Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • UKRAINIAN WISDOM (fun)(true) “There is nothing so useful in the home as a guilty

    UKRAINIAN WISDOM

    (fun)(true)

    “There is nothing so useful in the home as a guilty husband.”

    The degree of labor extraction a woman can obtain from a man is determined by BOTH her ability to identify and exploit opportunities for guilt, AND her ability to trade care, affection and sex. The economics of this indicates that over time, in any relationship, a woman will seek to reduce her costs and rely upon guilt as often as possible.

    The only male defense then, is to **never feel guilty**. Which is what happens in most relationships. Both parties reduce their efforts until they justify reducing their efforts, and therefore they cause the loss of hope for any reward, and they remain together purely out of the problem of opportunity costs: they aren’t marketable any longer.

    We can scientifically demonstrate that women have much higher expectations of men than men of women. I kind of wonder if this is some female genetic bias: that the reason they feel attracted to men is the promise extraction of labor. And males the promise of extraction of sex.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-08 05:12:00 UTC

  • BOARD MEETING CORRUPTION I can’t tell you how many board meetings that I’ve been

    BOARD MEETING CORRUPTION

    I can’t tell you how many board meetings that I’ve been in that included a legal team that gave us advice on how to legally screw over shareholders.

    1) There is only one law, and that is property, in all its forms (internal consistency)

    2) There is only one moral code, the voluntary, fully informed, fully warrantied, transfer of property in all its forms. (external correspondence)

    If there is a conflict between those two statements then something in your argument is false.

    That’s about all there there is to understanding law and morality.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-07 12:41:00 UTC

  • THE CULTURAL DIFFERENCE: CULTURE. In a pub. Underground. Brick walls. Wooden tab

    THE CULTURAL DIFFERENCE: CULTURE.

    In a pub. Underground. Brick walls. Wooden tables.

    Faux Irish decor, much cleaner and better lit than the real thing.

    A television over the bar. The opening olympic ceremony.

    A digital jukebox. Silent. Slightly gaudy and out of place.

    Friday at 6:30pm – waves of friends meeting after work.

    Patiently. Calmly. Confidently. Humbly. One after another.

    With long coats buttoned against the cold – still style conscious.

    Scarves. Heels. Black shoes. No suits. Perfect hair.

    All the women are beautiful, even if they are not.

    No sense of urgency. Or of destination. Of nervousness.

    Animated cheerful conversation everywhere.

    No one bearing the burdened face of American isolation:

    That conflict between a desperate wish for attention and total fear of it at the same time.

    That fear: that our illusory self images, carefully tended in our private warrens, fragile as wisps of blown glass, might crumble at the first hint of rejection.

    American culture, if we can call it that, died with the state’s intervention in civic affairs.

    America is the fulfillment of the Smithian vision: a society predicated upon the moral action produced by commerce.

    But these are loaded words. Full of as much self deception as our self images but nowhere near as fragile.

    There is no culture. There is no american culture. None.

    Culture requires a community of common interest.

    Culture just means treating everyone as ‘family members that I just don’t know well”

    These fools killed the family. The black family. Now the white family.

    But they killed our communal sense of family as well.

    The state is a predator.

    It eats everything it can touch and kills everything else it can’t.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-07 12:11:00 UTC

  • I LOVE THESE PEOPLE: UKRAINIANS AND RUSSIANS They make such sense to me. Yes, th

    I LOVE THESE PEOPLE: UKRAINIANS AND RUSSIANS

    They make such sense to me. Yes, the government is so corrupt that only gangland Chicago comes even close. And that’s not even close enough. Yes, you cannot trust those that you don’t know (much). But you can trust the people close to you with your life. There is nothing like this feeling.

    In America, you cannot trust your business partners, and you cannot trust the state, you can no longer trust the law, you can no longer trust the police, you can no longer trust your neighbor. Morality has evaporate from moral, cultural and legal discourse in a money-grabbing attempt at ‘equality’ on one hand and ‘escaping the predatory state’ on the other.

    I just wish the combination of revolution, my “alien” status, the fear of the collapsing local economy, and an unwarranted unjust attack by my own government hadn’t made me feel constantly insecure here. I mean I love it here but it is a desperately poor country.

    I don’t, as most ‘illegals’ do, feel I have any particular right to be here. And those people in america who claim such rights make me incredibly angry.

    You are responsible for your government. For toppling that government if it does not serve you. And certainly to topple it and kill all of its members if it oppresses you. And to build a new one.

    Ukrainians are what I wish Americans were. They are what we used to be. What we used to be before the well meaning fools destroyed the family, the civic society, and the moral and ethical basis of our culture.

