Curt Doolittle

Form: Quote Commentary

  • “Imagine what that will do for us – to recognize ORGSM as violence, and to treat

    —“Imagine what that will do for us – to recognize ORGSM as violence, and to treat its uncontrolled expression just as we do male violence? Truly this is warp-drive for the human mental condition. We will be limitless. We will Become Gods through this discovery…we will revert back to the mud and be another forgotten species without it.”—Joseph E. Postma

  • “Imagine what that will do for us – to recognize ORGSM as violence, and to treat

    —“Imagine what that will do for us – to recognize ORGSM as violence, and to treat its uncontrolled expression just as we do male violence? Truly this is warp-drive for the human mental condition. We will be limitless. We will Become Gods through this discovery…we will revert back to the mud and be another forgotten species without it.”—Joseph E. Postma

  • Access to Long Game via Explicit Strategy

    ACCESS TO LONG GAME VIA EXPLICIT STRATEGY by Patrick Smyth (via Alain Dwight)

    “Leftists have been playing the long game for the past century, slowly insinuating themselves into powerful positions, and the right wing has been largely ignorant of it until roughly the past decade. In other words, leftist have been led by an explicit strategy (Marxism), while the right is only just formulating theirs (Propertarianism).”

  • Access to Long Game via Explicit Strategy

    ACCESS TO LONG GAME VIA EXPLICIT STRATEGY by Patrick Smyth (via Alain Dwight)

    “Leftists have been playing the long game for the past century, slowly insinuating themselves into powerful positions, and the right wing has been largely ignorant of it until roughly the past decade. In other words, leftist have been led by an explicit strategy (Marxism), while the right is only just formulating theirs (Propertarianism).”

  • White Identity Arises in Response to Collective Threat

    WHITE IDENTITY ARISES IN RESPONSE TO COLLECTIVE THREAT via: Patrick Smyth, Alain Dwight

    “In summary, at their origins the Goths were significantly ethnic–in the fourth century around 20-50 percent being a freemen class with at least a sense of Gothic identity if not biological kinship […]. However, group identity was most important under conditions of threat or expansion. After attaining dominance in Spain, this group identity tended to dissipate, replaced by a class-structured society where elites were composed of both Romans and Goths, with a great deal of intermarriage. Family strategizing related to social class became more important than group identity. This is a good example of the weakness of extended kinship bonds among Western peoples and the tendency to splinter in the absence of threat.”

    • Kevin MacDonald, Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition

  • White Identity Arises in Response to Collective Threat

    WHITE IDENTITY ARISES IN RESPONSE TO COLLECTIVE THREAT via: Patrick Smyth, Alain Dwight

    “In summary, at their origins the Goths were significantly ethnic–in the fourth century around 20-50 percent being a freemen class with at least a sense of Gothic identity if not biological kinship […]. However, group identity was most important under conditions of threat or expansion. After attaining dominance in Spain, this group identity tended to dissipate, replaced by a class-structured society where elites were composed of both Romans and Goths, with a great deal of intermarriage. Family strategizing related to social class became more important than group identity. This is a good example of the weakness of extended kinship bonds among Western peoples and the tendency to splinter in the absence of threat.”

