Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • (sketch. want to show how marrying the state undermines all marrriage and family

    (sketch. want to show how marrying the state undermines all marrriage and family options by providing a circumvention of the necessary compromise between the genders)

    I have a pre-monogamous philosophy of the family, in that I have no problem paying for and raising another man’s children – none at all, nor another man paying for and raising mine. In fact, as a man, I see the polity as my tribe and all men share responsibility of defending, growing and improving the tribe, and that all the women and children in it belonging to our men, and we divide up the defense, financing, labor, and training of women and children in exchange for the voluntary care and sex of the woman. Of course, in the end, I give greater preference to my children, but this is my form of ‘communalism’. And it requires only that I create the sovereignty that prevents the taking of the proceeds of my production, and thereby prohibiting me from exchanging those proceeds for my caretaking.

    The consequences of this reciprocal insecurity are greater defense of any marriage – the woman in the short term and the man in the longer term.

    As long as I can do this all family choices are available. If not then men are just slaves to the state with no safety in old age from the security of family care. Men mature later, adapt less easily, accumulate cellular damage on behalf of women and children, and die earlier for it, in exchange for higher productivity during their shorter working lives.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-07 09:05:00 UTC

  • GENDER STUDIES GRADUATE DEMONSTRATES THE POWER OF SHOUTING The consequence of Wh

    GENDER STUDIES GRADUATE DEMONSTRATES THE POWER OF SHOUTING

    The consequence of White Female privilege – the belief that shouting, shaming, and rallying isn’t limited by the good will of the strong.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-07 09:01:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    https://twitter.com/ThomasSowell/status/893880041909735424/photo/1?utm_source=fb&utm_medium=fb&utm_campaign=jordanbpeterson&utm_content=894076843149721600

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-07 08:54:00 UTC

  • DEVELOPING AGENCY: THE SEARCH FOR PEAK HUMAN We probably reached peak physical h

    DEVELOPING AGENCY: THE SEARCH FOR PEAK HUMAN

    We probably reached peak physical human prior to the selection pressures of agrarianism.

    We probably reached peak domesticated human in northern europe during the late medieval period. If not by the corded ware era (more likely).

    We reached peak natural animal domestication a long time ago.

    We domesticated the last natural plants nearly two hundred years ago.

    We probably reached peak natural territorial capital by the early 20th century.

    We probably reached peak mobilization of natural human capital in the west by the 1950’s.

    We probably have not reached peak cooperative (economic) technology as such – our monetary systems are lagging. We can improve cooperation in commerce.

    We certainly have not reached peak political technology – our political systems are lagging. We can improve cooperation in the commons.

    We seem to have reached not reached peak information distribution – the central problem being that the market has not curated the inventory of human knowledge (Brought it into scientific prose) yet.

    To ‘peak’ we can largely only remove bads, rather than create goods. Meaning that all advancement will be in improving human capital itself.

    The primary means of improving human capital is reduction of the unproductive (under) classes.

    The secondary means of improving human capital is genetic modification.

    I suspect that I understand the limits of improving human information access and processing and that will

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-07 08:17:00 UTC

  • IS YOUR MORAL ARGUMENT BY REVENUE, INCOME, OR BALANCE SHEET? Whenever people cla

    IS YOUR MORAL ARGUMENT BY REVENUE, INCOME, OR BALANCE SHEET?

    Whenever people claim some policy or value is good, ask them whether they mean a sales and revenue report, an income statement, or a balance sheet.

    1 – Revenue Report

    Money In the Door (liberal / female )

    Ooooh, look what I have to spend!

    2 – Income Statement

    Money In Minus Expenses Out (libertarian – ascendant male)

    Oh, maybe I have something left to save or invest?

    3 – Balance Sheet

    Assets minus Liabilities after Income and Expenses

    (Conservative – Mature Male)

    Hmm…. In the end, after all is said and done we’re still losing capital due to depreciation and unproductivity.

