Curt Doolittle

Form: Quote Commentary

  • “Time to TAKE AWAY your fucking guns”—(((Gamhard McCoy))) It’s time to take aw

    —“Time to TAKE AWAY your fucking guns”—(((Gamhard McCoy)))

    It’s time to take away your citizenship, benefits, rights to property, free speech, and add 30% taxation above and beyond.

    Which one of those options do you think is more likely? šŸ˜‰

    Gonna happen this year.

    End Birthright Citizenship.

    End Migration Citizenship.

    Roll immigration back to pre 65 act.

    End all H1B, and all Non-European academic visitation.

    Require economic means of ongoing support

    Revoke citizenship to 65 Immigration Act

    Revoke citizenship for any and all individuals and their familes who have voted for, promoted, written raised money, written legislation for, violation of the constitution.

    Exit of miltiary, state, federal employment, and political positions of those people and their families.

    Monopolize military, state, federal employment, and political positions by pre-65.

    Forcible repatriation of all post 90′ immigrants.

    All will happen this year or next.

    Why? And it isn’t even hard.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-02 19:00:00 UTC

  • Irreciprocity. But creative. And Funny. (Pretty sure he just picked an upcoming

    Irreciprocity. But creative. And Funny.

    (Pretty sure he just picked an upcoming stop and had a friend film it. so it’s staged. But still twisted-funny.) https://twitter.com/noumanmaroof/status/1223808084708970496

  • TESTIMONY: LEARNING P —“Reminds me of that line from the second matrix. “You’r

    TESTIMONY: LEARNING P

    —“Reminds me of that line from the second matrix. “You’re not here to make the choice, you’ve already made it. You’re here to understand why you made it”. Always stuck with me that one.”—Aaronus TheThird

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-02 11:54:00 UTC

  • TESTIMONY —“I told my wife that P has changed the way I think. She said “No. Y

    TESTIMONY

    —“I told my wife that P has changed the way I think. She said “No. Your thinking hasn’t changed, you just understand why you have always thought that way now.”—Nathan Wiens

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-02 11:23:00 UTC

  • TESTIMONY —“When I was first exposed to propertarianism my jaw hit the floor.

    TESTIMONY

    —“When I was first exposed to propertarianism my jaw hit the floor. I love history. The context changes everything. It’s like seeing color for the first time. Few things in this world are truly simple, but it all is intuitive once you understand.”—Rick Tavi

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-02 09:19:00 UTC

  • “unpromising future for economics phd’s”— This is correct of course. It’s one

    —“unpromising future for economics phd’s”—

    This is correct of course. It’s one of Eric Weinstein’s complaints: the university system is organized for unsustainable growth, false-promising careers to researchers that can’t exist, in order to obtain cheap research labor (and cheap immigrant research labor) rather than paying researchers and doing less and better research. This problem is exacerbated by the withdrawal of the military as the primary originator of basic research funds given that military epistemology is competitive, and our failure or inability to direct research funds without military priorities, to competitive advantage.

    I expect this will be corrected rather shortly (and painfully) one way or the other.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-02 09:02:00 UTC

  • AN ARTICULATE PROGRESSIVE SO AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ARTICULATE COMPARISONS —“Progr

    AN ARTICULATE PROGRESSIVE SO AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ARTICULATE COMPARISONS

    —“Progresiveness errs on the side of openness in face of the uncertainty. Conservativeness errs on the side of “known good or reasonable” arrangements. … None are in principle superior in all cases. … We must use a third axis, rationality, to bridge our differences constructively.”—@flancian

    Progressives (consumptives) err on the side of consumption in the face of uncertainty. Conservatives(capitalizers) err on the side of saving in the face of uncertainty.

    The female consumptive herd (her children) the male capitalizing pack (their tribe).

    We must use TRADE to bridge our differences.

    (Are you starting to see yet?)

    I’m using male concrete (scientific) terms.

