Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • “Curt, what are your disagreements with the Right, alt-Right”– A Friend (a) Wan

    –“Curt, what are your disagreements with the Right, alt-Right”– A Friend

    (a) Wanting the whole pie (idealism, utopianism) rather than solving the problem the only way possible – separatism and competition. (b) LARPING like there is any possibility whatsoever of achieving desirable ends without separation and civil war to achieve it; (c) Sophomoric, moralistic, psychological, or sentimental appeals for attention instead of issuing demands for policy changes, a plan to force their enaction, and a demand for men to act to force its implementation. (d) Acting like high school children (demonstrations, rallies, throwing a party) rather than issuing t demands backed by threats, like revolutionaries they need to be. (e) Throwing a rally like the left without a plan for entry, training, exit, withdrawal under fire, attack under pressure, and pre-staged resources. (f) the state has zero chance of winning – except leadership went to church on sunday thinking they were gonna sing hymns to get it done, and blowing their wad early rather than once prepared.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-07 14:54:00 UTC

  • HOW TO ARGUE WITH THE HERD: “SEPARATION DOES NOT REQUIRE SUBJUGATION” (but witho

    HOW TO ARGUE WITH THE HERD: “SEPARATION DOES NOT REQUIRE SUBJUGATION”

    (but without separation subjugation is not only necessary, but unavoidable.)

    From The Other Half:

    —“Hi Curt, Thanks for your answer. I’m happy to be thought an Abrahamist, Abraham being a man who defied the moral rules of his tribe in obedience to an inner voice, as the artists who gave us the Western canon have always done. You strategically left the artist out of your taxonomy in #5 above, but included him as a mystic and escapist in #7. The fact that you can’t see a difference between mysticism and escapism says to me that my secular theology can encompass your materialism, but the latter can only deal with my position by reducing and trivializing it. You say you’re seeking to understand and improve the world, but I see Marxist levels of hubris and folly in the assumption that you can understand and improve it with the limited equipment you’re using viz. mathematics and economics. …. Your morality as I understand it is imposed by authority and obeyed by people who don’t want the responsibility of thinking about situations that don’t admit of binary answers, whereas the morality of the artist is internally generated by a part of him that is not his sociological self. This morality is what true sovereignty looks like, though few of us are capable of it at this point in our development as it involves the willingness to be in a minority of one. Hence the temptation of authoritarian answers to postmodern anomie. Ironically, your assumption that art is the arena of competing, positive moral norms is one that you share with the postmodernists, even if they prefer the term ideology to morality. ….. In contrast, Mailer’s line about the key to the universe being a metaphor and not a measure, recognises that artists are always smarter than ideologues and moralists. The line was in fact written in response to the first moon landing, a technological achievement of the kind of computing intelligence you apply to everything, and an example of how poorly materialists imagine transcendence of present problems. Launching a phallic rocket at the moon just to be the first one to do it is trivially heroic when set beside the world’s mythologies and literatures in which the moon was a goddess who punishes transgression as Diana did Actaeon’s, though I’m sure few people at NASA worried about the ramifications in the collective unconscious of their achievement. America’s subsequent hegemony and the atomisation of the body politic won’t I think be undone by propertarianism except possibly in a parodic way. A real body politic would have to be held together by a morality that comes from the inner life that you don’t believe in, where we reckon with sexual difference in a way that doesn’t involve subjugation.”—John Tangney

    “SEPARATION DOES NOT REQUIRE SUBJUGATION.”

    Paragraph one makes no argument it consists of straw manning and critique. to propose and argument you would have to construct one that states that Physical Fitness, Training in the Virtues (self authoring), literature, history, law, economics, science, logic, and mathematics have, must, or can produce worse outcomes than Mysticism, Occult, sophism, pseudoscience, philosophy and theology. I mean. I’ve done the work. that won’t happen. The second argument you’d have to make is that you aren’t simply covering for low, sexual, social, economic, political, and military value and simply self medicating your way out of reality. The third that you’re not using self medication, justifying it, and demanding others pay for it.

