Curt Doolittle

Form: Reply

  • —“Curt: Are Russians Part of The West?”–

    1) Russians are certainly ethnic europeans, and at least in southern russia and ukraine, the purest ethnic europeans. 2) Russians are Aryans (which is a cultural tradition). 3) Russians are christians. 4) Russian is a slavic branch of the indo european languages. HOWEVER Russians did not go through (a) the enlightenment, (b) the renaissance, (c) the development of a middle class (d) and the development of rule of law in support of middle class economies. The reason for being being that they were conquered by the mongols and russian territory is more hostile to trade (lacking trade routes) than the rest of europe. (much like canada today). Russians were heavily enserfed, and only liberated in the 1800’s and then put back under the soviet (communist) version of serfdom. And only recently forced into a middle class trajectory. Once put on that trajectory, certain (((anti-russian))) minorities preyed upon the people, and Putin stopped that predation again. (So, this is the reason for russian preference for power and suspicion of liberalism. ) The communists were successful in industrializing the country but were unable to transfer from their (corruption) bureaucracy to middle class rule as are the chinese slowly doing. The communists were successful in preserving the family as an institution. Conversely, in most respects, Russian education is far better than the west. As such there is an asymmetry between russian culture and education (which is *far* superior) and western commerce and commercial law (which is far superior). We tend to make all or nothing propositions but this is a mistake. The optimum is the blend of american russian and german cultures. High risk american innovation, disciplined german production, and intolerant russian conservatism. Personally I love them. The more masculine and feminine and the more traditional and intolerant the better.

  • Fat Tailed Male IQ Scores

    –“Hey Curt, how would you explain the fat-tailed, high-standard-deviation distribution of male IQ scores from an evolutionary/natural selection/sexual selection standpoint?”—Yiannis Kontinopoulos I can’t take time to make a complete list but here are the most obvious factors: (a) hierarchies are necessary for decision making, and outliers facilitate hierarchy formation. (b) intelligence appears to be (very) high causal density (ie: fragile) (c) intelligence as we understand it requires time (vulnerability) even if it succeeds at condensing time. So there is equal demand for impulsivity( short reaction times). (d) habituation of advantages in large numbers is lower cost than intelligence in large numbers. (e) brains are 11x as expensive as muscles. (e) there is very little value to female intelligence (equality). Intelligence is only as valueable as it is combined with aggression and physical ability. otherwise intelligence at the cost of aggression and physical ability just leads to defeat by ‘cheaper’ group strategies. And yes that means what you think it does. Updated: Well, as the comments suggest, intelligence is to some degree an advantage for the group, even if women don’t select for it (much at all). Also, the “crazy high risk uncle” is extremely valuable for the group, even if women don’t select for it. Also, the ‘lunatic’ is advantageous for the group, even if women don’t select for it. Women select for what we consider ‘sports team members’ – at least as best as they can obtain. My point was that there is a reason it’s an outlier phenomenon: it’s expensive, it requires high causal density, women counter-select for it, and there is a limit to the value of the distribution.

  • Fat Tailed Male IQ Scores

    –“Hey Curt, how would you explain the fat-tailed, high-standard-deviation distribution of male IQ scores from an evolutionary/natural selection/sexual selection standpoint?”—Yiannis Kontinopoulos I can’t take time to make a complete list but here are the most obvious factors: (a) hierarchies are necessary for decision making, and outliers facilitate hierarchy formation. (b) intelligence appears to be (very) high causal density (ie: fragile) (c) intelligence as we understand it requires time (vulnerability) even if it succeeds at condensing time. So there is equal demand for impulsivity( short reaction times). (d) habituation of advantages in large numbers is lower cost than intelligence in large numbers. (e) brains are 11x as expensive as muscles. (e) there is very little value to female intelligence (equality). Intelligence is only as valueable as it is combined with aggression and physical ability. otherwise intelligence at the cost of aggression and physical ability just leads to defeat by ‘cheaper’ group strategies. And yes that means what you think it does. Updated: Well, as the comments suggest, intelligence is to some degree an advantage for the group, even if women don’t select for it (much at all). Also, the “crazy high risk uncle” is extremely valuable for the group, even if women don’t select for it. Also, the ‘lunatic’ is advantageous for the group, even if women don’t select for it. Women select for what we consider ‘sports team members’ – at least as best as they can obtain. My point was that there is a reason it’s an outlier phenomenon: it’s expensive, it requires high causal density, women counter-select for it, and there is a limit to the value of the distribution.

  • “Hey Curt, how would you explain the fat-tailed, high-standard-deviation distrib

    —“Hey Curt, how would you explain the fat-tailed, high-standard-deviation distribution of male IQ scores from an evolutionary/natural selection/sexual selection standpoint?”—Yiannis Kontinopoulos

    I can’t take time to make a complete list but here are the most obvious factors:

    (a) hierarchies are necessary for decision making, and outliers facilitate hierarchy formation.

    (b) intelligence appears to be (very) high causal density (ie: fragile)

    (c) intelligence as we understand it requires time (vulnerability) even if it succeeds at condensing time. So there is equal demand for impulsivity( short reaction times).

    (d) habituation of advantages in large numbers is lower cost than intelligence in large numbers.

    (e) brains are 11x as expensive as muscles.

    (e) there is very little value to female intelligence (equality).

