Curt Doolittle

Form: Outline

  • I REDUCE ALL OF THIS “STUFF” TO ECONOMICS, SIGNALING, AND INCENTIVES 1) Genetic

    I REDUCE ALL OF THIS “STUFF” TO ECONOMICS, SIGNALING, AND INCENTIVES

    1) Genetic adaptation -> more or less impulsively (time preference)(openness to ‘others’)

    2) Reproductives strategy -> Moral Bias

    3) Structure of Production -> Family Structure

    4) Military Structure -> Property Rights initial structure

    5) Inheritance Structure -> Property rights Flexibility

    6) Property Rights -> Mobility of Labor

    7) Family Structure -> Moderates genetic moral bias

    8) Inbreeding and outbreeding -> Trust

    Freedom (property rights) requires:

    1) Militia (self financed weapons, voluntary participation)

    2) Individual Property rights (necessitated by militia)

    3) Distrust of the concentration of power / Openness

    2) Homogeneity of norms.

    3) Outbreeding

    4) Lower impulsivity

    And institutions to persist it.

    5) A family (reproductive) structure that compromises between male and female reproductive strategies.

    6) Voluntary (arbitrary, preferential) Inheritance

    7) Articulated property rights

    And side effects

    8) Some means of suppressing the reproduction of underclasses (war, pestilence, climate, calories – all of the above)

    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-30 06:37:00 UTC

  • TODD’S FAMILY SYSTEMS AND FARMS: COMMUNIST (TOTALITARIAN) Communitarian favors s

    TODD’S FAMILY SYSTEMS AND FARMS:

    COMMUNIST (TOTALITARIAN)

    Communitarian favors sharecropping (métayage, fixed proportion of crop taken as rent, somewhat egalitarian)

    MANORIAL

    Absolute nuclear favors rent (fermage, fixed gold/silver rent, individualist families being already “proletariat-like” and less able to maintain a continuous property over generations, activity is already monetized)

    EXTENDED FAMILY

    Egalitarian nuclear favors large properties (grande exploitation, egalitarian families are less able to maintain evenly-split properties across generations, also “proletariat-like” but activity less monetized, less individual)

    FAMILY

    Stem favors family farms (propriété, stem families are very apt at maintaining property across generations)

    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-30 04:18:00 UTC

  • EMMANUEL TODD’S FAMILY STRUCTURES (From HBD Chick) absolute nuclear family – no

    EMMANUEL TODD’S FAMILY STRUCTURES

    (From HBD Chick)

    absolute nuclear family

    – no cohabitation of married children with their parents

    – no precise inheritance rules; frequent use of wills

    – no marriage between the children of brothers

    – anglo-saxons, netherlands, denmark

    – christianity, capitalism, ‘libertarian’ liberalism, feminism

    egalitarian nuclear family

    – no cohabitation of married children with their parents

    – equality of brothers laid down by inheritance rules

    – no marriage between the children of brothers.

    – northern france, northern italy, central and southern spain, central portugal, greece, romania, poland, latin america, ethiopia

    – christianity (catholicism); the “liberte, egalite, fraternite” form of liberalism

    authoritarian family

    – cohabitation of the married heir with this parents

    – inequality of brothers laid down by inheritance rules, transfer of an unbroken patrimony to one of the sons

    – little or no marriage between the children of two brothers

    – germany, austria, sweden, norway, belgium, bohemia, scotland, ireland, peripheral regions of france, northern spain, northern portugal, japan, korea, jews, romany gypsies

    – edit 01/08/12: socialism/bureaucratic socialism or social democracy, catholicism. fascism sometimes, various separatist and autonomous (anti-universalist) movements (think german federalism)

    exogamous community family

    – cohabitation of married sons and their parents

    – equality between brothers defined by rules of inheritance

    – no marriage between the children of two brothers

    – russia, yugoslavia, slovakia, bulgaria, hungary, finland, albania, central italy, china, vietnam, cuba, north india (note that many of these countries, the eastern european ones, also have a tradition of marrying young)

