Curt Doolittle

Form: Quote Commentary

  • BLACK PANTHERS BECOME LIBERTARIANS? —“Asked by this reporter what his group’s

    BLACK PANTHERS BECOME LIBERTARIANS?

    —“Asked by this reporter what his group’s endgame is, Omowale replied:

    The end game is land ownership. The endgame is our own government in a nation within a nation. Okay. So we claim the states of Louisiana, we claim the states of Mississippi, we claim the states of South Carolina, we claim the states of Alabama, and we claim the states of Georgia.

    We just need to start migrating back to those states and taking control of the economics in those states. If black people move in, most definitely white people will move out. So it’s not a hard process for us to have our own country within a country.”—-

    smart guy

    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-10 22:30:00 UTC

  • “CREATE A COUNTRY WITHIN A COUNTRY” Great idea. Different peoples need different

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/07/10/exclusive-new-black-panther-leader-country-within/PANTHERS: “CREATE A COUNTRY WITHIN A COUNTRY”

    Great idea. Different peoples need different states so that they can construct the commons that suit their interests.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-10 22:28:00 UTC

  • THE BEST WAY TO CULL THE BOTTOM APPEARS TO BE TO LEAVE THEM BEHIND AND MOVE AWAY

    THE BEST WAY TO CULL THE BOTTOM APPEARS TO BE TO LEAVE THEM BEHIND AND MOVE AWAY

    —“East Asians (Chinese, Japanese and Koreans) obtain the highest mean IQ at 105. Europeans follow with an IQ of 100. Some ways below these are the Inuit or Eskimos (IQ 91), South East Asians (IQ 87), Native American Indians (IQ 87), Pacific Islanders (IQ 85), and South Asians and North Africans (IQ 84). Well below these are the sub-Saharan Africans (IQ 67), the Australian Aborigines (IQ 62), the Bushmen of the Kalahari Desert, and the Pygmies of the Congo rain forests (IQ 54).”—

    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-09 08:28:00 UTC

  • EXISTS. EVIDENCE ONCE AGAIN THAT JEHOVA IS THE DEVIL

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n8wQceQq_YEVIL EXISTS. EVIDENCE ONCE AGAIN THAT JEHOVA IS THE DEVIL

    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-07 02:35:00 UTC

  • ELI ON THE RATIONAL RISK PURSUIT AND AVERSION OF GENDERS —” While there certai

    ELI ON THE RATIONAL RISK PURSUIT AND AVERSION OF GENDERS

    —” While there certainly can be exceptions, in general, women are going to be more risk averse and men more risk tolerant.

    That’s a sensible risk management strategy. If a man fails, (in contrast to a woman) the individual consequences may be severe, but the consequences to the group are less severe, because a man doesn’t have a uterus. On the other end, men can’t afford NOT to take risks because they have to *demonstrate* value, and if they don’t, they’ll be left behind by men who do.

    Women, on the other hand, can afford not to take risks, because their uterii automatically give them some value, and so they’re usually better off playing it safe.

    So this division of risk-taking makes evolutionary sense for all parties.

    The problem comes when women attempt to IMPOSE their risk aversion on men as well, and this prevents men, not just from failing, but also from succeeding. And so it’s basically pointless even having men under those conditions, because they’re only women without uterii. And it prevents women from sharing in the successes that men can only obtain by taking risks.

    But this condition is unstable, because that society will be highly susceptable to revolt or conquest by aggressive, risk-taking, males. (Think “Demolition Man.”) And when push comes to shove, the effeminate males will simply be killed, and the risk-averse women will fold to save themselves.”— Eli Harman

    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-05 08:15:00 UTC

  • think those of us who study comparative civilizations take the opposite approach

    http://johnquiggin.com/2016/07/04/anti-militarism/I think those of us who study comparative civilizations take the opposite approach, and that is, that one of the reasons that western civilization has advanced FASTER than the rest, in each epoch, is precisely BECAUSE of frequent conflicts between smaller states. And that the central issue that has faced us since the french revolution, is the attempt to create massive states on the chinese model (meaning America and the EU) rather than continuing our western evolutionary process of religioous, philosophical, commercial, legal, and military conflict. Competition in the production of goods and services, in the production of commons, in the production of high arts, and sciences, is arguably impoverished by consumptive stability.

