Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • THERE WAS NOTHING GOOD IN CHRISTIANITY THAT WAS NOT THERE BEFORE IT. —“Peterso

    THERE WAS NOTHING GOOD IN CHRISTIANITY THAT WAS NOT THERE BEFORE IT.

    —“Peterson’s point in theism, using Christianity as his usual example, is that we didn’t develop somehow without it and if we cut it off we shouldn’t assume we’ll retain the good we got from it as a society. This has happened and it never goes that way. In fact it goes.the other way. If your Utopia is with God than your on the right track. Are you criticizing having ideals in general as well? Also, what is the basis for people having ideals?”— Billy Duke

    (a) that does not survive scrutiny, because everything good in christianity was demonstrably there beforehand in the pagan versions and everything bad in christianity was not there but added to politicize those pagan versions against aristocracy and reason.

    (b) It is very hard to make the argument that abrahamic religions, including the licensing of christianity and the forcible imposition of christianity, were concocted as other than a rebellion against the commercial market meritocracy, military meritocracy, legislative meritocracy, political meritocracy, religious meritocracy, and use of reason by the aristocracy both persian and greco-roman. Judaism, christianity, and islam were just the separatist fundamentalism(judaism), socialism(christianity), and militant communism(islam) of the ancient world. And visa-versa.

    The eastern empire was able to ally the underclasses against the weakened aristocracy and take power over (defeat) the western empire, in the same way the Marxists/Postmodernists/Feminists have allied against the aristocracy weakened by the french revolution and the world wars.

    There are only two existentially possible group evolutionary strategies to man: the aristocratic meritocratic (k-selection, eugenic, or “packs”), and the communist equalitarian (r-selection, dysgenic, or “herds”). Any order not explicitly meritocratic and eugenic will evolve into unmeritocratic and dysgenic. Just as all human organizations eventually calcify. It’s not consistency that makes us strong but constant ‘testing’ (competition).

    The most important competition however, is that between masculine eugenic(“pack”), and feminine dysgenic(“herd”). And we achieve the optimum possible nash equilibrium through markets for association, reproduction(marriage), commercial markets, intellectual markets, markets for commons (govt), and political markets (nations), when polities are small and homogenous, and can produce commons necessary for them without coming at the expense of others. But the consequence of those markets is suppression of the reproduction of the underclasses. And that is a good thing. Because the condition of each individual in a polity is determined more by the reduction of the underclass than by any other action we can take.

    (c) The central difference between, the aristocratic method and the underclass method is in cost vs demographics. It is one thing to use expensive high investment education in the development of meritocracy, truth, and reason, among the middle and upper classes, and much cheaper to develop low investment education in the development of resistance, fictionalism, and obedience in the lower classes. And this is still what we see in religiosity today. While morality remains constant, religiosity vs rational action is merely one of intelligence. The central problem being a full standard deviation in median IQ between the lower, middle, and upper classes. (90, 105, 120, 135). Hence the vehement militant religiosity of muslims (87), the tepid ratio-religiosity of christians 100, and the legalism of the educated (115), the and the virtue-signaling atheism of the intergenerational commercial, financial, and intellectual classes (130).

    (d) The church exemplifies the adage that he who writes history authors it. The church has a long history of ‘appropriation’ and almost no history of innovation. A long history of taking credit rather than giving it. A long history of advocating faith(submission) rather than reason(autonomy). A long history of attribution to the divine intention rather than natural consequence. A long history of claiming education, but failing to use the high time devotion to the church to literacy. A long history of claiming charity, but forcible accumulation of private property(largest land holder in europe). A long history of criticizing the aristocracy, but the major collector of land rents. A long history of claiming good, but persistent evidence of doing evil – most notably the templars, indoctrination, persecution, and ‘indulgences’.

    (e) there is but one utopia, and that is that man should make an eden of this world and every other. And he cannot do so with lies. If there are any gods, they have written their language in the structure of the universe, and it is through uncomfortable truth reason knowledge and calculation that we transcend the animal through comfortable falsehood, faith, ignorance, and storytelling.