    – communism, edit 01/08/12: socialism

    endogamous community family

    – cohabitation of married sons with their parents

    – equality between brothers established by inheritance rules

    – frequent marriage between the children of brothers

    – arab world, turkey, iran, afghanistan, pakistan, azerbaijan, turkmenistan, uzbekistan, tadzhikistan

    – islam

    asymmetrical community family

    – cohabitation of married sons and their parents

    – equality between brothers laid down by inheritance rules

    – prohibition on marriages between the children of brothers, but a preference for marriages between the children of brothers and sisters

    – southern India

    – hinduism; a variety of communism unlike that found elsewhere

    anomic family

    – cohabitation of married children with their parents rejected in theory but accepted in practice

    – uncertainty about equality between brothers: inheritance rules egalitarian in theory but flexible in practice

    – consanguine marriage possible and sometimes frequent

    – burma, cambodia, laos, thailand, malaysia, indonesia, philippines, madagascar, south-american indian cultures

    the eighth family type, which is additional to todd’s scheme (i.e. it doesn’t fit the three definitional dichotomies he uses, which maybe indicates a problem with his definitions?), is the african family. todd sort-of throws his hands up in the air and declares that african family systems are simply hopeless to understand (because they don’t fit his model) — and, anyway, there’s not enough data on them (which was prolly true in the early 1980s — and maybe still is now!). anyway, here’s all he has to say about the africans:

    african systems

    – instability of the household

    – polygyny

    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-29 07:55:00 UTC

  • THE SPECTRUM OF PROGRESSIVE DECEITS A draft list of the argumentative deceits em

    THE SPECTRUM OF PROGRESSIVE DECEITS

    A draft list of the argumentative deceits employed by the left.

    1) Solipsism

    2) Shaming

    3) Shouting

    4) Rallying

    5) Loading

    6) Framing

    7) Irrationalism

    8 ) Obscurantism

    9) Incrementalism

    10) Overpopulating

    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-28 03:47:00 UTC

  • PERSISTENCE OF ILLUSORY VISION 1) The labor theory of value (false and impossibl

    PERSISTENCE OF ILLUSORY VISION

    1) The labor theory of value (false and impossible)

    2) The socialist mode of production (illogical and impossible)

    3) Involuntary membership in a corporation called ‘society’ (fraud and framing)

    Is there anything else to know?

    No? OK.

    Why are there something on the order of one-hundred thousand books on Amazon related to marx, marxism, communism and socialism?

    It’s a religion.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-28 02:07:00 UTC

  • (CORE)The Family Shrinks as Property and Wealth Expand

      (However) Primitive matrilineality (endogamous) Community Family (endogamous) Patriarchal Community Family (exogamous) Authoritarian Family Egalitarian Nuclear Family (~catholic) Absolute Nuclear Family (endogamous) (Anglo Saxon) Post-Marital Individual Family (endogamous) (Feminism) The Anglo Saxon Absolute Nuclear Family – no precise inheritance rules, frequent use of wills; – no cohabitation of married children with their parents; – no marriage between the children of brothers. “…think of England as being like this for at least 750 years. We live in small families. We buy and sell houses. … Our parents expect us to leave home for paid work …You try to save up some money from your wages so that you can afford to get married. … You can choose your spouse … It takes a long time to build up some savings from your work and find the right person with whom to settle down, so marriage comes quite lately, possibly in your late twenties.

  • (CORE)The Family Shrinks as Property and Wealth Expand

      (However) Primitive matrilineality (endogamous) Community Family (endogamous) Patriarchal Community Family (exogamous) Authoritarian Family Egalitarian Nuclear Family (~catholic) Absolute Nuclear Family (endogamous) (Anglo Saxon) Post-Marital Individual Family (endogamous) (Feminism) The Anglo Saxon Absolute Nuclear Family – no precise inheritance rules, frequent use of wills; – no cohabitation of married children with their parents; – no marriage between the children of brothers. “…think of England as being like this for at least 750 years. We live in small families. We buy and sell houses. … Our parents expect us to leave home for paid work …You try to save up some money from your wages so that you can afford to get married. … You can choose your spouse … It takes a long time to build up some savings from your work and find the right person with whom to settle down, so marriage comes quite lately, possibly in your late twenties.

