(FB 1551451889 Timestamp) TEST OF ABRAHAMIC RELIGION What are priests selling in exchange for income and status? Is christianity history or mythology, true or poetic? Is there life after death or not? Is it truly wisdom or is it a means of self deception? If you learned stoicism instead of christianity, and if you learned history and science instead of mythology and supernaturalism would you and your people live a better life? Why did we rise out of superstition ignorance and poverty once we restored aristotelian thought, and literacy rather than semitic thought and illiteracy? Why did we have such a drastic increase in quality of life after the church was no longer able to prey upon the people through rents and tithes? Why are we vulnerable to marxism, postmodernism, and feminism if it is not for christianity? Why is christianity taught and argued using the same techniques as marxism, postmodernism, and feminism? Why do christians let our people be conquered rather than fight like the pagans do? Why are pagans and atheists so desirous of conflict and the christians cowardice? TEST OF RECIPROCITY Productive (fail) it’s parasitic. Fully informed (fail) it’s totally false. Warrantied (fail) they can’t warranty supernatural. Voluntary (fail) threat if you don’t comply Free of Externality: the externalities are suicidal.
Form: Question
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551697263 Timestamp) ( I mean, I don’t get it. Lay a foundation deep enough to carry a one meter wall. Concrete block. Foam. Dirt Fill. Two stories. Nine foot ceilings. Six foot windows. Cast lintels on-site and in place. Lam center beam. High Pitched Roof, with French (Provincial) cornices. Steel over Panels. One wet wall. Bedrooms up, kitchen, dining, great room down. Smaller house. Better fixtures. Lasts 300 years minimum. Standards and volume produce discounts. French construction is small but quality. No more sheds thanks. )
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551886968 Timestamp) by Rosenborg Predmetsky Something I’ve been considering: A forceful imposition of obscenity laws that criminalizes and censors pornography and public display of sexually arousing material, because the catastrophic psychological insecurity created in women by such media is precisely what motivates them to so profoundly resent men that they engage in their sociopathic revaluation of values that privileges the morbidly obese, the ugly, the mutilated, the masculinized, etc. Men exist not only to protect women from other men, but also from the ruthlessness of intra-sexual competition between women, and we protect women from other women, because the female underclass lashes out at males when they are made to feel worthless. Women have a need to be desired, seen and recognized, and being sexually desirable is one of their main means of doing so. On the one hand, the unnatural supra-normal stimulus generated by the ubiquity of fattening food and a sedentary lifestyle, has caused women to become monstrously ugly, and on the other hand, totally unrealistic portrayals of female beauty causes even the more attractive women to be extremely insecure. So the situation we’re in is profoundly unnatural. Women need to test men to feel safe and desired, to test their loyalty and desire. But they can never feel safe or desired in our current context, and their reaction to this despair is the kind of despairing rage that is the rough equivalent of a mass incel shooting among men. I think even 2nd wave feminists are actually on to something when they argue that women shouldn’t have to shave their bodies or face. Some women will complain that men are stifling their sexual expression. And they are right. But men need to learn to say “no” to women. Cultivating a healthy limiting impulse would lead to much happier men and women alike. Patriarchy, properly understood and implemented, is a necessary precondition for a healthy society because female sexuality is always already as aggressive and dominating as men, just in different ways.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551886968 Timestamp) by Rosenborg Predmetsky Something I’ve been considering: A forceful imposition of obscenity laws that criminalizes and censors pornography and public display of sexually arousing material, because the catastrophic psychological insecurity created in women by such media is precisely what motivates them to so profoundly resent men that they engage in their sociopathic revaluation of values that privileges the morbidly obese, the ugly, the mutilated, the masculinized, etc. Men exist not only to protect women from other men, but also from the ruthlessness of intra-sexual competition between women, and we protect women from other women, because the female underclass lashes out at males when they are made to feel worthless. Women have a need to be desired, seen and recognized, and being sexually desirable is one of their main means of doing so. On the one