    (f) As far as I know, the philosophy of the west has been that of the truth of martial aristocracy and the philosophy the failed peoples has been the lies of priestly communism. And while the chinese succeeded at building a wall to keep the ‘people of lies’ out, they were not able to develop the trust of the aristocratic west, any more than the aristocratic west was able to complete the roman project of building a wall to protect the west from the people of desert, steppe, and tundra. And it is this failing – to learn isolation from the chinese – that has been our downfall. Just as much as it is their failing – to learn trust from europeans – that was theirs. The difference is, that they have learned from us now, but we have not yet learned from them.

    (g) “Christendom without Christianity.”

    1) Extend familial love to brothers in arms, first above all.

    2) Extend kinship love to the polity

    3) Extirpate hatred from the human heart.

    4) Show tolerance of honest error, intolerance of all else; and respect for those who earn it, and disrespect for those who don’t. Kneel to none.

    5) Speak the truth without exception.

    6) Master an art, a science, a craft, and a trade.

    7) Bear and raise children to be husbands and warriors and wives and mothers.

    8) Preserve, Maintain and Beautify the commons

    9) Safeguard the young, weak, and elderly.

    10) Take nothing not paid for, seek nothing not earned.

    11) Place no burden of notice, attention or impediment upon others.

    12) Perform and enforce restitution for all wrongs.

    13) Punish or kill the criminal, wicked, and lazy.

    14) Defeat and exterminate all enemies completely

    15) Leave life having transcended yourself, your line, your polity, man, and this land, closer to omniscience, omnipotence, sovereignty, and beauty.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-16 10:42:00 UTC

  • I have been and always will be, against all marital community property, alimony

    I have been and always will be, against all marital community property, alimony and child support, but not against fines for the person breaking the marriage. (spoken as a guy with multiple broken marriages. my first wife cheated. I broke my second marriage primarily due to my severe illness, and I broke my third marriage for reasons that I thought were her fault but were mine.) A women cannot regain her fertile years and a man cannot regain the proceeds of his excess production. But a woman can trade her vagina and personal care while a main can only trade his economic productivity and environmental care. Empirically speaking this leaves men at a great disadvantage. But either way, a divorce all but guarantees poverty in later life. IMO the millions I made were not ‘ours’ but mine. And had the court treated them as ‘mine’ then we would still be married. The central problem is that an individual cannot control the bad behavior of one’s spouse in modernity. As such we cannot have common property

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-16 10:05:00 UTC

  • ( porch. coffee. donuts. finches and mourning doves. writing. )

    ( porch. coffee. donuts. finches and mourning doves. writing. )

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-16 09:59:00 UTC

  • Violence is just an asset like any other. Violence is neither good nor bad. Only

    Violence is just an asset like any other.

    Violence is neither good nor bad.

    Only its uses are good or bad.

    Those who cannot produce and spend violence well, are always and everywhere mastered by those who do.

    The optimum use of violence is to prevent all impositions of will no matter how well intentioned, such that only voluntary exchanges remain.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-16 09:10:00 UTC

  • THE OATH – FOR THOSE WHO WOULD BE SOVEREIGN (“Commandments” for those who would

    THE OATH – FOR THOSE WHO WOULD BE SOVEREIGN

    (“Commandments” for those who would obey.)

    “Christendom without Christianity.”

    1) Extend familial love to brothers in arms, first above all.

    2) Extend kinship love to the polity

    3) Extirpate hatred from the human heart.

    4) Show tolerance of honest error, intolerance of all else; and respect for those who earn it, and disrespect for those who don’t. Kneel to none.

    5) Speak the truth without exception.

    6) Master an art, a science, a craft, and a trade.

    7) Bear and raise children to be warriors, husbands and fathers of your grand children, and teachers, wives, and mothers of your grandchildren.

    8) Preserve, Maintain and Beautify the commons

    9) Safeguard the young, weak, and elderly.

    10) Take nothing not paid for, seek nothing not earned.

    11) Place no burden of notice, attention or impediment upon others.

    12) Perform and enforce restitution for all wrongs.

    13) Punish or kill the criminal, wicked, and lazy.

    14) Defeat and exterminate all enemies completely

    15) Leave life having transcended yourself, your line, your polity, man, and this land, closer to omniscience, omnipotence, sovereignty, and beauty.