    Lets look at the reasons for the great war: Napoleonic expansion of the fiat state, and the rest of europe’s reaction in defense of it. This caused the rise of germany out of the european heartland of three hundred princedom’s. The hansiatic germanic expansion in to estern europe had achieved on the continent what russia had achieved in the orient, and the atlantic nations in the new world.

    Three great pressures built: First was the failure of the slavs to create a core state from either Lithuania or poland so that the eastern European civilization could rise to an enlightenment of their own. Second was Russian messianic expansion after the fall of the ottoman empire, and their attempt to restore orthodox civilization. Third was the fear by the UK that further expansion of Russia (or Germany) would result in an imbalance to the existing balance of powers.

    Now, heterodox or not, because it conflicts with the self-congratulating western virtuous narrative, it’s pretty clear in hindsight that we were wrong to interfere with german attempts at expansion and in doing so we English speakers doomed western civilization because of our conversion from moral landholders to utilitarian mercantilists.

    And that is what I ‘hear’ when you’re making the above argument: that you have not yet learned the lessons of history. That the law of diminishing returns occurs very quickly, over 10M people.

    The eradication of the military elite from the government of the USA since the late fifties (for the first time in western history) largely at the will of the left, has in no doubt exacerbated the military industrial complex by removing the ability to alter policy to control it.

    War is not bad, or good. Any more than Violence is Bad or Good. Any more than the proxy for violence we all democracy is bad or good. Democracy, War and Violence can be put to immoral or moral use.

    The question is whether we put our efforts into moral or immoral uses.

    The destruction of the family and the hybridization of cultures is not a good no matter how much consumption it produces – and we know that from the data.

    But mainstream economists are very happy with their measures, and so they seek to expand their measures, without realizing this measure is a methodological selection bias.

    We are not happier than we were in 1960.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-04 04:18:00 UTC

  • TIME TO TEACH ELITES THEY ARE NOTHING WITHOUT THEIR PEOPLE (by Eli Harman ) Elit

    TIME TO TEACH ELITES THEY ARE NOTHING WITHOUT THEIR PEOPLE

    (by Eli Harman )

    Elites are naturally less racist, less ethnocentric, more cosmopolitan, than the lower classes. Elites can interact with *other* elites as peers. They don’t have to squabble over pieces of pie because they can make pie.

    But the lower classes are justifiably racist, nationalistic, xenophobic, because they are in direct competition over resources they don’t create, infrastructure, services, social spending, jobs, and so on and so forth.

    Additionally, the higher impulsivity of the lower classes increases the frictions that arise from differences and proximity. And they can’t afford to isolate themselves from these.

    The classes can cooperate on common interests. And elites can cooperate with foreign elites. But in order for these two imperatives not to conflict, and for classes not to conflict, elites must stop claiming, defending, exercising, and sacralizing a “right” to betray and sacrifice their lower classes to others.

    A people are less without their elites. But elites are nothing without their people.

    Time to teach them.

    H/t Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-04 01:34:00 UTC

  • ABSOLUTELY CORRECT ANSWER: Well, if we call upon William of Ockham’s advice to c

    http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/2016/07/cognitive-biases-ideology-control.htmlTHE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT ANSWER:

    Well, if we call upon William of Ockham’s advice to criticize your psychological attribution it’s much more likely that you are engaging in selection bias, as well as rationalization, in order to justify the use of your methodology, and its measures, to produce what it is that you measure, rather than what OTHERS are measuring.

    In this case, they’re measuring the full portfolio of needs and you are not.

    So let’s look at why:

    Because your aggregates do not take into account the full cost of your recommendations: genetic, institutional, cultural capital is the most expensive investment we have made and you’re encouraging spending it in favor of increasing populations and increasing consumption despite the overwhelming empirical evidence that it doesn’t improve happiness.

    Because there are a lot of voters who intuit if they cannot fully articulate, that the cost to the family, to the civic order, to the culture, to the civilization, to history and to kin, is far higher than any incremental benefit that you can promise from increases in productivity and consumption.