    A’ll I”m saying is that separation between the feminine (you) and the masculine (us) group strategies is beneficial to both, but if not beneficial can be solved by conquest, prosecution, and law. But that is better than another dark age of ignorance produced by people like yourself addicted and demonstrating addiction responses, to self medication.

    Achievement is superior to self medication. That is a judgement. And since I am not willing to let you spread addiction to self medication to future generations as people like you did in the past, destroying the great civilizations and bringing about a dark age of dysgeneia poverty disease and ignorance, the there are only a few choices for people like me and people like you: Extermination, Conquest and rule, Separation, or surrender.

    History shows that for europeans, trying to domesticate others turns out to be our end through outbreeding since the majority underclass wins. Ergo, separation.

    We were speciating (races) before agrarianism. Agrarianism is over. We can easily return to speciation – we can afford to. Hence, separate, prosper, and gradually speciate.

    I have no problem leaving you and yours (the herd) behind, while me and mine (many packs), continue to drag ourselves into the gods you need to govern you. 😉

    Upon separation, all the 20th century will have done is assisted in the ‘culling’ of our remaining undomesticated demi-humans. It will advanced our evolutionary progress by two thousand years. (HOw is that for a counter-proposition of our inequality, undesirability of defective and defectors, and our disgust at cohabitation with you. 😉

    Revolt, Separate, Prosper, Speciate. May the best group win.

    – Cheers

    BTW: my background is in fine art. In fact, I’m teaching a class on art starting next semester. And as usual it will be as good or better than the best universities. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-07 13:19:00 UTC

  • ( Working on writing courses is 10x more enjoyable than working on writing prose

    ( Working on writing courses is 10x more enjoyable than working on writing prose. … Just sayin’. Having a blast. )

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-07 12:17:00 UTC

  • (Followup Humor) CURT> Veronika, Um. Theoretical question: What would happen, if

    (Followup Humor)

    CURT>

    Veronika, Um. Theoretical question: What would happen, if I hid your makeup bag so you couldn’t find it in the morning. Pretended I didn’t know anything about it, and then after you were exasperated put it back where it belonged. And you figured out really quickly it was me that hid it? Just …. scientific question…. lol

    VERONIKA>

    I always have ‘emergency one’. So I would just give you a look and leave the room 🙄

    ( Joy killer…. lol )

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-07 12:03:00 UTC

  • “Curt: Post the covers of the ten books that most influenced you over the past t

    —“Curt: Post the covers of the ten books that most influenced you over the past ten years over 10 days. Tag me in your posts.”—Lance Kennedy

    You have me thinking here …. You know, books that affect you, books that helped you articulate ideas, and books you would recommend in retrospect are three different things. That which affects you is a function of your condition at the moment in development time and space. Books that are useful in your work are something else. Books that you would recommend to others would be something else yet again.

    Books that affected me more than any other were reading Encyclopedia Britannica and … (can’t remember the other one) all the way through three or four times… lol. There is a ‘pattern’ across the NPOV, and Western Tradition, and “Nobility” in which those books were written. And in retrospect I think it was that ‘education’ combined with study of war through the ages, and reading science fiction, that affected me most.

    Even today, the readiness of wikipedia, amazon, google scholar, and economic web sites – to find an idea and work through references is more influential than any given book.

    Why? Context. Contemporary education (by design) is context free in an attempt to undermine western civilization and it’s narrative, and therefore our moral and normative perpetuation of it.

    Teens it was 20th C Technology Mythology:

    – Time Enough For Love by Heinlein

    – Everything by Clarke

    – Everything by Bova and Ellison

    – A Wizard of Earthsea

    – Dune

    – Neuromancer and Snow Crash

    I find today, that people on ‘our side’ have abandoned the optimism of the technological era (sci fi) given our failures and have returned to the secular-theological era of the essayists (most commonly, the pessimism of nietzsche and evola and their anglo peers. Noticeably different from the hopefulness of the 20th c conservatives that ‘the left will learn’.)

    In college it was the study of art – without question – rewriting my mental image of mankind from military, technological, and scientific to artistic and civilizational was helpful, just as rewriting it into institutional, economic, and geographic was helpful. Just as rewriting it as what I call the grammars has been helpful.

