Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_kg5QueHwVw/95143126_267848747946619_67589515722

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_kg5QueHwVw/95143126_267848747946619_6758951572283064320_o_267848741279953.jpg

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-27 12:21:00 UTC

  • TOOLS OF DECEIT |Falsehood -> Deceit|: … Ignorance -> Error > … … Bias->wi

    TOOLS OF DECEIT

    |Falsehood -> Deceit|:

    … Ignorance -> Error >

    … … Bias->wishful_thiking >

    … … … Loading->framing >

    … … … … Suggestion->Obscurantism >

    … … … … … Sophistry->Idealism (verbal) >

    … … … … … … Magic ->Pseudoscience (physical) >

    … … … … … … … Occult-> Supernaturalism (imaginary) >

    … … … … … … … … Fiction (fabrication) >

    … … … … … … … … … Denial

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-27 12:19:00 UTC

  • “The Jackson Pollock movement provided novelty in context. Now it’s not novel. T

    —“The Jackson Pollock movement provided novelty in context. Now it’s not novel. The vector can’t go far, it’s built on counter signaling.”—Brendan Hegarty

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-27 12:11:00 UTC

  • The best art is always made for sale. Why?

    The best art is always made for sale.

    Why?

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-27 11:47:00 UTC

  • British historians, american entrepreneurs, swiss bankers and government, german

    British historians, american entrepreneurs, swiss bankers and government, german education and engineering, scandinavian commons, italian art and design, russian literature and warfare, french bureaucratic nationalism, jewish doctors, spanish lifestyle, polish community, russian-belarusian-ukrainian men and women.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-27 11:04:00 UTC

  • WE ARE TRYING TO ARTICULATE “NATIONAL COMMONS-ISM” by Luke Weinhagen I have a su

    WE ARE TRYING TO ARTICULATE “NATIONAL COMMONS-ISM”

    by Luke Weinhagen

    I have a suspicion that what many are grasping at within NatSoc is not a socialization of the economy but rather a commonization (not communization) of the government.

    This is what the west was aimed at solving but without full-accounting under P’s complete description of property, government became just another marketable commodity under globalist capitalism.

    What we are really trying to articulate is a form of National Commonsism.

    The resistance to “socializing” any part of our civic under our current model of “governance as commodity” is it effectively means selling whatever was socialized to big interest and international agents. There is no trust.

    National Commonsism == Kinship Capitalism == reciprocity protected by full-accounting

    —

    CD: Always count on luke for genius.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-27 10:53:00 UTC

  • Three Podcasts coming: 1) E0006 – On Reciprocity, The Natural Law, Rule, Governm

    Three Podcasts coming:

    1) E0006 – On Reciprocity, The Natural Law, Rule, Government, and Commons

    2) E0007 – Crossing the Chasm and the Choice

    3) E0008 – On The Past, Present, and Future of Marriage

    then

    N) E000N – The Introduction to the Constitution

    Now if someone can just bind and gag the little old lady long enough that I can edit them … lol.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-27 10:46:00 UTC

  • IS IT TRUE YOU NEED A HIGH IQ FOR P? (NO) —“If I remember correctly, you once

    IS IT TRUE YOU NEED A HIGH IQ FOR P? (NO)

    —“If I remember correctly, you once stated that an IQ of 120 is required as a bare minimum for having the most basic understanding of Propertarianism. Is this correct? Be honest”—Korey Savoie

    I almost wouldn’t answer this because of ‘be honest’. WTF do you think I do all day? At great personal cost. lol 😉

    THE INFLUENCE OF IQ

    1 – IQ determines time and effort in learning something.

    2 – Cost benefit prediction determines willingness to invest time and effort in learning the subject.

    3 – Cost benefit prediction determines willingness to invest in the time and effort of assisting others in their learning of the subject.

    So when I say “You need x IQ to understand P” it’s in the context of learning the METHOD along with the group. The 140/150+ crowd can do it quickly. Others not. It is very hard to explain and apply the method. That seems to be a 130/140 requirement. But pretty much anyone can understand everything up to applying it, and I’m not sure other than theoretical mathematicians will understand the underlying logic.

    UNDERSTAND WHAT PART OF THE PROJECT?

    EVERYONE

    The psychology (acquisition) sociology (compatibilism), the Ethics (basic reciprocity, telling the truth), and politics (optimum government)?

    MOST EVERYONE

    The foundations of western civ in natural law?

    The group strategies of different civilizations?

    The history? The JQ/20th C attack on our civ?

    SOME

    The method? Reciprocity? Testimony, the grammars?

    The legal method? Strict construction of law?

    The constitution?

    FEW

    Applying and arguing with the method

    VERY FEW

    The operational description of brain and consciousness?

    The logical foundations?

    The geometry of thought?

    —“Excellent. For some reason I thought you or Bill or Brandon posted a few months ago that an IQ of 120 was required just to scratch the surface. I haven’t been tested, but I assumed mine to be somewhere in the 100-109.”—

    Korey Savoie

    It’s because if someone ARGUES with us, that requires we resort to using the METHOD and if they can’t use the method we can’t conduct an argument.

    So we can understand what it tells us, vs understand how to use it.

    You don’t need to undrestand calculus to understand most statistical diagrams. You do if you want to argue against those diagrams.

    You don’t need to understand operationalism to undrestand the findings of operational analysis using P-law. You do if you want to argue against those findings.

    Understanding WHAT vs understanding HOW.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-27 09:37:00 UTC

  • TRANSFORMATION OF WAR (4GW) —“The most important book written about military t

    https://www.amazon.com/Transformation-War-Martin-Van-Creveld-ebook/dp/B002YFC1ISTHE TRANSFORMATION OF WAR (4GW)

    —“The most important book written about military theory since Clausewitz. I am the “give peace a chance” antiwar generation. This book completely changed my view on war and soldiers. I found it indispensable when I was teaching High School students the _Iliad_: Agamemnon forgets than no one will die for the interests of another. Odysseus forgets than no one will die for his _own_ interests. Achilles forgets that the “I” must become a “we”. Chapters 5 & 6 “What War Is Fought For” and “Why War is Fought”, respectively, were written in Paradise.

    “Transformed war”, what Van Creveld calls “non-trinitarian war”, is now with us. William Lind calls it “Fourth Generation War”. Van Creveld’s book is the original and best study of this kind of war, done magisterially in his last chapter.

    This book, and Van Creveld’s Rise and Decline of The State are essential reading. Both books changed my life.”—

    https://www.amazon.com/Transformation-War-Martin-Van-Creveld-ebook/dp/B002YFC1ISUpdated Apr 27, 2020, 9:31 AM

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-27 09:31:00 UTC

  • CONTROL VOTING AS INVESTMENT IN STATE CONTROL (via Joel Davis)Updated Apr 27, 20

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investment_theory_of_party_competition?fbclid=IwAR3BK5jF37EXqv6jlwTrAdIt3yNQ863QTX0ZCieKCh60Q9_XQ6d3K0uah88ELITES CONTROL VOTING AS INVESTMENT IN STATE CONTROL

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investment_theory_of_party_competition?

    (via Joel Davis)Updated Apr 27, 2020, 7:49 AM

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-27 07:49:00 UTC