Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • ARE THERE ANY GOOD ARGUMENTS FOR WHITE SUPREMACY THAT AREN’T RACIST?”— (omfg..

    https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-good-arguments-for-white-supremacy-without-being-racist/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=66fd9a7a&srid=u4Qv–“CURT: ARE THERE ANY GOOD ARGUMENTS FOR WHITE SUPREMACY THAT AREN’T RACIST?”—

    (omfg… sigh)

    If somehow acknowledging racial differences is ‘racism’ then no because you can’t ask the question, and you cant answer it either

    If ‘racism’ refers to treating an individual by the average properties of his race then that is a legitimate criticism of an illogical behavior.

    If ‘racism’ refers to criticism of the reproductive, cultural, political strategies of a competing group, rather than criticism of one’s inability to defend against the harm caused you by that group, then that’s illogical also.

    If ‘racism’ refers to a preference for nationalism or separatism in order to reduce conflicts between groups and improve the conditions of either by creating norms and institutions more suitable for each group’s differing wants and needs, then criticizing that is not rational.

    White ‘supremacy’ in nearly every field is simply a fact – although the reason for white success (the high cost of truth even if it may disrupt the dominance hierarchy, and therefore resulting in reason, debate, argument, common law, science, medicine, engineering, technology etc.) is something we have only recently begun to understand.

    White genetic supremacy does not appear correct – at least regarding the Han/Korean/Japanese. All racial groups both evolved in different geographical conditions and in doing so produced different levels of neoteny. With east asians most, whites next, mixed colors next, and blacks last. The reason being that whites and asians have been in homogenous groups a long time, under agrarianism and have succeeded at selecting for neoteny. And secondly, because of the pressures of agrarianism and the winter seasons, the asians and western europeans have more successfully reduced the sizes of the ‘troublesome’ (underclass) population leaving almost the entire population descendent from the genetic middle class. Every other race and subrace has dominated warmer climates where the rate of maturity as a means of surviving a higher disease gradient requires earlier maturity and deeper maturity and therefore limited selection for neoteny.

    The superiority of europeans appears to be the result of a rather small set of noble families never exceeding a few hundred thousand in total population combined with a middle class majority population who expanded downward as the lower and underclasses were reduced through starvation, disease, plague, war, and aggressive use of hanging.

    So because europeans and asians lived in homogenous groups that were somewhat insulated from sun belt density of diverse and nomadic pastoral peoples, they were able to genetically select (not so much evolve) for superior populations.

    The differences between china and europe are largely that china started earlier. THe muslims were not able to cause a thousand year dark age in china like they were in Europe by collapsing the four major ancient civilizations and reducing them to sub 85IQ averages.

    But the west is faster than china in both the ancient and modern worlds because of its institutions of ‘truthfulness’ instead of ‘face-saving’, which allowed the west to advance more quickly in both ancient and modern eras.

    I hope this helps.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-10 06:12:00 UTC

  • YES OF COURSE THERE IS MORE SOCIAL MOBILITY IN EUROPE —“You do know that socia

    YES OF COURSE THERE IS MORE SOCIAL MOBILITY IN EUROPE

    —“You do know that social mobility in the USA is actually LOWER than in most of Europe right?”—

    That’s because europe is so much POORER that there are surplus movements available. (Really)

    For a variety of reasons, nearly everyone in america works in a capacity beyond his abilities, and peope who don’t can consume goods, services, and information beyond their productivity.

    Under those conditions, we should expect very little rotation.

    Europe is much poorer in every capacity, and as such, we should expect incomplete rotation.

    It’s not complicated.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-10 05:19:00 UTC

  • THE THREE SETS OF IDEAS, AND WHY I EXPECT CRITICISM There is a great difference

    THE THREE SETS OF IDEAS, AND WHY I EXPECT CRITICISM

    There is a great difference between 1) the set of Acquisitionism, Propertarianism, and Testimonialism – which I am fairly certain solves the unification of the fields of philosophy and science, and 2) the Western group evolutionary strategy of Sovereignty which I’ve explained by USING that set of ideas. And 3) my particular solution to constructing a condition of sovereignty today via constitutionalism as a means of eliminating the second abrahamic defeat of the west.