    Because it has become obvious that the externalities produced by your policies have created an increasingly fragile social order that cannot survive shocks in a world in which we no longer have cultural, institutional, and technological advantages that allow our middle and upper classes and our militaries to provide asymmetric economic benefits to our working, clerical, and professional classes.

    Because it has become obvious that the business cycle theory is correct, and that each attempt we make to soften the correction merely extends this correction as well as all corrections that follow.

    Because it has become obvious that the American and European experiment have produced precisely the failure that the Chinese encountered in their post-warring-states period where the bureaucracy absorbed the professional class to a degree that the civilization increasingly stagnated.

    Because a lot of reasons.

    Now, you are resorting to what we call the rhetorical fallacy of “psychologism” which is the modern equivalent of the theological prohibition on sin, and nothing more.

    People act in their rational self-interest, but their rational self-interest beyond a certain limited scope, is to preserve their status, family, and culture in contrast to other families and cultures.

    The right (aristocratic) philosophy of the west is reducible to the Anglo-Saxon Bipartite Manorial mandate to produce great families as the central unit of policy, production, and reproduction.

    The left (underclass) philosophy of the counter-empirical-enlightenment, is reducible to the attempt to remove the eugenic advantage of good families and to raise ‘bad’ families to equal footing.

    Apparently, left-leaning economists do not study the consequences of Islamic expansion and slave trade on the civilization after 1100, and the decline of the near east and north Africa as a consequence.

    So it is that people correctly intuit that their “portfolio of capital” is no longer being benefitted by leftist expansion. It is one thing to provide reciprocal insurance to near kin with shared history, and another to consume genetic, institutional, cultural, and historical capital for the sake of increasing consumption that has no material impact and merely returns our cities into medieval ghettos, and modern favelas.

    When we just spent over thirteen hundred years trying to reverse those possibiliites where all other civilizations in human history have failed.

    That is why.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-03 11:48:00 UTC

  • RECIPROCAL INSURANCE —“The Salic Law outlines a unique way of securing the pay

    RECIPROCAL INSURANCE

    —“The Salic Law outlines a unique way of securing the payment of money owed. It is called the Chrenecruda (or crenecruda, chren ceude, crinnecruda).[21] In cases where the debtor could not pay back a loan in full they were forced to clear out everything from their home. If the debt still could not be paid off the owner could collect dust from all four corners of the house and cross the threshold. The debtor then turned and face the house with their next of kin gathered behind them. The debtor threw the dust over their shoulder. The person (or persons) that the dust fell upon was then responsible for the payment of the debt. The process continued through the family until the debt was paid. Chrenecruda helped secure loans within the Frankish society. It intertwined the loosely gathered tribes and helped to establish government authority. The process made a single person part of a whole group.”—

    Hence we make people responsible for the actions of their group.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-03 09:45:00 UTC

  • THREE PARABLES (by William L. Benge) THE ADULT AND THE FAMILY PURSE If a mother,

    THREE PARABLES

    (by William L. Benge)

    THE ADULT AND THE FAMILY PURSE

    If a mother, given food money, comes home with a new red dress instead of the family’s groceries, the youngest children may not sense the significance of it. Probably the older children would understand, and feel some angst. And certainly, the husband understands. And is concerned. With the conversations that ensue between the parents, all but the very young children will initially grasp the mother’s impropriety and consequences.

    Remedy? The father must pay a visit to the merchant, use his powers of persuasion to return the dress, and then proceed to spend those funds on needed groceries.

    This is an anecdote, a metaphor for our own times.

    THE TODDLERS

    Westerners steeped in the lunacy of progressivism (pseudoscience/marxism) are blind to harm created by their child-like overly simplistic outlook: only when faced with immediate hunger or similar dire consequences will the truth about irresponsible actions register and matter.

    Conservatives will have to use core arguments to make any headway with this ideological demographic. Except that regards such core arguments, sadly; conservatives do not yet possess or are not broadly aware of them.

    That’s a problem.

    THE PERSUADER

    Determined to achieve the single desired outcome, the father may have to pull out all stops and place all options on the table in his negotiations with the merchant; which — who knows? — might have to include legal or physical warfare.

    One thing is clear in his mind. He will do all within his power to watch after, care for and feed his children. Even if it means protecting them against a deviant mother.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-07-03 05:44:00 UTC