    You’re using female seductive (deceptive) terms.

    Once you see it you can’t un-see it. The question is adaptation possible?

    No. Hence institutions of trade.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-02 08:24:00 UTC

  • THE ONLY POLITICAL ARGUMENT —“Leftists care more about an assertion being offe

    THE ONLY POLITICAL ARGUMENT

    —“Leftists care more about an assertion being offensive than it being true.”— Ī§ĻĻŒĪ½ĪæĻ‚ @HliosX

    Yes.

    —“Hi! I am a leftist, yet I don’t think this assertion applies to me. Would you like to discuss/debate?”—Flancia @flancian

    Sure. šŸ˜‰

    Assertion: all differences are reducible to right evidentiary capitalizing, inter-temporal, reciprocal, falsificationary eugenic vs left experiential, consumptive, temporal, proportional, justificationary, dysgenic – and as such, decidable. As such all left propositions will be reducible to approval/disapproval, and right truth/falsehood.

    Cognitively left dysgenic female herd vs cognitively right eugenic male pack. We have no agency. We we are gene machines pursuing our reproductive strategies adapting them only to our class (status).

    And all speech and most importantly, all political speech is either truthful, reciprocal, meritocratic (hierarchical male right) or untruthful, irreciprocal, proportional (equalitarian female left). Right trade and truth and Left Seduction disapproval.

    The only solution is exchange. The condensation of the three classes of monarchy(judge of last resort), nobility(lords, senate), and family-business(house of commons), into a single parliamentary council, instead of adding a house of labor and a house for women eliminated the traditional european market between the classes, thereby creating a race to the majoritarian bottom, political conflict, and the incentive to immigrate vast underclasses to circumvent the western civilizational strategy of sovereignty.

    If we had added houses women (who are the only defectors driving leftward movement) would have learned how to use their access to political power in exchange, rather than using the traditional female method of undermining.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-02 07:45:00 UTC

  • THREAT PERCEPTION IN INTERNET AGE by Bill Joslin I think the threat detection is

    THREAT PERCEPTION IN INTERNET AGE

    by Bill Joslin

    I think the threat detection issue spans the entire political, soci-economic bell curve. i think think this stems from “threat signal saturation”.

    I suspect threat saturation disrupts friend foe identification.

    friend foe identification expresses differently across the bell curves –

    The left has an inverted identification – where in-group competitive drives supersede predator proximity drives.

    And the right has an amplified “err on the side of false positives” where proximity sensitivity becomes applied to friends.

    In both cases this results in a positive feedback loop which exacerbates the problem.

    We live with a nightmarish degree of anomie – social instability resulting from a breakdown of standards and values.

    In rat utopia, normie rats in proximity to the beautiful ones display this behavior – obsessive territorial marking – because they lose the ability to tell the difference from fellow colony marking from adversarial markings.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-01 20:43:00 UTC

  • WHAT IT SAYS RIGHT THERE IN TEXT… by Jerry Odom —“We hold these truths to be

    WHAT IT SAYS RIGHT THERE IN TEXT…

    by Jerry Odom

    —“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men,

    deriving their just powers from the ā€œconsentā€ of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, ….”—

    So what it says here is our rights donā€™t come from government or from words on paper. Let’s be real here the only reason that we actually create government is to protect the rights of the people.

    So, what are inalienable rights? Among the natural rights of the people, are life, liberty, and property together with the right to protect and defend them with the best possible means possible.

    So if you donā€™t have the right to life you’re dead, if you donā€™t have liberty in your servant of the government you created, if you donā€™t have a right to property and that you donā€™t have a right to life and your subject to whoever owns the property, if you donā€™t have a right to defend these things than you are slave you are not a free man, if you have to ask permission of the government protect my life my and my property then you are not a free man, inalienable rights are not subject to laws of man especially when we gave them the ability to govern based on the consent of the people.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-01 19:38:00 UTC