Whether within race or without. Upper class whites (me) don’t like to spend too much time with lower class whites. They like it even less with lower classes of other groups over whom they have no signaling value to exchange to moderate conflicts.s

    I am keenly aware when traveling, or doing business, or participating in intellectual forums, when I am the white minority, and how people treat me, just as anyone else is. In Hartford (which is a black city) I felt it. For many years I worked in predominantly jewish companies and felt it. In academia I feel an outlier. In business I feel an outlier. We all feel kin selection unless we are privileged by circumstance, and in peer classes.

    Hence the only way to avoid racism is to homogenize the classes and cultures such that racial signals are neither valuable nor detrimental.

    We can tolerate racial mixture (it merely affects reproductive desirability). We can tolerate some class mixture within the same group. But mixing race, culture and class differences is more cross group competition for individuals in each group to rationally choose egalitarianism.

    As an intellectual I prefer to judge people only on intellectual and moral merits. As member of my family and tribe I place greater value on the perpetuation, improvement and expansion of of mine than that of others. As a business man, I prefer to see everyone as equal in potential to generate wealth. As a politician I am keenly aware that internal conflict and competition are constraints upon in-group status signals (harmony), economic prosperity, the construction of commons, and the competitive success of the group is predicated on the least diverse, most

    If groups are not willing to practice culling (genetic pacification, eugenic reproduction) then they are merely lying when they say they want equality – what they want is to win, and to weaken their competitors through appeal via suggestion to pathological altruism.

    So from this perspective, racists are not the problem. The failure of groups to genetically pacify their underclasses is the challenge to overcome.

    Anyway, that is where I end up today.

    I have seen the change in american in my lifetime, and it is tragic. I am sitting here in Estonia and I see the damage done by the Russians and that the Russians constitute the lower (trailer park) classes. I can see in Sweden, Denmark, England and Norway that they have no intellectual recollection of their history of genetic pacification and therefore do not appreciate the suicide mission they are engaging in. The Chinese are perfectly aware of it. The were just less successful than the west because of their large numbers. THe hindus use class. The Brazillians have been most successful in the opposite: elimination of racism, interbreeding. And that has resulted in recreating the caste and poverty of india.

    There are only three choices: hindu castes bcause of genetic diversity, aristocratic equality through genetic pacification, or asian tyranny to force homogeniety of behavior.

    As usual, I would say that complaints about out-groups are admissions of in-group failure to resist competition from the range of strategies of others.

    Curt

    Source date (UTC): 2015-08-09 04:09:00 UTC