(FB 1553015815 Timestamp) jeez brandon hayes. you got to the heart of it didn’t you. nice.
Form: Reply
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1553173829 Timestamp) —“Do you have any ideas on how to stop Civil War? Or is it inevitable and desirable in your mind? .. Do you have any thoughts as to how that can be done, without civil war?”—Stephen Wells I think it’s inevitable unless we devolve the federal government. My intention is to make a clear set of demands (constitutional reformations) that are actually preferable to the majority, and then to make demand for them great enough, and the threat of revolution serious enough, that revolution is not necessary, and these are adopted. The problem is nothing I propose is all that complicated and most of it is known, but it will deprive media, academy, state, and financial sector rent seekers of their status and wealth, and so it is not possible to enact these rules by any other means than revolt. The anglo model succeeds because it requires only modification of the law, not the people – that is the virtue of rule of law. So we have had many ‘revolutions’ in the anglo world but none like the french. However, if we need a french revolution here – we will have it. And yes I will revel in it.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1553173829 Timestamp) —“Do you have any ideas on how to stop Civil War? Or is it inevitable and desirable in your mind? .. Do you have any thoughts as to how that can be done, without civil war?”—Stephen Wells I think it’s inevitable unless we devolve the federal government. My intention is to make a clear set of demands (constitutional reformations) that are actually preferable to the majority, and then to make demand for them great enough, and the threat of revolution serious enough, that revolution is not necessary, and these are adopted. The problem is nothing I propose is all that complicated and most of it is known, but it will deprive media, academy, state, and financial sector rent seekers of their status and wealth, and so it is not possible to enact these rules by any other means than revolt. The anglo model succeeds because it requires only modification of the law, not the people – that is the virtue of rule of law. So we have had many ‘revolutions’ in the anglo world but none like the french. However, if we need a french revolution here – we will have it. And yes I will revel in it.
-
(FB 1553440354 Timestamp) Quote by Michael Abbott CurtD: Correct. Although, we c
(FB 1553440354 Timestamp) Quote by Michael Abbott CurtD: Correct. Although, we can say, conversely, that both freudian theory, and feminine strategy, are genetic expressions of the same interests, and that neither freud nor woman chooses their strategy, but is an animal barely conscious, and simply following baser instinct.
-
(FB 1553440354 Timestamp) Quote by Michael Abbott CurtD: Correct. Although, we c
(FB 1553440354 Timestamp) Quote by Michael Abbott CurtD: Correct. Although, we can say, conversely, that both freudian theory, and feminine strategy, are genetic expressions of the same interests, and that neither freud nor woman chooses their strategy, but is an animal barely conscious, and simply following baser instinct.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1553443464 Timestamp) —“Not sure “continuous recursive disambiguation” really clarifies anything!”—Dennis Spain You probably don’t know how to write software, haven’t read turing, nor chomsky, because that’s what ‘language’ means. Continuous (a stream of sounds), recursive (passing ‘state’ – you might think of this incorrectly as ‘accumulating’), disambiguation (removing error). Just as science is falsificationary, language is falsificationary. Sounds in a stream should result in continuous decreases in ambiguity until the point at which we establish a context, a contract for meaning, and a warranty of due diligence limiting that meaning. Which is what a ‘grammar’ means: Rules of continuous recursive disambiguation. (Turing > Chomsky) + (Weber > Mises > Rothbard > Hoppe) + (Hayek) -> Doolittle
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1553443464 Timestamp) —“Not sure “continuous recursive disambiguation” really clarifies anything!”—Dennis Spain You probably don’t know how to write software, haven’t read turing, nor chomsky, because that’s what ‘language’ means. Continuous (a stream of sounds), recursive (passing ‘state’ – you might think of this incorrectly as ‘accumulating’), disambiguation (removing error). Just as science is falsificationary, language is falsificationary. Sounds in a stream should result in continuous decreases in ambiguity until the point at which we establish a context, a contract for meaning, and a warranty of due diligence limiting that meaning. Which is what a ‘grammar’ means: Rules of continuous recursive disambiguation. (Turing > Chomsky) + (Weber > Mises > Rothbard > Hoppe) + (Hayek) -> Doolittle
