Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • by Daniel Gurpide Vacher de Lapouge was the French founder of a school – Anthrop

    by Daniel Gurpide

    Vacher de Lapouge was the French founder of a school – Anthroposociology – which wanted to apply the new Darwinian science of evolution to the study of politics. Before WWI, he had followers in Germany, Italy, Spain, Norway and the USA.

    I don‘t think Lapouge was ever translated into English, despite his having several American disciples (Madison Grant, Carlos Closson at the University of Chicago). I know he also visited the USA twice (Second International Eugenics Congress in NYC in 1921 and some Conference on Family Planning with Margaret Sanger).

    The text in a previous post here:

    [ https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=293882641177035&id=100016659043273 ]

    is a summary of “Les Selections Sociales“ made by Pitirim Sorokin and polished by me to adapt it to modern sensitivities (the original is too politically incorrect).

    Sorokin, Professor of Sociology in the University of Minnesota, wrote a work entitled “Contemporary Sociological Theories” in 1928. It contains a chapter on the racial question. The chapter is memorable, for it marks the close of the period in which both sides in the controversy (hereditarians/environmentalists) were free to put forward their views, and authors who wished to do so could give objective accounts of the evidence pointing in each direction. Sorokin supported neither side, he just expressed clearly and shortly the views of both sides in the controversy. The book is worth reading today, as a reminder of what was possible before 1933.

    In France, the main opponent of anthroposociology was (((Emile Durkheim))); in the USA, (((Franz Boas))). From the beginning of the thirties onwards scarcely anyone outside Germany and its allies dared to follow the hereditarian school, lest it should appear that they were excusing or supporting the Nazi cause. Anthropology became a strictly ‚cultural‘ discipline.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 15:28:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared an event. Для Ð±Ð°Ð³Ð°Ñ‚ÑŒÐ¾Ñ Ð¼Ð¾Ñ—Ñ Ð´Ñ€ÑƒÐ·Ñ–Ð² в Ð

    Curt Doolittle shared an event.

    Для багатьох моїх друзів в Україні.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 15:13:15 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. THOUGHTS ON THE GERMAN POSTWAR THEORY: ORDOLI

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    THOUGHTS ON THE GERMAN POSTWAR THEORY: ORDOLIBERALISM

    —“Is ordoliberalism an effective economic theory in your opinion? Why/why not?”—
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordoliberalism

    THE CORRECT ANSWER

    Ordoliberalism refers to the state-private alliance used by Germans after world war two. The premise is for the state to extend the market such that it provides desired goods and services rather than to take over the market for the production of goods and services.

    Ordoliberalism (geramn) differs from classical liberalism (anglo) just as continental law (german/french) differs from common law (anglo), in that the anglo seeks to suppress the state’s interference in the market (optimistic), and the german seeks to guard and manage the market (pragmatic to pessimistic).

    The anglo model is Imperial and expansionist (seizing all growth opportunities), and the german is domestic (maximizing known wants).

    The principle issue here is (a) demographic and (b) cultural. You can only conduct the german model with a martial (professional) bureaucracy and very honest people (farming). You can only conduct the anglo model when innovation is accessible (sail, piracy, conquest).

    So again, there is no ‘best’ model of government, there are only organizations that satisfy wants, needs, and exploit opportunities.

    The german postwar model was somewhat like the Chinese postwar model, and that is when you are ‘behind’ and want to ‘catch up’ it is a problem of organization. When you are ‘ahead’ and want to ‘stay ahead’ it’s a problem of innovation. The german model would be ‘bad’ for imperial purposes, and ‘good’ for postwar purposes.

    Germans are unique because of superior and homogeneous genetics, superior political culture due to lack of a central state, superior culture due to mastering craftsmanship for production of quality products, and the professionalization of the bureaucracy in imitation of Frederick the Great – and the subsequent investment in technical education that allowed Germany to produce the scientific (rather than British empirical) revolution – from which the postwar era has so soundly benefitted. In other words, the Germans and the Japanese both pursued superior export goods as a postwar strategy – and they COULD because of genetic(demographic) and cultural superiority. This is not a strategy all peoples can pursue – they lack the genetics, culture, and institutions to do so.

    As I’ve said repeatedly, and will continue to, the primary economic advantage any culture can seek is demographic. This will exacerbate over the next century such that smaller states with superior demographics will constantly outperform larger states with worse demographics. The people you live with have greater influence on your potential than do your abilities.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 15:10:58 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 14:57:02 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. THE LAST WORD ON EQUALITY We are no different

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    THE LAST WORD ON EQUALITY

    We are no different from any other domesticated animal. We control domesticated animal’s reproduction and evolve them for cooperation with us (use by us). We control human animal’s reproduction and evolve them for cooperation or not.

    The difference between groups is mostly sexual dimorphism, sexual maturity, and size of the underclass in relation to the upper middle class. In other words, our upper middle and upper classes do not differ because they converge on neoteny, dimorphism, intelligence and temperament and are less dependent upon peers for knowledge and decisions. Our working and lower classes diverge in lower neoteny, biased dimorphism, lower intelligence and less civil temperament.

    Like anna karinnena’s families, and like the range of domesticated animals, to produce a ‘human’ requires many genetic things to go right, and if any one of them goes wrong then we are less human and more animal. As such we have domesticated one another and ourselves over millennia of demand for increasingly complex forms of cooperation.

    We consider humans to be defined by communication using language, but this is just a complex form of signaling. instead, the definition of human vs animal is AGENCY.

    Equality does not exist. Even when we claim it’s a necessity under dispute resolution in the law of torts, it is our property that is treated equally – not us. As such it is the equality of our property that exists under rule of law.
    Everything else is both dishonest, pseudoscientific, and dysgenic. And advocacy of dysgenia is just a means of warfare and conquest on a longer time line.

    We are either producing agency (humans) or reducing agency (animals).

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 14:54:52 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a link. —“What might happen to our society if race was n

    Curt Doolittle shared a link.

    —“What might happen to our society if race was no longer used as a form of identity?”—

    Your question answers itself if asked operationally with correct grammar:

    –“What would be the observable consequences if people no longer predicted peoples value, neutrality and threat by visible and behavioral traits.”–

    The answer is that we would cease making use of the most accurate measurement in social sciences: stereotypes, and render ourselves interpersonally blind, and as such give unlimited opportunity to people who lie, cheat, scam, and steal.

    Stereotypes are the most accurate empirical measurement of display(appearance), word(thought) and deed(action) because they are tested every single day by millions and millions of us.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 14:37:35 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. —All nations of any scale are now fascist (

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    —All nations of any scale are now fascist (intolerant) mixed economies, with minor variations in corruption and liberty.—

    (worth repeating: h/t to Brandon Hayes)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 14:37:25 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a link

    Curt Doolittle shared a link.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 14:36:04 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. The criteria of decidability vary greatly bet

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    The criteria of decidability vary greatly between the male and the female. This is easily demonstrated. Men and women judge by very different criteria.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 13:55:38 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. MALES REQUIRE DOMINANCE PLAY (GAMES) TO INVES

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    MALES REQUIRE DOMINANCE PLAY (GAMES) TO INVEST IN LEARNING
    Let me help you. Males learn via dominance play (competition). I teach the ‘male way’ through providing vehicles for dominance play by means of articulate argument. I stomp on other means of dominance play as unconstructive in this venue. But if you taught boys through dominance play they would be interested in education. The reason boys check out of society is that they have to resort to video games for their dominance play. Anything that can be taught in a video game will work.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 13:44:48 UTC