    If anything made me want to kill every living soul in the American government, and every well meaning fool in the media, it’s looking at these wonderful people and realizing what we’ve lost.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-07 12:00:00 UTC

  • UKRAINIAN LOGIC Man: “He loves her more than she loves him, I think.” Woman: “Of

    UKRAINIAN LOGIC

    Man: “He loves her more than she loves him, I think.”

    Woman: “Of course. He is a man. He must worship his wife.”

    Man: “You look beautiful tonight!”

    Woman: Scowl. “Does that mean I do not always look beautiful?”

    My mom did me a great favor, which was to teach me to compliment women in particular, on something small that they had DONE (rather than their bodies obviously), and that’s turned out to be a very useful habit to get into. Guys like it a lot too. So I compliment the hell out of men on whatever I can. Because almost nobody does. It’s like throwing rose petals into the air. It just makes the world a better place.

    I really don’t notice men paying much rude attention to women here. I’m sure it happens but maybe not around the kind of people I associate with. Men and women just talk to each other. And there is a lot of glance-look-flirt subtlety (which is incomprehensible to me). And it’s all pretty honest and direct and free of all that. Women are incredibly forward. I had one woman grab my by the hair and forcibly kiss me. Another just told me her husband was out for the weekend and invited me over. (um..no thanks.) But most of the women just ask you to dance, or start pleasant conversations. Some are a little too demure. And I get in a little trouble because I’m extremely friendly and playful but really not interested in other than just fun.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-07 10:29:00 UTC

  • TODAY’S AGENDA: + Get Oversing running locally on the laptop. + Deal with VPBank

    TODAY’S AGENDA:

    + Get Oversing running locally on the laptop.

    + Deal with VPBank

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-07 04:06:00 UTC

  • ANGLO VS CONTINENTAL THOUGHT: TRADERS VS FARMERS (cross posted for archiving) Co

    ANGLO VS CONTINENTAL THOUGHT: TRADERS VS FARMERS

    (cross posted for archiving)

    Continental thought is heavily loaded with moral assumptions necessary for a diverse set of polities to cooperate on a shared land mass – and the philosophy is loaded at the metaphysical level.

    Anglo thought is predicated on individual sovereignty and the Smithian moral proposition that voluntary exchange PRODUCES moral behavior independently of any intentional, abstract or metaphysically invisible moral commitment. This is a rule based system independent of moral sentiments. Because traders do not share moral sentiments with their customers. They reduce morality to incentives and the satisfaction of them.

    The continentals desperately try to preserve moral authority as group identity. Anglo thought is the metaphysics of an extended family of island traders. Just as the French philosophers have always criticized Anglos for not being part of Europe because they are traders and craftsmen not farmers.

    Obverse: Trade=Navy=England = Athens = Analytic.

    Reverse: Farming=Army=Germany = Sparta = Continental.

    Karl Popper frustrates me because while he is often making statements about science in the anglo analytical and empirical sense, he is also retaining the continental religio-moral argumentative framework and the silly metaphysical nonsense prevalent on the continent that desperately attempts to retain commonality of moral experience, rather than relying upon action independent of experience to produce moral outcomes regardless of moral sentiment.

    So we can look at this spectrum with something like Smith on one end of the spectrum, Popper in the middle bridging the traditions, and say, Heidegger on the extreme european end, really trying to recreate christianity in the same manner as Kant.

    The continental idea in both napoleonic law, and in continental philosophy, suggests that we must have sentimental moral consensus prior to action. The anglo idea both in the common law and anglo philosophy, is that if we have simple rules, we will produce moral outcomes, regardless of our abstract moral commitments…

    So simple really.

    (So now my criticism of Crusoe ethics is complete.)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-07 03:11:00 UTC

  • RESISTANCE ISN’T FUTILE Christianity is a competitor to the state as the arbiter

    RESISTANCE ISN’T FUTILE

    Christianity is a competitor to the state as the arbiter of moral and lawful action. The state must eliminate this competitor because religion is the only successfully demonstrated means of resisting the state on moral grounds.

    Religion is the most effective means of resisting the state.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-06 13:52:00 UTC

  • SHOULD VS IS ARGUMENTS I usually make IS arguments. The reason is simple: becaus

    SHOULD VS IS ARGUMENTS

    I usually make IS arguments. The reason is simple: because if you take the position that the only moral test is fully informed voluntary cooperation in the absence of free riding then, all you need rely on is truth and incentives.

    No ‘should’ is necessary. Only “is rational” is necessary.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-06 11:46:00 UTC

  • new ‘nine nations’ map has been floating around and it says pretty much the same

    http://www.policymic.com/articles/81321/forget-state-lines-this-map-shows-you-how-america-is-really-dividedThis new ‘nine nations’ map has been floating around and it says pretty much the same as every other map: BREAK UP THE EMPIRE and let us each live how we wish.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-06 10:31:00 UTC