    And I am aware that those that cannot grasp any of those systems cannot also grasp that they are three different things, and that one’s criticism of the second and third says nothing about the first. Or that the first, as far as I know, survives all possible criticism.

    Under Testimonialism, no single dimension of a fully accounted truth proposition is closed, and therefore no logical or mathematical, or ethical paradoxes exist. And while I originally, intuited ‘something wrong’ with mathematics ( for which one of my closest friends, a mathematician was frustrated) I was swayed by these kinds of nonsense mathematical arguments myself.

    At present I understand that we can only close a dimension of reason (logic and mathematics for example) by appeal to the next dimension. And that in the end even Testimony (a full accounting of all the dimensions) cannot be closed (Critical Rationalism) – for no other reason that any description we can give relies upon incomplete knowledge of a universe with what appears to be non distillable causal density.

    So I take it as ‘a cost of doing business’ when people criticize me, or criticize my work, because I understand how very few people grasp Acquisitionism+Propertariainsm+Testimonialism. (What I call Propertarianism, but which I should probably call Testimonialism). And I accept that my use of Propertarianism to express western civilization’s group evolutionary strategy (and the strategy of all other groups and civilizations) is offensive. And I understand that people may not like or desire to live in a nation-state where truthful speech in the commons is a legal obligation.

    So I understand when people both conflate the three different projects, and construct criticisms, or express skepticism, or disapproval or ridicule: they are simple people. But as simple people they assist me in improving my argument until those who are a bit less simple may grasp it with effort, and those who are not simple are attracted to what they intuit are answers to problems that I have solved.

    I conduct my work in public specifically so that I can attract (worthwhile) criticism, and therefore produce a work more thoroughly tested than i could by merely talking to myself about it so to speak.

    So it’s quite alright. I know the difference between myself and all but a few as we struggle on the edge of human understanding.

    That said, I am extraordinarily cognizant that i’ve completed and explained the success of the scientific method and unified philosophy and science. And if only a handful of people understand that, then that’s fine with me.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-10 05:10:00 UTC

  • (diary) ( Increasingly feeling back on my game. thanks to family, friends, and o

    (diary)

    ( Increasingly feeling back on my game. thanks to family, friends, and one friend’s advice in particular ( Megan K. Usui ) I mean, you can overdo it for a couple of years, but man, at my age, I don’t come back from a hard crash like that in ninety days anymore. It’s been six months and I finally feel like my brain is working again. I kept trying too hard to overwork instead of recovering first and it just didn’t work this time. )

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 18:49:00 UTC

  • The more criticism one attracts, the more publicity one obtains. The more public

    The more criticism one attracts, the more publicity one obtains. The more publicity the bigger the audience. The bigger the audience the more influence. The more influence the more power.

    Generally speaking, most idiots stumble and attract more publicity than the content that they offer can satisfy the wants of new eyes.

    And the opportunity of first impression is wasted.

    All young entrepreneurs try to go to market too early.

    Same thing for radicals.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 18:45:00 UTC

  • ( web site first. wordpress. free. search creates legitimacy. marketing on fb fi

    ( web site first. wordpress. free. search creates legitimacy. marketing on fb first just costs you a first impression, and first impressions cannot be re-made. )

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 18:17:00 UTC

  • OMG THIS IS AN UNPLEASANT QUESTION? (Asking a controversial question…. If a gr

    OMG THIS IS AN UNPLEASANT QUESTION?

    (Asking a controversial question…. If a group of people selectively bred for feminine traits in males sufficiently to transfer female brain structure and therefore female verbal ability to males, then is it possible that the psychosis and much higher frequency of mental illness in females would be transferred to males, and when manifested in male sexual impulses result in increased frequency of incidents of perversion (lack of impulse control) in males? And what groups, if any demonstrate this set of traits?)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 18:15:00 UTC

  • THE PROPERTIES OF RELIGIONS SATISFY A SET OF NECESSARY DEMANDS Most people don’t

    THE PROPERTIES OF RELIGIONS SATISFY A SET OF NECESSARY DEMANDS

    Most people don’t understand the term religion because they define religion as monotheism and supernaturalism rather than the demands of the human psyche once outside of tribal life, that are satisfied by religion – rituals and regularities that provide the kind of saturation that tribal life provides the always-uncertain-mind.