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1553626495 Timestamp) —“I follow American renaissance and they canât figure why we do not demonstrate in group preference to the degree other so. — Philip Clark Philip, this is a good question. Because it is not a single cause, but a group of environmental causes that produced greater ‘evolution’ in our race (subspecies) than others. I can narrow down to these three groups of causes: Genetic Population Scarcity Bias (Possible?) Neoteny Bias (Certain) Homogeneity bias. (certain) Time under Eugenic Pressure (certain) Socio Political Time under Cold Weather bias (certain) Time under Agrarianism bias (certain) Time under Tripartism Time under Sovereignty (Aristocratic Egalitarianism) (likely) Time under micro-corporatism/manorialism (certain) Strategic The Rise and Fall of the Empire, and resulting expansion. The Plague(s) Commercial bias (certain) Time under own and in “Power” Bias (likely) Christianity Bias (approaching certain) ((())) Alien Bias in the 20th+ Century. A small homogenous population that survives the ice age is dependent upon one another for self defense, that must work together to divide labor to weather winters, that practices eugenics in every direction.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1553543874 Timestamp) David Carr —“Curt, I would like to draw your attention to a historical curiosity. Some time between 600 and 800 AD all the nations that comprised Western Civilization at the time gave up their unique writing systems and accepted an “innovation” from Holy Rome that replaced the traditional legends of symbols with a phonetic reaction ethic. This appears to have given us an edge in the realm of creative daring, at the expense of societal cohesion and discipline as a social standard.”— Um. This is an false narrative. The Futhark was an invention in response to other writing systems, sometime after 300. We do not know where it originated. There are stories of migration of leaders from the caucuses. But trade was common and it come from general contact. It is most similar to Linear B, early Greek, and Etruscan – though simplified for carving. It’s less similar to Roman, Phoenician, or Cuneiform, which were for writing (roman, phoenician), or stamping in clay (cuneiform) more so than carving. Latin and Greek were the written language of literate peoples. And remained so until printing, with german literature dating back to the Carolingian period (700). The vocabulary and ideas in greek and latin, vocabulary and ideas in french, and vocabularies and ideas in german were as tehy are today, vocabulary and ideas of the classes. I disagree with your position. The reason they remain ‘cohesive’ is because they have not been invaded, and are too far behind the curve of adoption of modernity. —Societies that retain their legends of symbols (Hebrew, Arabic, every Asian language, etc) do not have our modern problems. They remain fairly cohesive, avoid suicidal ideologies, generally operate as societies. Might it be time to return to our roots, and establish a Legend of symbols within the Anglophone paradigm?”— you call chinese and arabic peoples cohesive? indian? No, they are just backward. We are in the lead, we experiment. we adapt, and sometimes we adapt poorly. This time, it’s because of semitic influence just like it was in the imperial period.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1553626495 Timestamp) —“I follow American renaissance and they canât figure why we do not demonstrate in group preference to the degree other so. — Philip Clark Philip, this is a good question. Because it is not a single cause, but a group of environmental causes that produced greater ‘evolution’ in our race (subspecies) than others. I can narrow down to these three groups of causes: Genetic Population Scarcity Bias (Possible?) Neoteny Bias (Certain) Homogeneity bias. (certain) Time under Eugenic Pressure (certain) Socio Political Time under Cold Weather bias (certain) Time under Agrarianism bias (certain) Time under Tripartism Time under Sovereignty (Aristocratic Egalitarianism) (likely) Time under micro-corporatism/manorialism (certain) Strategic The Rise and Fall of the Empire, and resulting expansion. The Plague(s) Commercial bias (certain) Time under own and in “Power” Bias (likely) Christianity Bias (approaching certain) ((())) Alien Bias in the 20th+ Century. A small homogenous population that survives the ice age is dependent upon one another for self defense, that must work together to divide labor to weather winters, that practices eugenics in every direction.