    Intelligence is only as valueable as it is combined with aggression and physical ability. otherwise intelligence at the cost of aggression and physical ability just leads to defeat by ‘cheaper’ group strategies.

    And yes that means what you think it does.

    Updated:

    Well, as the comments suggest, intelligence is to some degree an advantage for the group, even if women don’t select for it (much at all). Also, the “crazy high risk uncle” is extremely valuable for the group, even if women don’t select for it. Also, the ‘lunatic’ is advantageous for the group, even if women don’t select for it.

    Women select for what we consider ‘sports team members’ – at least as best as they can obtain.

    My point was that there is a reason it’s an outlier phenomenon: it’s expensive, it requires high causal density, women counter-select for it, and there is a limit to the value of the distribution.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-14 08:18:00 UTC

  • “CURT: ARE RUSSIANS PART OF THE WEST?”– 1) Russians are certainly ethnic europe

    —“CURT: ARE RUSSIANS PART OF THE WEST?”–

    1) Russians are certainly ethnic europeans, and at least in southern russia and ukraine, the purest ethnic europeans.

    2) Russians are Aryans (which is a cultural tradition).

    3) Russians are christians.

    4) Russian is a slavic branch of the indo european languages.

    HOWEVER

    Russians did not go through (a) the enlightenment, (b) the renaissance, (c) the development of a middle class (d) and the development of rule of law in support of middle class economies.

    The reason for being being that they were conquered by the mongols and russian territory is more hostile to trade (lacking trade routes) than the rest of europe. (much like canada today).

    Russians were heavily enserfed, and only liberated in the 1800’s and then put back under the soviet (communist) version of serfdom. And only recently forced into a middle class trajectory. Once put on that trajectory, certain (((anti-russian))) minorities preyed upon the people, and Putin stopped that predation again. (So, this is the reason for russian preference for power and suspicion of liberalism. )

    The communists were successful in industrializing the country but were unable to transfer from their (corruption) bureaucracy to middle class rule as are the chinese slowly doing.

    The communists were successful in preserving the family as an institution.

    Conversely, in most respects, Russian education is far better than the west.

    As such there is an asymmetry between russian culture and education (which is *far* superior) and western commerce and commercial law (which is far superior).

    We tend to make all or nothing propositions but this is a mistake. The optimum is the blend of american russian and german cultures. High risk american innovation, disciplined german production, and intolerant russian conservatism.

    Personally I love them. The more masculine and feminine and the more traditional and intolerant the better.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-14 08:17:00 UTC

  • More Method To The Madness

    —“When you intersperse, or do intermissions from the hard core Propertarian stuff and add tips/topics on life, love, money, programming/tech and business especially, it psychologically shows others (not our guys, but the general public), “Shit, this guy is not a failed austrian immigrant painter living in a flophouse”, but very well studied and successful. It also teaches Propertarian utility in real life and it makes it fun. Lastly it makes it harder for enemies to attack because if they say, he doesn’t know about business, they open up and pull that out and get crushed and that association makes what you say stronger on Propertarianism.”— A Friend

    [T]here is method to the madness…. I also play king of the hill and bait constantly to make it a game. I also post things that I disagree with, or that can be interpreted other ways, to start debate. Congratulate even the smallest success. Edit and quote others to inspire them to keep trying. Audit the feed and comments.Ask others to contribute or handle those i can’t. Run experiments so others can help me and themselves. Keep a loose inventory and estimate of people who are talented and drip ideas to them as needed while letting them own the discoveries they make. And i also try to include thinking women without demanding they think or play the game as males. And Include people from as many cultures as I can so that we all transcend the century of pseudoscience and sophism. 😉 Thanks for appreciating it. 😉

  • More Method To The Madness

    —“When you intersperse, or do intermissions from the hard core Propertarian stuff and add tips/topics on life, love, money, programming/tech and business especially, it psychologically shows others (not our guys, but the general public), “Shit, this guy is not a failed austrian immigrant painter living in a flophouse”, but very well studied and successful. It also teaches Propertarian utility in real life and it makes it fun. Lastly it makes it harder for enemies to attack because if they say, he doesn’t know about business, they open up and pull that out and get crushed and that association makes what you say stronger on Propertarianism.”— A Friend

    [T]here is method to the madness…. I also play king of the hill and bait constantly to make it a game. I also post things that I disagree with, or that can be interpreted other ways, to start debate. Congratulate even the smallest success. Edit and quote others to inspire them to keep trying. Audit the feed and comments.Ask others to contribute or handle those i can’t. Run experiments so others can help me and themselves. Keep a loose inventory and estimate of people who are talented and drip ideas to them as needed while letting them own the discoveries they make. And i also try to include thinking women without demanding they think or play the game as males. And Include people from as many cultures as I can so that we all transcend the century of pseudoscience and sophism. 😉 Thanks for appreciating it. 😉

  • #NewRight #Conservative #Libertarian #NRx

    #NewRight #Conservative #Libertarian #NRx https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1005838777930182657

  • @POTUS @realDonaldTrump #Trump #TrumpKimSummit

    @POTUS @realDonaldTrump #Trump #TrumpKimSummit https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1006175276622143488

  • @POTUS @realDonaldTrump #Trump #TrumpKimSummit

    @POTUS @realDonaldTrump #Trump #TrumpKimSummit https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1006360600132415491