  • (CORE) On Race And Diversity In Libertarianism

    (cross posted for reference) (insights) (important) METHODS Methods of justification for libertarianism (or any other political and moral bias) 1) Sentimental (I like it) 2) Moral (it’s better) 3) Historical (it works) 4) Empirical (direct experimentation) 5) Economic (indirect experimentation) 6) Ratio-scientific (cumulative evidence and theory) TWO SOURCES OF LIBERTARIAN THOUGHT 1) Conservative and Classical Liberal Land holders (christian) 2) Anarchic and religious non-land holders (jewish/gypsies) FOUR SOCIAL STRUCTURES 1) German (Kant/hierarchical/duty/nuclear family) 2) French ( Rousseau/equalitarian/care/traditional family) 3) British (smith-hume+ / aristocratic egalitarian / empirical/ absolute nuclear family) 4) Jewish (ricardo-mises-rothbard/tribalism) FOUR AMBITIONS 1) The british saw free trade as an international means of achieving peace and prosperity for all europeans. 2) The germans were trying to resist british consumerism’s disruption of ‘social order’ implicit in german ‘duty’. 3) The french were trying to extend the family to all of society, and demonstrate their nobility having failed to conquer Europe. (The failures of the world wars and transformation from demonstrated material achievement, to the use of generosity and diversity to maintain status, explain current european behavior.) 4) The jews were and are, trying to justify their participation in a host society without integrating. THE ANSWER There are two basic reasons for ‘tolerance’ in the libertarian movement. 1) Jewish authors justifying right to inclusion but denial of the necessity of payment into the commons. 2) christian authors arguing for payment only into non monopolistic commons, while retaining a homogenous moral commons. 3) feminist and postmodernist influences. DOMINANCE OF JEWISH THOUGHT I think that Rothbard brought his heritage to the table (just as Hayek stated of Mises) and he conflated the two ambitions. This is actually, the reason why rothbard failed to give us a morally tolerable libertarianism. And it is why libertarianism fails to gain traction. Humans are tribal. Immigration is a political problem. And human seek political power. So it is better to have a homogenous, liberty seeking people, for whom no seizure of power is of any group benefit, because the group is already in power. And there is no incentive for status achievement, because in a homogenous society, there is no status value to trying to gain power. HOPPE’S CORRECTION Hoppe, through admittedly interesting logic, has shown that rothbard was wrong. I have I think, with rather scientific rather than purely rational terms, demonstrated that Rothbard was wrong. CHRISTIAN ARGUMENT There is a very great difference between ‘we will not fight despite our differences if we trade’ and ‘we are all equal and can politically cohabitate without conflict’. Politics is a family matter. Trade is a cross-family matter. We can easily trade, but we cannot be politically diverse without replacing conflict over trade with conflict over politics. ROTHBARD WAS WRONG. THE STATUS ECONOMY RULES. We don’t ‘need’ much as human beings, except to hold onto our status, improve our status, and prevent loss of status. Loss aversion is more applicable to status than any other human trait except perhaps life and limb. We accumulate status, and desperately hold onto it.

  • The Two Dark Or Anglo-counter-enlightenment Projects

      1) Attack on diversity and equality as a means of preserving our ability to use historical deliberative classical liberal institutions 2) Formulation of alternative institutions that make possible the voluntary cooperation between diverse and unequal people. THE RIGHT IS DOING THE FIRST. I (as a libertarian) AM DOING THE SECOND. THE DARK ENLIGHTENMENT IS NOT REACTIONARY – ITS RADICAL.

  • The Two Dark Or Anglo-counter-enlightenment Projects

      1) Attack on diversity and equality as a means of preserving our ability to use historical deliberative classical liberal institutions 2) Formulation of alternative institutions that make possible the voluntary cooperation between diverse and unequal people. THE RIGHT IS DOING THE FIRST. I (as a libertarian) AM DOING THE SECOND. THE DARK ENLIGHTENMENT IS NOT REACTIONARY – ITS RADICAL.