hand, the unnatural supra-normal stimulus generated by the ubiquity of fattening food and a sedentary lifestyle, has caused women to become monstrously ugly, and on the other hand, totally unrealistic portrayals of female beauty causes even the more attractive women to be extremely insecure. So the situation we’re in is profoundly unnatural. Women need to test men to feel safe and desired, to test their loyalty and desire. But they can never feel safe or desired in our current context, and their reaction to this despair is the kind of despairing rage that is the rough equivalent of a mass incel shooting among men. I think even 2nd wave feminists are actually on to something when they argue that women shouldn’t have to shave their bodies or face. Some women will complain that men are stifling their sexual expression. And they are right. But men need to learn to say “no” to women. Cultivating a healthy limiting impulse would lead to much happier men and women alike. Patriarchy, properly understood and implemented, is a necessary precondition for a healthy society because female sexuality is always already as aggressive and dominating as men, just in different ways.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551979928 Timestamp) Could you produce a competition between a hereditary monarchy ruling the military and the judiciary and the militia, and a fascist government ruling the commons and economy? Not sure. I prefer a fascist monarchy under rule of law.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551979928 Timestamp) Could you produce a competition between a hereditary monarchy ruling the military and the judiciary and the militia, and a fascist government ruling the commons and economy? Not sure. I prefer a fascist monarchy under rule of law.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1552011509 Timestamp) WHAT DOES P-LAW SAY ABOUT TORTURE? Torture as punishment? Or torture to extract information? In the case of common criminals? For involuntary actors: soldiers, warriors, or spies? Or for voluntary actors: traitors, terrorists, enemy combatants? As a punishment no. Never. That is cruelty. As a means of extracting information, without maiming, yes. As a means of extracting with maiming, only for voluntary actors: traitors, enemy combatants, and terrorists, and not for involuntary actors (soldiers, warriors, and spies). Mercy is for the weak, for fools, and women. –“And cruelty, for the desperate, the cowardly, the short-lived, and the base.”—Tim Beckley-Spillane To second Tim, I ‘ll say that men who enjoy war are different from men who enjoy cruelty. And cruelty is never something we want among us.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1552011509 Timestamp) WHAT DOES P-LAW SAY ABOUT TORTURE? Torture as punishment? Or torture to extract information? In the case of common criminals? For involuntary actors: soldiers, warriors, or spies? Or for voluntary actors: traitors, terrorists, enemy combatants? As a punishment no. Never. That is cruelty. As a means of extracting information, without maiming, yes. As a means of extracting with maiming, only for voluntary actors: traitors, enemy combatants, and terrorists, and not for involuntary actors (soldiers, warriors, and spies). Mercy is for the weak, for fools, and women. –“And cruelty, for the desperate, the cowardly, the short-lived, and the base.”—Tim Beckley-Spillane To second Tim, I ‘ll say that men who enjoy war are different from men who enjoy cruelty. And cruelty is never something we want among us.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551984037 Timestamp) MOST CONTROVERSIAL ISSUE? —“Curt Doolittle: Whatâs the most controversial social issue that is the most difficult to solve for propertarianism?”—Philip Clark Religion without exception. Abortion because it is so passionate and it is not a question of law but of choice on the part of the community. hence the necessity of small custom communities. I’ll say this:
Abrahamic religion is a rather obvious bad – but it appears we are stuck with it.
Abortion is very difficult because (a) it is never clear that we aren’t just trying to suppress sexuality (which is fine) but address the underling question not abortion, (b) whether it’s any different or worse than ‘exposure’ by which women have killed more lives than all wars in history combined. (c) whether it’s simply a better choice than putting children into terrible circumstances and hostile environments. (d) whether it’s tragic for many young couples who are not sufficiently adult and if there is any alternative, (e) that there shouldn’t be some additional penalty for failing to use protection. My opinion is keep it legal but make couples pay dearly for it over the long term. But it’s only an opinion.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1552666713 Timestamp) Cari amici italiani; mia nipote studierà a Verona quest’anno. quale compagnia di cellulari dovrebbe usare per il suo iPhone? grazie.