    • Kevin MacDonald, Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition

  • Why Red Means Red in Almost Every Language

    Why Red Means Red in Almost Every Language – Issue 76: Language – Nautilus nautil.us Joel Davis This is an excellent example of marginal indifference in mental emotional and physical experiences. That we create narratives (fantasy narratives) to increase our scope of decidability within groups, by internally consistent systems of measurement (paradigms), doesn’t mean that the archetypes, plots, and patterns of rise and fall make vary whatsoever. They don’t. Period. All that matters is the competitive, <- cooperative, <- choice and < – sedative strategies embedded in the narrative. Just as hollywood has run out of narratives, and must devolve like every culture into increasingly complex series of rise and fall sequences, by increasingly complex combination of archetypes ( biases), leading eventually to either the richness of the hindo, or dead to the calcification of the abrahamic, or to the abandonment of the buddhist or stoic, these processes are deterministic and dependent upon easily identifiable variables. In other words forensic analysis (disambiguation, deflation, and operationalization) of every single mythology whether spiritual – occult -supernatural, magical-pseudoscientific, or allegorical-ideal-sophomoric, or simply (as we do in western literature) philosophy – essay – story – novel. The fact than one does not want to abandon his emotional satisfaction from experiencing those different philosophical sophomoric, pseudoscientific magical, and supernatural occult narratives, is no different from any other addiction. It’s just an addiction. Which is what buddhism negatively and the stoic-epicurean method positively seek to produce in REALITY not in imagination. Yes it is entirely possible to use narratives to create visions upon which people will coalesce because it presents a new set of paradigms, producing a new system of measurement, around which they can independently, without explicitly organization, coordinate their actions, toward a shared goal That is the purpose of all narratives whether at one or multiple points on the competitive< cooperative< choice and < sedative spectrum. And yes we can create those narratives in any of the grammars whether the most scientific or the most complete and extended conflation of occult, magical, sophomoric. But like there are only three weapons of influence (force-physical, ostracization-emotional, payment-intellectual), and only three sets of senses (physical, emotional, intellectual), there are only three means of circumventing reality: Magic (physical), occult (emotional) , sophomoric (intellectual), and there are only so many primary emotions (excitement-calm, reward-fear, dominance-submission), only three personality clusters (feminine-beta male, ascendent male (libertarian), and dominant male (conservative), and only so many personality traits derived from them (maybe 4-6), only so many archetypes that can be derived from them (maybe a dozen), and only one root narrative (rise -fall in some combination), and only so many plots (at most 30 or so). In other words, there is no narrative that any human being can compose for the purposes of providing a paradigm for individual, group, or national action, that is not reducible to a very simple strategy of acquisition using those variables. So when you say I have no theory, it’s simply not true. Its the most precise, fullly accounted theory ever developed and the reason is simply because the 20th gave us so man y political failures, but it gave us information as the unit of measurement for modeling all of the universe, it gave us programming(directed) and AI(self organizing), it gave us cognitive science, and it gave us biochemistry, and genetics. And sorry but my work is built upon nothing but entropy upward competing with evidence top down. And i know it is humiliating for sophists (verbalists) who concieve of the world verbally, as it is for occultists who concieve of the world emotionally, but this is the story of our evolution of knowledge: the incremental reduction of ignorance by the incremental increase in the precision of measurement of categories, by reducing them to sets of constant relations coherent, consistent, correspondent, and existentially possible, in the universe under those deterministic rules we call realism, naturalism, and operationalism

