Curt Doolittle

Form: Sketch

  • ARISTOCRACY VS GENTRY I have’t figured out how I’m doing to deal with this yet,

    ARISTOCRACY VS GENTRY

    I have’t figured out how I’m doing to deal with this yet, but there is indeed a difference between Aristocratic egalitarian manorialism, and the Aristocratic class. One describes the metaphysical prejudices of a social order, the other it’s extreme instantiation in a small number of individuals.

    In fact, as someone else pointed out today, the Aristocrats were, for much of the medieval period, bloody warriors that the church could not suppress.

    But that said, I disagree with the negative opinions of aristocracy held by most historians. The aristocratic obsession was a ‘good thing’ is based upon the fact that the church (STATE) could NOT suppress them. Nor can the state suppress an armed militia.

    While the current intellectual emphasis is on the family, and outbreeding, as the source of the western aristocratic egalitarian ethic, the militia is an equally important institution – because it was the first: the cause of liberty and property.

    GENTRY

    The gentry were the middle managers who actually ran society the way that sergeants run the army.

    And when we say that one is a gentleman, we refer to the behavior of the gentry, if not the martial aristocracy.

    These gentlemen and their families built England, as a commercial power.

    And it is their progeny that we all represent.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-25 10:17:00 UTC

  • PERFECT WORK SCHEDULE EXPERIMENT 13 Month Business Calendar. 5 day work week + 2

    PERFECT WORK SCHEDULE EXPERIMENT

    13 Month Business Calendar.

    5 day work week + 2 day weekend.

    5 day work week + 2 day weekend.

    5 day work week + 2 day weekend. (release deliverable)

    2 day work week + 5 day weekend. (planning next)

    Holiday’s restart the cycle.

    Gotta try that some day. And track performance.

    Too hard to do unless you have something like Oversing.

    Now, the data says that ‘people’ are only productive about six hours a day. But that doesn’t really apply to the high performance fields. Plenty of us who specialize in thinking, can work ten or twelve hours productively. And, I know, that if I don’t have other real-life distractions, I’m pretty good for 14 hours a day for six weeks before I get tired.

    My favorite way to work, and I think this is true for most problem solvers, is to ‘sprint’. That means, to work very hard on a problem for up to three months, and then recover for a week or two. I’d actually rather work in sprints than I would at a constant pace.

    And I don’t think I’m alone in that. I just think most people don’t get the opportunity, and so they have to try all sorts of games to remain interested in what they’re doing, precisely because they don’t set goals, and ‘sprint’.

    One of the best reasons for sprinting, is that work doesn’t expand to fit available time, nor does work become diluted by a multitude of irrelevant but pleasantly distracting nonsense – like internal politics.

    (just a thought for the day)

    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-22 03:42:00 UTC

  • THE FEMALE ARMS RACE AGAINST MEN: ‘HOW MANY PEOPLE CAN I RALLY’? (draft)(sketch)

    THE FEMALE ARMS RACE AGAINST MEN: ‘HOW MANY PEOPLE CAN I RALLY’?

    (draft)(sketch)(interesting idea) (REVISED)

    AGAINST ‘RALLYING’ and ‘SHAMING’.

    The anti-gun emotional-reaction by women is not rational or empirical, but instinctual. . The female strategy for controlling her reproduction is to rally others to her defense. A man with a weapon both intimidates her, and reduces the value of ‘others’. Any empirical argument she makes is justificationary, not scientific.

    Our moral intuitions are not rational. Some women are so solipsistic that they see a rapist behind every T-shirt and necktie. They have it backwards of course, as the evidence shows.

    The problem for women is that they have as hard a time suppressing their irrational emotions as we males have suppressing our physicality. There are higher consequences for our failure to suppress physicality, and we assumed that there are lower consequences for failure of women to suppress rallying. But we were WRONG.

    We have retained constraints on male physicality, and abandoned constraints on female solipsism and emotional control over rallying us via emotion. We have stopped ‘punishing women’ for improper rallying, but retained the punishment of men for improper physicality.

    This has allowed women to immorally use ‘rallying’ the same way men rally crowds with violence. But while violence may be destructive to property, women’s solipsistic uncontrolled emotions empower the minority of males to use the violence of the state, and to increase the extraction of rents and increase their free riding by coddling women.

    Women would have themselves feel free to rally. But we men unfree to resist rallying. Rallying in the form of the state.

    We evolved to take women seriously, in the sense that they are troubled by something we feel the need to fix it. But there are many things that they are not to be taken seriously about. There are many things that they should be actively suppressed about rallying for, out of their instinctual, visceral reactions rather than rational reactions.

    And this is one of them. Freedom, liberty, and safety, and the equality and demand for reason that comes from the use of arms, is to important to tolerate women’s inappropriate rallying.

