Form: Reply

  • BINGO

    BINGO


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-22 12:22:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1010135904084688898

    Reply addressees: @Gyeff

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1010134113322446848


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1010134113322446848

  • infantilization doesn’t help either

    infantilization doesn’t help either


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-22 11:57:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1010129699920629762

    Reply addressees: @weltmord

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1010128529378463745


    IN REPLY TO:

    @weltmord

    @curtdoolittle Overdomestication leads to poor mental stability.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1010128529378463745

  • Not Starbucks no. Other shops yes. Preferably not chains

    Not Starbucks no. Other shops yes. Preferably not chains.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-21 21:58:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1009918506727608325

    Reply addressees: @JonasBr58673834

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1009911377123774470


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1009911377123774470

  • Ragnar Redbeard and Nietzsche: Introductions to Aristocratic Ethics of Propertarianism

    —“Have you ever read Might is Right? I’m almost finished it. I’d like to know your thoughts on the topic. Can you explain how it relates to Propertarianism?”— Kelly Wilson Ragnar Redbeard (Arthur Desmond) – Might is Right Nietzche: – The Birth of Tragedy – The Geneology of Morals – Beyond Good and Evil – The Will to Power 1) The book Might is Right was written in 1890 as a derivation of Nietzsche – written in English by a Briton, with the ‘clarity’ of anglo sentiments, rather than the ‘romanticized’ prose of German sentiments. In that sense it should be taken as a more aggressive anglo restatement of Nietzsche’s works published at that time. 2) Nietzsche’s works and Redbeard’s (Arthur Desmond), were followed by the social darwinist and eugenics movements, especially (British) Herbert Spencer’s thought. They were extremely popular pre-war. (And should have remained so. That failure will haunt us for centuries.) 3) Neither Nietzsche nor Redbeard solved the problem of replacing ‘slave’ (jewish and christian) morality with aristocratic morality for the simple reason that they did not understand aristocratic morality’s origins in germanic common law. We do see that Hayek, by the late 1970’s has begun to understand but he was german again, and too ‘tepid’, where the more aggressive British Keynes and American Rawls, and the very, very, aggressive ashkenazi marxists and socialists were more successful. 4) I have, I think, in propertarianism, completed the scientific explanation of our ancient heroic morality – although I am frequently criticized for writing it so legally and dryly. Most men want something more romantic (german), or passionate (anglo), or spiritual (Italian). When in reality, it is the Russians who have begun to practice it – absence the commitment to truth and sovereignty and reciprocity. They have at least taken on the Aryan Ambition. 5) So I would say that Ragnar Redbeard is a great … let us say, Young Adult Literary introduction to aristocracy and Propertarianism, yes. Just as Nietzsche is a freshman college introduction to aristocratic ethics and Propertarianism. Where Propertarianism is a bit like the graduate school version of both. Meaning that those are both works of literary inspiration, where Propertarianism is literally ‘The Natural Law Of Reciprocity of Sovereign Peoples: The Law of Aristocratic Egalitarians.” Hope that helps Curt

  • Ragnar Redbeard and Nietzsche: Introductions to Aristocratic Ethics of Propertarianism

    —“Have you ever read Might is Right? I’m almost finished it. I’d like to know your thoughts on the topic. Can you explain how it relates to Propertarianism?”— Kelly Wilson Ragnar Redbeard (Arthur Desmond) – Might is Right Nietzche: – The Birth of Tragedy – The Geneology of Morals – Beyond Good and Evil – The Will to Power 1) The book Might is Right was written in 1890 as a derivation of Nietzsche – written in English by a Briton, with the ‘clarity’ of anglo sentiments, rather than the ‘romanticized’ prose of German sentiments. In that sense it should be taken as a more aggressive anglo restatement of Nietzsche’s works published at that time. 2) Nietzsche’s works and Redbeard’s (Arthur Desmond), were followed by the social darwinist and eugenics movements, especially (British) Herbert Spencer’s thought. They were extremely popular pre-war. (And should have remained so. That failure will haunt us for centuries.) 3) Neither Nietzsche nor Redbeard solved the problem of replacing ‘slave’ (jewish and christian) morality with aristocratic morality for the simple reason that they did not understand aristocratic morality’s origins in germanic common law. We do see that Hayek, by the late 1970’s has begun to understand but he was german again, and too ‘tepid’, where the more aggressive British Keynes and American Rawls, and the very, very, aggressive ashkenazi marxists and socialists were more successful. 4) I have, I think, in propertarianism, completed the scientific explanation of our ancient heroic morality – although I am frequently criticized for writing it so legally and dryly. Most men want something more romantic (german), or passionate (anglo), or spiritual (Italian). When in reality, it is the Russians who have begun to practice it – absence the commitment to truth and sovereignty and reciprocity. They have at least taken on the Aryan Ambition. 5) So I would say that Ragnar Redbeard is a great … let us say, Young Adult Literary introduction to aristocracy and Propertarianism, yes. Just as Nietzsche is a freshman college introduction to aristocratic ethics and Propertarianism. Where Propertarianism is a bit like the graduate school version of both. Meaning that those are both works of literary inspiration, where Propertarianism is literally ‘The Natural Law Of Reciprocity of Sovereign Peoples: The Law of Aristocratic Egalitarians.” Hope that helps Curt