    In other words, are they using full accounting (balance sheet), or are they *cherry-picking*?

    Because a conservative includes genetic, social, institutional, and normative capital in his calculations. A libertarian is selective about it. And a liberal treats it as someone else’s problem.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-07 08:01:00 UTC

  • THE VALUE OF STATUS DEPRECATING SPEECH The only reason to prohibit status-deprec

    THE VALUE OF STATUS DEPRECATING SPEECH

    The only reason to prohibit status-depreciating speech is to increase revenues. But one’s right to revenues ends where falsehood begins. Why? Because the function of status deprecating speech is to prevent imposition of costs upon the commons: the assets in the markets for association, cooperation, reproduction, production, production of commons, of polities, and of war.

    (insults are important means of defense of the commons)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-07 07:48:00 UTC

  • POSTMODERN TECHNIQUE When I say that all (((abrahamists))) are using the female

    POSTMODERN TECHNIQUE

    When I say that all (((abrahamists))) are using the female reproductive strategy, I mean that the female weapon of influence is gossip, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism, deceit, and rallying (undermining), and that postmodernism seeks to destroy reason as a means of decidability leaving only intuition (feelings) as decidability, therefore leaving only individuals ( equality ) as a means of decidability, therefore leaving only communism (authoritarianism) as a means of political decidability.

    And when I say that the cycle of history is between military conquest by violence, bourgeoise civilization by trade, and slave+women conquest of civilization by undermining (creating weakness) so that outsiders can merely replace their betters with a new set of betters, I mean that it is a cyclical battle between aristocratic order by truth, bourgeois wealthy by pragmatic exchange, and underclass utopianism by gossip, undermining, falsehood, and theft.

    Women and the weak are always trying to recreate the herd and men and the powerful are always trying to recreate the pack. The reason being obvious: the distribution of resources for larger numbers and dysgenic stagnation giving best opportunity for bad genes, and the concentration of resources for small numbers and eugenic evolution giving best opportunity for good genes.

    What we should take away from the french and german works of philosophy is that they resisted the enlightenment with every fiber in them, and sought to replace the structures of power: the monarchies and the church.

    But they did not want truth if it meant restoration of hierarchy – and truth will always restore hierarchy, because our talents and abilities and therefore our value to one another is hierarchical.

    And the attempt to resist that hierarchy can only be achieved through lying about it, and stealing enough that the dominance hierarchy is not visible – or better yet, that the dominance hierarchy is female:he who takes and redistributes most, rather than male: he who produces most.

    Because in the end, we measure all as gains to our reproductive strategy. And we cannot do otherwise.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-07 07:44:00 UTC

  • Men see the world as objects. Seriously. It’s that simple. If you can’t eat it,

    Men see the world as objects. Seriously. It’s that simple. If you can’t eat it, kill it, fight it, f–k it, or use it to do one of the above, it doesn’t exist.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-06 18:31:00 UTC

  • THE DEMAND FOR ENFRANCHISEMENT Allan Hernandez: Demand-for-enfranchisement creat

    THE DEMAND FOR ENFRANCHISEMENT

    Allan Hernandez:

    Demand-for-enfranchisement creates competition, allows for worshiping/striving for the ideal and provides pressure for those at the top not become weak and corrupted by ease living and power. All classes can get behind this. It is a society structured like a trireme.

    Moritz Bierling:

    Trireme society – that’s an awesome meme.

    Oliver Westcott:

    Demand for enfranchisement creates competition… among suppliers of enfranchisement to deliver that enfranchisement easier to people who don’t necessarily deserve it.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-06 17:22:00 UTC

  • “The influence of the clergy, in an age of superstition, might be usefully emplo

    —“The influence of the clergy, in an age of superstition, might be usefully employed to assert the rights of mankind; but so intimate is the connection between the throne and the altar, that the banner of the church has very seldom been seen on the side of the people”— Gibbon

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-06 17:01:00 UTC