    We must remember that women’s rallying IS A WEAPON. It evolved AS A WEAPON. It is possibly the cause for the origin of SPEECH: rallying.

    But female rallying is violence against us and it is a weapon, just as carrying a weapon is defense against RALLYING.

    Women marry the state and rally statists and fools.

    It is an arms race.

    And we cannot let them win.

    SHAMING Is an act of theft. RALLYING is an act of aggression. Never tolerate either from women. REQUIRE REASON not RALLYING or SHAMING.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-15 03:09:00 UTC

  • THE TWO DARK or ANGLO-COUNTER-ENLIGHTENMENT PROJECTS 1) Attack on diversity and

    THE TWO DARK or ANGLO-COUNTER-ENLIGHTENMENT PROJECTS

    1) Attack on diversity and equality as a means of preserving our ability to use historical deliberative classical liberal institutions

    2) Formulation of alternative institutions that make possible the voluntary cooperation between diverse and unequal people.

    THE RIGHT IS DOING THE FIRST.

    I (as a libertarian) AM DOING THE SECOND.

    THE DARK ENLIGHTENMENT IS NOT REACTIONARY – ITS RADICAL.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-13 02:27:00 UTC

  • (Sketch) Eliminate the state sponsored corporation. A corporation is a partnersh

    (Sketch)

    Eliminate the state sponsored corporation.

    A corporation is a partnership whose members are insured by a monopoly insurer insulated from competition: the state.

    All associations are, and only can be, partnerships.

    Restore right of suit for any and all involuntary transfers, outside of morally sanctioned competition, against any and all individuals within the partnership and their agents.

    Require insurance bonds be purchased by the partnership.

    Require all employees be bonded if they communicate with or act on behalf of, customers.

    (The incentives will favor truth telling and allocate money and status to truth-tellers.)

    Stock certificates shall not represent ownership, but a purchase of contractual rights to dividends that are guaranteed by the assets in the event of liquidation or sale. Control then shall not be democratic, but contractual.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-07 09:26:00 UTC

  • THE MASCULINE SPECTRUM OF TRIBAL ORDERS Adding Orthodox to the spectrum consisti

    THE MASCULINE SPECTRUM OF TRIBAL ORDERS

    Adding Orthodox to the spectrum consisting of:

    Orthodox->Conservative->Libertarian->Anarcho Capitalist yields:

    BIAS MODE MEANS JUSTIFICATION

    Orthodoxy: Rules, External Constraint, ‘Duty’

    Conservative: Reason, Moral Capital (behavioral capital), ‘Harmony’.

    Libertarian: Reason, Economic Capital, ‘Prosperity’

    AnCapitalist: Reason, Personal Capital, ‘Liberty’

    Different visions of the nature of man. Possibly, probably just reflections of class. And if that is true, we can get or use the data to prove it.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-17 03:39:00 UTC

  • (COURT OF SILLY IDEAS) PROBLEMS WITH ANY NEW CIVIC ‘CHURCH’ One of the primary r

    (COURT OF SILLY IDEAS) PROBLEMS WITH ANY NEW CIVIC ‘CHURCH’

    One of the primary reasons we live in little isolated boxes is so that we can create our own illusion of status. We hate it when that status is challenged. But it is a status of our own construction. We are sold this fantasy by Government, Universities, Advertisers, and in some cases, lenders.

    We could ‘buy’ that status cheaply because the ‘Blue Period’ of american postwar prosperity made it possible to transfer people from farm and apartment, to industry and home. But there is no reason that this can continue. Those conditions no longer exist. We are just spending our heritage, and impoverishing the future thanks to baby boomers. (I am Jones, not Boomer, generation.)

    One of the things going to ‘church’ or whatever public ceremony you choose, does, is contextualize your status. And for some people that’s good. For some it’s unnecessary. And for others it’s downright unpleasant because its contradictory.

    If some civic gathering (feast ritual) on a regular basis is status producing, personally advantageous, or economically advantageous, then I assume people would go. But the problem is creating that environment in modernity. Right now it’s the false promise of academia. Academia just sorts. It doesn’t teach us anything.

    THE CIVIC SOCIETY

    What I think all of us want is the true commitment of community. And that institution CANNOT be the state. The state can only apply violence. That is all it can do. WIthout the extended family, we require the civic society and the state has stolen it from us.

    NEEDS

    1) Rituals (christening, maturity, education, wedding, death)

    2) Festivals (holidays)

    3) Education (technical, civil-ethical, historical, literary)

    4) Banking

    5) Personal Financial Management

    6) Insurance

    7) Elder advice and counsel.

    Most of this would be fairly easy to accomplish with the professionalization of teaching, banking and insurance.