    —“This is all via-positiva and would lend itself as an outline for a set of hero tales. Each tale explores the limits operations and consequences of the spectrum each line item above refers. Teach it to kids (duty) so they can emulate it as adolescents (virtue) and demonstrate it as adults (utility).”—Bill Joslin

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-16 02:35:00 UTC

  • CAPITALISM VS SOCIALISM VS MIXED ECONOMIES? (well intentioned fools) Capitalism

    CAPITALISM VS SOCIALISM VS MIXED ECONOMIES?

    (well intentioned fools)

    Capitalism refers to the allocation of property to individuals providing incentives and the possibility of calculation.

    Socialism refers to the allocation of property to the state, eliminating incentives and the possibility of calculation.

    Mixed economies solve the problem of allocation of proceeds of cooperation under capitalism, by forcible redistribution of the proceeds largely using progressive taxation.

    Mainstream economists debate the degree of ‘takings’ that would achieve a pareto optimum, but evidence is that competition from the restoration of globalization under global consumer capitalism is lowering the maximum possible level of taxation, and that increased opportunity for extra-economic strategic expansion, may lead to wars, which is putting pressure on defense expenditures as well.

    For this variety of reasons, real incomes from other than financialization have been in constant decline as the world equilibrates, and just as conservatives feared, the left has created a moral hazard through expansion of the underclass in order to generate demand to compensate for the general decline in the distribution of productivity and its rewards.

    I always find well intentioned fools well intentioned. But we do not choose our governments. They are chosen for us by external circumstances, and we either adapt well to those circumstances or we do not.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-15 11:47:00 UTC

  • “CURT, BUT ISN’T SCIENCE A PROCESS OF MYTH DEVELOPMENT?” —“What is the process

    “CURT, BUT ISN’T SCIENCE A PROCESS OF MYTH DEVELOPMENT?”

    —“What is the process of science if not building upon mythological language?”— Josh Jeppson

    Ah… great question.

    NARRATIVE CYCLE

    — begin —

    Free Association

    Hypothesis, Theory, Testimony

    History

    Analogy (literature)

    Idealism (rational + ideal – real)

    Mythology (supernormal/hyperbolic – temporal )

    Supernaturalism (rational + ideal + supernormal )

    Occult ( Supernatural + post-rational )

    Dreams (pure experiential)

    — return to to begin –>

    EPISTEMOLOGICAL CYCLE

    — begin –>

    Observation

    Free Association — on false, begin –>

    Hypothesis — on false, begin –>

    Theory — on false, begin –>

    Law (visible) — on false, begin –>

    Habit (becoming invisible) — on false, begin –>

    Metaphysical Assumption(invisible) — on false, begin –>

    THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CATEGORIES OF NARRATIVES

    Science vs literature:

    Sure, we can describe science as an effort to create narratives and plots so that we humans can use scientific narratives like historical, or fictional, or mythical, or supernatural narratives to identify opportunities to apply transformations.

    The difference is that we had to learn (very slowly it seems) that the universe’s monomyth is very different from ours (cycles of entropy). And that it was extremely difficult for us to learn do de-anthropomorphize the universe’s narrative

    So the purpose of narratives is to assist us in producing searches for opportunities. The purpose of recipes is to provide us means of transformation.

    So all sorts of narratives must contain certain useful functions (or attempts at inserting dysfunctions – as does postmodern literature).

    And while scientific narratives assist us in transforming the world, political narratives assist us in transforming the polity, interpersonal narratives assist us in transforming others, and personal narratives assist us in transforming ourselves.

    Narrative=search, Recipe=transformation(action)

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-15 10:57:00 UTC

  • “Who CAN be trusted with literary interpretation? I don’t trust people who are d

    —“Who CAN be trusted with literary interpretation? I don’t trust people who are dumber than me, because they are idiots. And I don’t trust people who are smarter than me, because they are probably up to something. I can’t necessarily say what, but they seem shady. People who are exactly as intelligent as me are probably alright, but only if they are related closely enough.”— Ely Harman

    (classic) lol

    Ergo. “Calculation.”

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-15 10:35:00 UTC

  • “INTERPRETATIONS” VERSUS PROOFS (CALCULATIONS). (gem) —“Interpretations are us

    “INTERPRETATIONS” VERSUS PROOFS (CALCULATIONS).