  • How Propertarianism Would Judge Hitler’s Germany’s Relocation Policy

    (ANSWER TO A “BAIT POST” – BTW: I BLOCKED THE INDIVIDUAL WHO REQUESTED IT.) SOME RADICAL LEFTIST ASKED ME HOW PROPERTARIANISM WOULD JUDGE HITLER’S GERMANY’S RELOCATION POLICY It was a dishonest attempt to bait hate speech. I don’t do hate speech. Ever. I do Science and Natural Law. Here is the Answer: (a) That high trust is nearly exclusive to the germanic and Japanese peoples, and is their civilization’s competitive advantage. (b) That outside of scientific researchers (scientists) non kin shouldn’t cohabitate in the fist place, because it reduces trust, and creates those exact conditions of conflict. (The upper intellectual classes are more autistic and less dependent upon collective for information, and the lower classes the opposite). (c) That peoples that specialize in rent seeking and profiting from moral hazard in particular shouldn’t be hosted (any more than those dependent upon begging and thievery) because it leads to prosecution, persecution, and at times, extermination – as well as destroying trust and raising costs of policing the commons. (d) That peoples who practice separatism of any kind shouldn’t be tolerated by host societies for those same reasons. (e) That this process of separation, if pursued, should be legislated with a multi-year timeline, later prosecuted for non-compliance, and then subject to Hoppe’s “Forcible Removal”. (f) That the original relocation model, taken from the Soviet Relocations, had been successful there, and truthfully, throughout all human history. (g) That the combination of relocation (forcible removal) and a nearly impossible war was unmanageable. And that they could not fund both. Had they not been pressured by Russia into war, they would have succeeded.

  • How Propertarianism Would Judge Hitler’s Germany’s Relocation Policy

    (ANSWER TO A “BAIT POST” – BTW: I BLOCKED THE INDIVIDUAL WHO REQUESTED IT.) SOME RADICAL LEFTIST ASKED ME HOW PROPERTARIANISM WOULD JUDGE HITLER’S GERMANY’S RELOCATION POLICY It was a dishonest attempt to bait hate speech. I don’t do hate speech. Ever. I do Science and Natural Law. Here is the Answer: (a) That high trust is nearly exclusive to the germanic and Japanese peoples, and is their civilization’s competitive advantage. (b) That outside of scientific researchers (scientists) non kin shouldn’t cohabitate in the fist place, because it reduces trust, and creates those exact conditions of conflict. (The upper intellectual classes are more autistic and less dependent upon collective for information, and the lower classes the opposite). (c) That peoples that specialize in rent seeking and profiting from moral hazard in particular shouldn’t be hosted (any more than those dependent upon begging and thievery) because it leads to prosecution, persecution, and at times, extermination – as well as destroying trust and raising costs of policing the commons. (d) That peoples who practice separatism of any kind shouldn’t be tolerated by host societies for those same reasons. (e) That this process of separation, if pursued, should be legislated with a multi-year timeline, later prosecuted for non-compliance, and then subject to Hoppe’s “Forcible Removal”. (f) That the original relocation model, taken from the Soviet Relocations, had been successful there, and truthfully, throughout all human history. (g) That the combination of relocation (forcible removal) and a nearly impossible war was unmanageable. And that they could not fund both. Had they not been pressured by Russia into war, they would have succeeded.

  • omg…. that’s awesome… lol

    omg…. that’s awesome… lol


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-20 22:49:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1009568966782660608

    Reply addressees: @DanielTravis138

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1009568736624414727


    IN REPLY TO:

    @DanielTravis138

    @curtdoolittle for the win https://t.co/soFnnjnLVT

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1009568736624414727

  • I haven’t tested in a long time but in college about 80wpm. I assume I’m quite a

    I haven’t tested in a long time but in college about 80wpm. I assume I’m quite a bit faster now. As fast or faster than a professional typist – which isnt terribly uncommon for those of us who spent a lot of time programming. (It’s also the reason I make so many typos.)


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-20 14:33:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1009444182732279808

    Reply addressees: @JonasBr58673834

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1009442570014019584


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1009442570014019584

  • You can’t really. We all pursue what we understand. The young and powerless male

    You can’t really. We all pursue what we understand. The young and powerless male can only conceive of simplistic solutions that he can imagine. The idea of producing institutional solutions is too ‘boring’, when fantasies provide cheaper and more ready emotional stimulation.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-20 00:20:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1009229468924284928

    Reply addressees: @bottomtextpunk

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1009225429755006977


    IN REPLY TO:

    @bottomtextpunk

    @curtdoolittle A person I know, he falls into all those categories. He was heavily into Propertarianism until he got sucked into NeoAbsolutism, which now he regards it to be superior to all other theories. How do we fix him

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1009225429755006977