Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • WHAT I LEARNED ABOUT REVOLUTIONS 1) I learned from napoleon that the best genera

    WHAT I LEARNED ABOUT REVOLUTIONS

    1) I learned from napoleon that the best general does not plan for a single strategy, but plans a strategy of seizing opportunity.

    2) I learned from Mao that the countryside can always and everywhere defeat the cities.

    3) I learned from ISIS to move move move and resource resource, and profit profit profit, because, concentration of force is difficult, and it deprives opposition of resources, and it motivates the men.

    4) I learned from the arab spring how fast revolutions spread to people with similar anxieties, and that we are in the same condition.

    5) I learned from the IRA that you always win with time, especially if you use both political and military actions.

    6) I learned from the past twenty years that americans cannot fight and win a fourth generation war.

    7) I learned from the civil rights movement that the government caves to demands rather than face chaos.

    8) I learned from the the LA, Baltimore, and KC riots – and charlottesville – that the police are only symbolically powerful – and only for as long as they aren’t outmaneuvered.

    9) I learned from strategic research that the USA cannot survive power outages and road checkpoints for more than a few weeks.

    10) I learned from the data that there are very few people capable of resisting a movement that originates in multiple places at once.

    11) I learned from the past four years that the deep state will not ‘go’ without ‘a fight’.

    12) I learned from the data that a constitutional solution will be supported by the majority of men in the military especially if accompanied by the right incentives.

    13) I learned from the evidence that left and right might align on taking out the financial sector, and gutting the state if we both agree to separate.

    14) I learned from the past thirty years that the left in all its forms is confident it can win and must be stopped permanently.

    15) I learned that it is relatively easy to restore our place in human history and lift our people again in to a renaissance if we win.

    I learned a lot more too….

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-02 14:46:00 UTC

  • I”m not against anyone. But you’re either integrating into the militia, the natu

    I”m not against anyone. But you’re either integrating into the militia, the natural law, duty reciprocity and truth, markets in everything, trifunctionalism, optimum government, and evolutionary necessity or you’re not only undermining western civlization, but mankind, and you’re not only depriving those of us who inherited all those institutions from self determination but leaving us no choice but war.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-02 14:14:00 UTC

  • WHEN WE PERCEIVE SOMETHING WRONG – WE’RE RIGHT (The Economics of Communication)

    WHEN WE PERCEIVE SOMETHING WRONG – WE’RE RIGHT

    (The Economics of Communication)

    To profit we must exchange.

    To trade (communication) requires we discover a medium of exchange.

    To exchange we must discover coincidences of wants using the available medium of exchange.

    All language consists of measurements. Measurements within paradigms. Paradigms that serve interests. Interests that are achievable with abilities. And values that measure the degree of interests.

    So we are trying to achieve commensurability so that we can measure the value of the exchange.

    When we are frustrated it means we are seeking cooperation (exchange, trade, returns) where the transaction costs are higher than the rewards.

    When we are not frustrated it means we have divided the labor of discovering coincidences of wants, commensurable mediums of exchanges, given abilities, values, and paradigms.

    Are we frustrated that they don’t think like us or that the cost of thinking like them, or reducing our thoughts to their level of precision is too costly?

    Are we frustrated by those cost or are we frustrated that that we no longer function in an aristocratic hierarchy because under democracy our words despite our differences in ability are mispriced?

    If we were still ruled by Nindsors, Nevilles, Fitzroys, Marlboroughs, Curzons rather than the parliament of fools would we have this problem? If the anglo-dutch aristocracy and the german labor majority were not undermined by underclass immigration? If our society was organized multi dimensionally so that the martial hierarchy, the commercial hierarchy, and the informational hierarchy were mediated by the law preventing ‘putting fingers on the scale’, would this be the case?

    So my view is the over-commercialization of society, and the over-politicization of society that were the result of the windfalls of the industrial revolution, and the (((world wars))) we tolerated by not nationalizing banking, and redistributing the windfalls of interests on state credit, as we all sought to seek commercial success where the balance of military-aristocratic, comercial-noble, and intellectual-arts and knowledge, and priestly-service could compete on their own terms rather than unviersal commercialization (privatization).

    We are at the end of the windfall. And we must learn, that like the athenian discovery of the silver mine, the roman conquest of the celts, the spanish conquest of the mezzo americas, that the industrial revolution created the ability to devote our energies increasingly away from food production to innovation. And that we followed the folly of the athenians, romans, the spanish, into the false promise of endless growth and the abandonment of aristocratic martial discipline, in favor of commercial overconsumption.