    MORE LATER.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-07 08:39:00 UTC

  • ON POLITICAL DISCOURSE: (sketch) Never give up Seek the objective truth Incentiv

    ON POLITICAL DISCOURSE:

    (sketch)

    Never give up

    Seek the objective truth

    Incentives expose the truth

    Never seek agreement or consent

    Demand your property and voluntary exchange

    Ridicule and shame justifications for theft

    Majority rule is theft by threat of violence.

    There is no reason we cannot use government,

    To facilitate exchanges rather than justify thefts.

    The left is a kleptocracy

    Ridicule, shame, criticize it.

    If necessary, fight, kill and destroy it.

    The source of property is the application of organized violence to prevent involuntary transfers from circumventing the need for voluntary exchange.

    Resistance isn’t futile.

    But action is more effective.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-09-17 22:59:00 UTC

  • Now, I’m going to go out on a limb here, and say that christianity must be divid

    Now, I’m going to go out on a limb here, and say that christianity must be divided into european and middle eastern content. And that, with Chivalry, the middle eastern content is irrelevant, and would best be abandoned.

    ARISTOCRACY gave us:

    ——————-

    Private Property

    Individualism

    Heroism (sacrifice for the greater good)

    The purpose of man is to bend nature to his will.

    Objective Truth

    Reason

    History

    Science

    Mathematics

    Enfranchisement

    Civic Duty

    Politics

    Houses of Classes

    ANGLO SAXONS GAVE US

    ———————–

    Poetry, Riddle, Pagan Mythology, Worship of Land and Nature

    The Common Law

    CHRISTIANITY gave us:

    ——————-

    Legitimate Laws (natural rights)

    Property Rights for Women

    Mandatory Outbreeding (universalism)

    Chivalry (Heroism in service rather than defense or conquest)

    PROTESTANTISM gave us:

    ———————-

    The Nuclear Family

    Eugenic Reproduction

    Universal Private Property Rights

    The Work Ethic (Work as Virtue)

    Source date (UTC): 2013-09-08 10:01:00 UTC

  • THE SPECTRA OF MORAL PERSUASIONS: OBSERVATIONAL vs EXPERIENTIAL (sketch) Compare

    THE SPECTRA OF MORAL PERSUASIONS: OBSERVATIONAL vs EXPERIENTIAL

    (sketch)

    Compare the rational (observational) deception spectrum:

    :>IGNORANCE->AWARENESS->FACTS->SYMPATHY(observational)->CONSEQUENTIALIST CALCULATION(outcomes)->FRAUD{…}->PROPAGANDA->DOCTRINE->(VOLUNTARY ORGANIZATION[incentive for inclusion in opportunity)->(INVOLUNTARY ORGANIZATION[incentive against exclusion from opportunity])->(ORGANIZATIONAL CONQUEST)>|:

    with the emotional (experiential) deception spectrum:

    :|>IGNORANCE->AWARENESS->NARRATIVE->SYMPATHY(experiential)->EMPATHY->LOADING->FRAMING->PROPAGANDA->DOCTRINE->(VOLUNTARY ORGANIZATION[incentive for inclusion in opportunity)->(INVOLUNTARY ORGANIZATION[incentive against exclusion from opportunity])->(ORGANIZATIONAL CONQUEST)>|:

    And we get:

    >IGNORANCE->AWARENESS->…

    followed by the choice between:

    Rational Deception: …FACTS->SYMPATHY(observational)->CONSEQUENTIALIST CALCULATION(outcomes)->FRAUD{…}->…

    and/or:

    Emotional Deception: …NARRATIVE->SYMPATHY(experiential)->EMPATHY->LOADING->FRAMING->…

    Culminating in:

    ….PROPAGANDA->DOCTRINE->(VOLUNTARY ORGANIZATION[incentive for inclusion in opportunity)->(INVOLUNTARY ORGANIZATION[incentive against exclusion from opportunity])->(ORGANIZATIONAL CONQUEST)>|:

    THOUGHTS

    It’s no wonder we resort to everything other than voluntary, fully informed, warrantied exchange to obtain what we want, whenever possible. There are simply so many options available for us to use to obtain what we want by deception. 🙂

    While it’s possible to persuade (coerce) people using the three means of coercion: argument, violence, and exchange; It’s not really possible to demonstrate that the use of violence is a deceptive means of coercion. Its immoral, certainly, in the sense that it’s involuntary. But it’s not a form of deception.

    Violence is the most honest human expression possible. There is no lack of clarity about it. No room for misinterpretation. No attempt at cost-savings or cooperation. Violence is as honest as you can get. But honesty isn’t in itself a good. It’s only a good in the context of cooperation. Using violence isn’t cooperation. It’s the opposite. It’s abandoning effort at cooperation.

    Propertarianism: Morality reconstructed.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-08-02 13:40:00 UTC