    The tribal mind is constantly receiving feedback from other members in the group. But as scale and division of labor increase this turns into ‘noise’. Because it is noise it is incalculable (impossible to order and rationalize). Because it is incalculable it creates uncertainty and frustration. Uncertainty and frustration that for a time can be satisfied by increased consumption provided by increases in the division of knowledge and labor. But eventually ends on confusion and loneliness (or what marx called ‘alienation’).

    Gods, demigods, saints, and heroes provide a unit of measure by which complex sets of phenomenon can be judged across family, clan, tribe, and cultural lines. They provide decidability and therefore the reduction of conflict, a standard of norms, and the production of trust and certainty through repetition, and the elimination of effort of game-theoriizing which failed the human mind by the second or third order.

    Sports, Festivals, Holidays, Feasts and Rituals provide trust by evoking the pack response which is one of the most pleasant feelings humans can experience. Repetition eliminates differences. Costly rituals eliminate defection (loss avoidance).

    Private rituals and prayers and recitation and meditation provide mindfulness.

    So at every level, political, social, and personal, that which we call ‘religion’ creates the equivalent of the pack at increasingly large scales.

    And humans like all pack and herd animals, are gregarious toward the pack.

    And that is the purpose of religion.

    To create gregariousness toward the pack.

    And therefore a forgiving and tolerant and gregarious pack despite our ever increasing differences in a division of knowledge and labor.

    In propertarian terms: to decrease opportunity and transaction costs including the physical, emotional, and intellectual.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 17:27:00 UTC

  • Buddhism is a made up religion. Judaism is a made up religion. Christianity is a

    Buddhism is a made up religion.

    Judaism is a made up religion.

    Christianity is a made up religion.

    Islam is a made up religion.

    Protestantism is a made up religion.

    The church of england is a made up religion.

    Quakerism is a made up religion.

    Amish is a made up religion

    Mormonism is a made up religion.

    Scientology is a made up religion.

    Current evangelical protestantism is a made up religion.

    Postmodernism (democratic socialist secular humanist femnism, and the charter for human rights) is a made up religion.

    Arguably the Church of Ted is a made up religion.

    Every religion is made up. The problem isn’t making it up.

    ITS FULFILLING A MARKET DEMAND

    WHAT DOES THE MARKET DEMONSTRATE DEMAND FOR?

    And how do you fund it?

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 16:21:00 UTC

  • THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH IS DEAD – AND A COLLABORATOR The catholic church is dead. S

    THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH IS DEAD – AND A COLLABORATOR

    The catholic church is dead. She abandoned us. Our people have abandoned her.

    The protestant church has reverted to jewish sect. The puritans have become but jews.

    There has been no Augustine to save the church this time. There is no Enlightenment romantic attachment to defend her failures.

    She is now but a wing of the Abrahamists, Marxists, Socialists, Postmodernists, and Feminists.

    For the conquest by Byzantines against the West alone we should end her.

    For the destruction of Stoicism, Philosophy, and science alone we should end her.

    For the indoctrination of our people into Abrahamic lies alone we should end her.

    For the desecration of our sacred groves, holidays, festivals, alone we should end her.

    For the preservation of the ignorance of our people in illiteracy alone we should end her.

    For the destruction of the templars alone we should end her.

    For the failure to reform in response to the enlightenment we should end her.

    For the collaboration with the marxists, socialists, postmodernists and feminists, we should end her.

    For her collaboration with the islamists we should end her.

    We need no lies. We have become the gods of old. We need only contemplate and celebrate their and our achievements.

    The solution is a new religion from the old, free of abrahamism, and free of lies.

    And the financing and incentives to make it happen.

    And to retain the rituals with different parables, different readings, different histories, and a different oath.

    And thankfully, that is something that can be done….

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 14:55:00 UTC