    If something is’t computing without substantial friction than the computation system is ‘programmed’ with the incorrect incentives and resulting division of labor.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-02 11:07:00 UTC

  • GOLD IS NO LONGER MONEY BECAUSE IT CAN’T BE —“I want to stress the importance

    GOLD IS NO LONGER MONEY BECAUSE IT CAN’T BE

    —“I want to stress the importance of understanding gold is money, not an investment. With banks on Comex getting into greater difficulty it is increasingly likely the US Treasury and Exchange Stabilisation Fund will attack the gold price in an attempt to save Comex and the banks.”—Alasdair Macleod @MacleodFinance

    That’s false. Gold is a durable commodity. The transaction cost is too high to function as money. The fraud rate is too high to function as money. The scarcity is too high to function as money (there isn’t enough of it). It’s too open to manipulation to function as money.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-02 10:43:00 UTC

  • May 2, 2020, 10:26 AM

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOAiyogY_6E&feature=shareUpdated May 2, 2020, 10:26 AM

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-02 10:26:00 UTC

  • THE ERRORS OF OUR THINKING AT BOTH BOTTOM AND TOP Dunning-Kruger overconfidence

    THE ERRORS OF OUR THINKING AT BOTH BOTTOM AND TOP

    Dunning-Kruger overconfidence expresses a lack of ability. However, educational overconfidence expresses a lack of skepticism. Half truths whether theological, philosophical, historical, scientific, or formal, are sources of ignorance by providing us with overconfidence.

    Mathiness has been the source of formal, philosophical, and scientific (physical and social) ignorance. Philosophical sophistry has been the source of most of the rest of pseudo intellectual ignorance. And of course theological – a monopoly conflating all the falsehoods plus false promise – is the most ignorance inducing of all.

    It appears that there are a very small number of fundamental laws that can be taught to everyone at the cost of suppression of the reproduction of the underclasses, and the suppression of the parasitism of the elite classes.

    ===

    edit:

    Paragraph one – low end of the spectrum

    Paragraph two – high end of the spectrum

    Paragraph three – curing the problems of the high AND low ends of the spectrum

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-02 10:19:00 UTC

  • THE TRANSFORMATION OF MATHEMATICS I’ve come to understand that my long standing

    THE TRANSFORMATION OF MATHEMATICS

    I’ve come to understand that my long standing frustration with mathematics and the failure of mathematics in the 20th is that mathematics is fundamentally statistical and that the sequence counting-accounting(operational measurement), programming (operational change), and mathematics (commensurability by scale independence) reverses our understanding of mathematics as the primary logic.

    As human knowledge and the scale of our inquiry increased, the ‘hand calculation’ of statistical measures (math) failed.

    The evidence that computers provided with computation was predictable, but the insights we had from mandelbrot’s fractals, conway’s ‘life’, 3d cellular automata (advanced ‘life’), and wolfram’s current physics project, is that the statistical-probabilistic revolution, and the subsequent wave-form revolution together resulting in the half-truth, half-catastrophes of keynes’ pseudo-economics and bohr’s pseudo-probability of wave forms, and the loss of a century in economics and physics for having failed to invest in the ‘right’ mathematics and apply operational on the fundamental, and limit statistics to the expression and measurement of aggregates. When the underlying problem was that these questions cannot be solved by the use of statistics (aggregates) and only by discovery of their underlying operations.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-02 09:51:00 UTC

  • THE END OF “HAND WAVING” —“You’d probably benefit from learning some basic cod

    THE END OF “HAND WAVING”

    —“You’d probably benefit from learning some basic coding, because it is a very different way of thinking. You just can’t handwave stuff with a computer…”—Moritz Bierling

    Exactly. Which is what operational prose prevents – our endemic ‘hand waving’.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-02 09:35:00 UTC

  • UM. NOPE. Moral psychology is relationship regulation: moral motives for unity,

    UM. NOPE.

    Moral psychology is relationship regulation: moral motives for unity, hierarchy, equality, and proportionality.

    Tage S. Rai, Alan Page Fiske

    Published in Psychological review 2011

    Genuine moral disagreement exists and is widespread. To understand such disagreement, we must examine the basic kinds of social relationships people construct across cultures and the distinct moral obligations and prohibitions these relationships entail. We extend relational models theory (Fiske, 1991) to identify 4 fundamental and distinct moral motives. Unity is the motive to care for and support the integrity of in-groups by avoiding or eliminating threats of contamination and providing aid and protection based on need or empathic compassion. Hierarchy is the motive to respect rank in social groups where superiors are entitled to deference and respect but must also lead, guide, direct, and protect subordinates. Equality is the motive for balanced, in-kind reciprocity, equal treatment, equal say, and equal opportunity. Proportionality is the motive for rewards and punishments to be proportionate to merit, benefits to be calibrated to contributions, and judgments to be based on a utilitarian calculus of costs and benefits. The 4 moral motives are universal, but cultures, ideologies, and individuals differ in where they activate these motives and how they implement them. Unlike existing theories (Haidt, 2007; Hauser, 2006; Turiel, 1983), relationship regulation theory predicts that any action, including violence, unequal treatment, and “impure” acts, may be perceived as morally correct depending on the moral motive employed and how the relevant social relationship is construed. This approach facilitates clearer understanding of moral perspectives we disagree with and provides a template for how to influence moral motives and practices in the world.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-02 09:24:00 UTC

  • “In the 1960’s the radicals were too small a percentage of the population to be

    —“In the 1960’s the radicals were too small a percentage of the population to be a real threat, so their bombings was not regarded as the tip of any iceberg (except when blacks got involved and there was concern that all blacks would revolt). … Today the revolt against over-reach represents a larger group of people, and therefore has to be taken more seriously.”—Red-State Secession

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-02 09:01:00 UTC