  • Why Red Means Red in Almost Every Language

    Why Red Means Red in Almost Every Language – Issue 76: Language – Nautilus nautil.us Joel Davis This is an excellent example of marginal indifference in mental emotional and physical experiences. That we create narratives (fantasy narratives) to increase our scope of decidability within groups, by internally consistent systems of measurement (paradigms), doesn’t mean that the archetypes, plots, and patterns of rise and fall make vary whatsoever. They don’t. Period. All that matters is the competitive, <- cooperative, <- choice and < – sedative strategies embedded in the narrative. Just as hollywood has run out of narratives, and must devolve like every culture into increasingly complex series of rise and fall sequences, by increasingly complex combination of archetypes ( biases), leading eventually to either the richness of the hindo, or dead to the calcification of the abrahamic, or to the abandonment of the buddhist or stoic, these processes are deterministic and dependent upon easily identifiable variables. In other words forensic analysis (disambiguation, deflation, and operationalization) of every single mythology whether spiritual – occult -supernatural, magical-pseudoscientific, or allegorical-ideal-sophomoric, or simply (as we do in western literature) philosophy – essay – story – novel. The fact than one does not want to abandon his emotional satisfaction from experiencing those different philosophical sophomoric, pseudoscientific magical, and supernatural occult narratives, is no different from any other addiction. It’s just an addiction. Which is what buddhism negatively and the stoic-epicurean method positively seek to produce in REALITY not in imagination. Yes it is entirely possible to use narratives to create visions upon which people will coalesce because it presents a new set of paradigms, producing a new system of measurement, around which they can independently, without explicitly organization, coordinate their actions, toward a shared goal That is the purpose of all narratives whether at one or multiple points on the competitive< cooperative< choice and < sedative spectrum. And yes we can create those narratives in any of the grammars whether the most scientific or the most complete and extended conflation of occult, magical, sophomoric. But like there are only three weapons of influence (force-physical, ostracization-emotional, payment-intellectual), and only three sets of senses (physical, emotional, intellectual), there are only three means of circumventing reality: Magic (physical), occult (emotional) , sophomoric (intellectual), and there are only so many primary emotions (excitement-calm, reward-fear, dominance-submission), only three personality clusters (feminine-beta male, ascendent male (libertarian), and dominant male (conservative), and only so many personality traits derived from them (maybe 4-6), only so many archetypes that can be derived from them (maybe a dozen), and only one root narrative (rise -fall in some combination), and only so many plots (at most 30 or so). In other words, there is no narrative that any human being can compose for the purposes of providing a paradigm for individual, group, or national action, that is not reducible to a very simple strategy of acquisition using those variables. So when you say I have no theory, it’s simply not true. Its the most precise, fullly accounted theory ever developed and the reason is simply because the 20th gave us so man y political failures, but it gave us information as the unit of measurement for modeling all of the universe, it gave us programming(directed) and AI(self organizing), it gave us cognitive science, and it gave us biochemistry, and genetics. And sorry but my work is built upon nothing but entropy upward competing with evidence top down. And i know it is humiliating for sophists (verbalists) who concieve of the world verbally, as it is for occultists who concieve of the world emotionally, but this is the story of our evolution of knowledge: the incremental reduction of ignorance by the incremental increase in the precision of measurement of categories, by reducing them to sets of constant relations coherent, consistent, correspondent, and existentially possible, in the universe under those deterministic rules we call realism, naturalism, and operationalism

  • Fallacy of White Privilege: Demanding Ingroup Benefits While Maintaining Outgroup Status.

    FALLACY OF WHITE PRIVILEGE: DEMANDING INGROUP BENEFITS WHILE MAINTAINING OUTGROUP STATUS. by Bill Joslin (via Justin Allred) (canon) Better stated as in-group members pay for membership via opportunity cost to not betray in-group trust. The incentive is clear. The benefits of maintaining membership outweighs the opportunity costs of not betraying trust of the in-group. This framing now includes class. Lower classes are on the cusp of this equation where betraying ingroup trust outweighs membership (i.e. crime and fraud). And outgroup members have no benefit of membership so have no incentive to take on the opportunity cost. “White privilege” distills down to outgroup con-artistry for why they should have ingroup benefits without paying the cost of membership…. And now we have the crux of the liberal philosophy and the common interests between lower class, migrants, academics and unassimilated sub-groups… All demanding ingroup benefits while maintaining outgroup status. Edit

  • I Don’t Really Recommend Philosophy

    —” might have done better by reading the summaries of the major philosophers first instead of going through their complete works one by one. Still, I’m going through them pretty fast.”— Martin Štěpán

    I don’t really recommend philosophy, but science and economics instead. That said, myself I just read the Encyclopedia of Philosophy. And most of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, and I don’t know how many summaries of the works of philosophers before I ‘bothered’ with the source material. And even then, except for starting with aristotle and plato like everyone else, I worked backwards from the present to the past. Because it’s readily apparent from that process what’s worth reading and what’s drivel.