    (gem)

    —“Interpretations are useless. The only credulity for an interpretation stems from trusting an undemonstrated authority. (If the authority had demonstrated their ability, they’d not be providing interpretations, they’d provide proofs) The stick I flick dung from my boot has more value.”— Bill Joslin

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-15 10:25:00 UTC

  • “CAN WE END THE USE OF LITERATURE FOR SUBVERSION OF THE WEST?”— Daniel Gurpide

    —“CAN WE END THE USE OF LITERATURE FOR SUBVERSION OF THE WEST?”— Daniel Gurpide

    WHEREAS

    I agree that the (abrahamist’s) strategy was to ally three underclasses (through women in particular), to communism as a means of defeating the aristocracy.

    Furthermore, I agree with the theory that the purpose for the licensing of christianity and the invention of the church was to defeat the “Old” aristocracy.

    And I think we can agree that Marxism/Communism/Postmodernism, are the modern version of the attack on the aristocracy, by replacing a supernatural cult’s promise of afterlife with a pseudoscientific cult’s promise of utopia within one’s lifetime.

    ASSERTION

    We can only kill a virus by killing its hosts. That seems to be out of the question – although not for the muslims it isn’t.

    We can regulate the spread of a virus(law). We can innoculate against the virus. (education). And these actions raise the cost of replication of the virus. To the point where it may live on, but not spread, because it can find no hosts.

    Now, just as we can operationalize language, by limiting it to warranty of due diligence, we can to the same for plots.

    Why? Because there is no difference between a literary recipes and legal recipes.

    For example, there is but one monomyth plot > so many archetypes > so many subplots (variations), and so many virtues and vices(sins). And we know that that hierarch refers to transcendence(learning), psychological portfolios, methods of resistance to transcendence, and an accounting of those changes virtues, vices. So we can in fact analyze any such literature. The evolution of post-literary persuasion will be through ‘harmonics’, which is a series of ‘reports’ the synthesis of whcy by any individual will feed a narrative. We can defend against this also by the same means.

    our primary problem is that we are denied the protection of the courts, and that church and state manage the commons rather than the MARKET manages the informational commons.

    So it is just as possible to perform a propertarian analysis of a piece of literature, no matter how subtle as it is to perform a propertarian analysis of advertisement, propaganda, or proposed law.

    The postmodern literary attempt was to circumvent the monomyth by creating little windows into the lives of people who were not heroic. THe postmodern and marxist artistic attempt was to circumvent the monomyth by removing narrative and relying entirely on design, and even then, anti-heroic design.

    And they do this under the auspices that the army common people fight in, and the economy common people labor in, and the families common people struggle with, are not in fact empirically better than they would be under non heroic civilizations that persist in ignorance and poverty. After all, the primary beneficiaries of consumer capitalism have not been the upper middle and upper classes. We have lost our status under capitalism to the middle and working classes. And we don’t like it very much.

    REVERSAL

    But we must remember that just as we must preserve cheaters in the gene pool to insure we retain defense against cheaters, we must preserve deceptions in the informational pool in order to preserve defense against deceptions.

    The northern europeans developed high trust to an extent where it was a fault. It was exploited. So it is not so much that we want to eliminate it as evolve in parrallel to it so that we preserve the ability to defeat it.

    I am attracted to the same general approach as the chinese: “these people are inferior’ but our solidarity is somewhat dependent upon their inferiority”

    in other words, it may be that we just need to create a wall and continuously defend against them otherwise there is no reason for the very heroism that has driven us despite our small numbers, to transcend the beast man.

    FORWARD

    I think this conversation would be very fruitful if you and I were to have it in a larger forum. Because this is the central question.

    I find nothing in middle eastern abrahamism that is good, that is not in pagan europeanism. I find no techniques in the world disciplines that are not in stoicism (action). And I find frightening parallels between the Roman authors of 0-100AD and the authors of 1880-1929.

    We have lost almost a century. The question is, can we save ourselves from what appears to be a certain dark age. Because while it is one thing to occupy and defeat a high trust people, once that high trust people, and their high trust are gone, it does not appear that other than levantine chaos and poverty remain.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-15 10:23:00 UTC