Form: Question

MARCO CAN YOU HELP ME WITH THIS?

Can you all please help me flesh this out a bit? The table at the bottom? I don’t know who the players are.

I know you organize by topic and ‘movemnet’ where I organize by argument structure and class.

I tend to divide the previous generation (through 2012) as ‘hopeful’ and the new movements as ‘resigned’ or ‘hopeless’, meaning that the newer movements are scientific and not rationalist, and that they accept the data that it’s not possible to convince people to adopt political orders at odds with their reproductive strategies.

I’m really only interested in people who argue under the ‘resigned’ or ‘hopeless’ strategy, not the ‘hopeful’ strategy of the postwar right and libertarians.

Anyway, we’re the only two people who seem to work on this consistently so I was hoping you could help.

Thanks

Curt

THE EMERGING NEW RIGHT MOVEMENT

———————————————————————–

CENTRAL ARGUMENTS

———————————-

1) We can no longer hold any belief that we can integrate the postwar generations into the ‘aristocracy of everyone’ including the absolute nuclear family, individual accountability, the civic society, and rule of law. Where we were not defeated ideologically, despite the monopoly conversion of the academy, media, and state bureaucracy, we were defeated by importing millions of the underclasses that the founder sought to leave behind in Europe.

2) When the Jewish cosmopolitan left invented pseudosciences in the mid 1800-1900’s: Boazian anthropology, Marxist social science and economics, Freudian psychology, Cantorian mathematical platonism, and Frankfurtian cultural anti-Europeanism, Randian-Rothbardian libertarianism, and Straussian neo-conservatism, and combined these pseudosciences with media, propaganda, and academy – our ‘liberal’ middle-class takeover of government was divided into the feminine-caretaking-underclass-progressive, and the masculine-empirical martial-class conservative. Abandoning rule of law on the left for discretionary rule and individualism, and holding to the natural law, rule of law, and the institution of the family on the right. The left abandoning that the purpose of policy was the development of strong families, and the embrace that the purpose of policy was the development of individuals regardless of they or their family merits.

Our aristocratic European empirical philosophers and scientists could not create a rational but unempirical counter argument to counter the pseudoscientific propaganda so appealing to underclasses first liberated by the industrial revolution. These underclasses could not imagine that they had not so much been kept down, but domesticated over millennia in the hope that they might one day join civil society. Nor could the intellectuals, whose aristocratic political methodology was never written down in conflated form, merging both religion and law as had other civilizations.

But by the 1980’s with the failure of the great society programs world wide. The visible failure of communism, we saw emergence of a new generation of conservative think tanks, and the ambition of creating an inclusive monopolistic society. By the end of the 1990’s the combination of computers, imaging, and genetic research, and now culminating in the second decade of this century, we have found that the cosmopolitan pseudoscientific program and its puritan post-christian political correctness wing, have been completely repudiated by the scientific research, and at this point we see desperate media attempts to hold to these falsehoods out of some ‘moral’ justification (meaning revenue defense).

This supplied the Right (aristocratics) with the empirical evidence that they were correct, and that the left has done nothing but lie for the purpose of destroying good families, rule of law, meritocracy, and the civic society.

So we see a new generation of thinkers in every social class, from very sophisticated institutional solutions to our political problems, to educational, to critical, to simply rebellious, all emboldened and determined to either correct, reform, restore, demand restitution for, and if possible punish those who have done their families, civilization, and traditions so much harm.

3) The New Right, consists, like all previous generations of cultural movements, of classes (compare with jewish neo-con, libertine-libertarian, and socialist), And each class uses the techniques of rebellion that are appropriate to their capacity for argument: Philosophy and Institutions, Education and information, criticism and analysis, rebellion and ridicule, information and physical warfare..

That these classes reflect, loosely, the capabilities of individuals at every ten points of IQ, from 140 on down, doesn’t surprise anyone on the right – because that is how society is structured genetically, reproductively, culturally, economically, and politically.

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR ATTEMPTS TO FRAME THE RIGHT?

It means we have a large movement underway that is currently abandoning the ‘hopeful right’ of the postwar and certainly post-Vietnam period, and adopting the ‘hopeless’ position that we cannot compromise with people who are effectively our enemies, and whose policies while well intentioned, have destroyed black families, and is in the process of destroying white – turning north America into south American favelas one urban district at a time, from the northeast coast to the west.

We are the emerging new right. We make political decisions on empirical evidence, not on pseudoscience pseudorationalism, propaganda, and deceit.

We fight with institutional solutions, we fight with education and information, we fight with criticism, we fight with ridicule, and if necessary we fight with force.

The old right will die thankfully with America’s WORST GENERATION (the boomers).

And we repair this government, this culture, and this civilization….

… or we will break it all to pieces.

Curt Doolittle

The Philosophy of Aristocracy

The Propertarian Institute

THE CLASSES

——————–

ARISTOCRATIC RIGHT (institutions – law,philosophy)

Curt Doolittle (and friends), Propertarianism,

(left equivalent Rawls, although I suppose I could critique each of them. That would be an interesting exercise.)

UPPER MIDDLE CLASS NEW RIGHT (education – information – analysis)

(the slowly converting anglo libertarians)

Stefan Molyneux

Tom Woods

(left equivalent is the top 20 mainstream left-writers)

MIDDLE CLASS NEW RIGHT (resistance – criticism – analysis)

(Here we begin the Alt-right)(NRx)

Ramsey Paul

LOWER MIDDLE CLASS NEW RIGHT (rebellion – ridicule) (Right)

Christopher Cantwell

(Left Equivalent social justice warriors)

WORKING CLASS NEW RIGHT (information warfare – aggression) (traditional hard right) (Alt-Right-foot soldiers)

The inequalitarians

The racists

The Fashy Militants

(left equivalent = anarchists)