    I might say that programming and designing software systems served me the way mathematics and logic did not – due to the operational logic of programming transforming the ideal to the real.

    I might say that Huntington, Hayek, Popper, Becker, and Hoppe, influenced my thought the most – but it wouldn’t be a single book – it would be learning how they thought by reading all their books.

    I might say that certain people’s works helped me a great deal: Hawkins on intelligence, Everyone’s IQ research, Everything by Simon Baron Cohen on autism and male-female brains, Haidt’s work in toto, Dawkins’ Selfish Gene, Diamond’s Third Chimp, and GST, everyone’s work on genetic history of man – particularly Reich’s new book. (What’s her name’s) book on mathematical philosophy. Olson’s on commons. Hick’s postmodernism definitely helped a great deal. Armstrong, Keegan, Mallory, and Todd on civilizational development helped. Nietzsche’s birth of tragedy was definitely a huge influence – even if I found it better to read ABOUT it by others, than in his own words translated into english – continental prose makes me intellectually gag.

    So what books influenced me most in the past ten years vs what books would I recommend over the past ten years, over what authors would I recommend over the past ten years…. hmmm…

    Well I’ll give that some thought, and see what I can post….

    Thanks. 😉

    (My recommended reading list is here: propertarianism.com/reading-list/ http://propertarianism.com/reading-list/

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-07 11:08:00 UTC

  • EMMANUEL TODD’S FAMILY STRUCTURES 1. Absolute Nuclear Family: a. Spouse selectio

    EMMANUEL TODD’S FAMILY STRUCTURES

    1. Absolute Nuclear Family:

    a. Spouse selection: Free, but obligatory exogamy.

    b. Inheritance: Indifference – no precise rules, frequent use of wills.

    c. Family Home: no cohabitation of married children with their parents.

    d. Representative Nations, Peoples, Regions: Anglo-Saxon world, Holland, Denmark.

    e. Representative Ideology: Christianity, Capitalism, `Libertarian’ Liberalism, and Feminism.

    2. Egalitarian Nuclear Family:

    a. Spouse selection: Free, but obligatory exogamy.

    b. Inheritance: Egalitarian – equality between brothers.

    c. Family Home: no cohabitation of married children with their parents.

    d. Representative Nations, Regions: northern France, northern Italy, central & southern Spain, central Portugal, Greece, Romania, Poland, Latin America, Ethiopia.

    e. Representative Ideology: Christianity (Catholicism); the “Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite” form of Liberalism.

    3. Authoritarian Family:

    a. Spouse selection: Parents, little or no marriage between children of brothers.

    b. Inheritance: Anti-Egalitarian – inequality between brothers, transfer of patrimony to one son.

    c. Family Home: cohabitation of the married heir with his parents.

    d. Representative Nations, Peoples, Regions: Germany, Austria, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, Bohemia, Scotland, Ireland, peripheral regions of France, northern (Basque) Spain, northern Portugal, Japan, Korea, Jews, Romany Gypsies.

    e. Representative Ideology: Fascism, various separatist and autonomous (anti-universalist) movements.

    4: Exogamous Community Family:

    a. Spouse selection: Parents, no marriage between the children of two brothers.

    b. Inheritance: Egalitarian – equality between brothers.

    c. Family Home: cohabitation of married sons with their parents.

    d. Representative Nations, Regions: Russia, Yugoslavia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Hungary, Finland, Albania, central Italy, China, Vietnam, Cuba and north India.

    e. Representative Ideology: Communism, Socialism.

    5. Endogamous Community Family:

    a. Spouse selection: Custom, frequent marriage between the children of brothers.

    b. Inheritance: Egalitarian – equality between brothers.

    c. Family Home: cohabitation of married sons with their parents.

    d. Representative Nations, Peoples, Regions: Arab world, Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tadzhikistan.

    e. Representative Ideology: Islam.

    6. Asymmetrical Community Family:

    a. Spouse selection: Custom, prohibition on marriages between the children of brothers, but a preference for marriages between the children of brothers and sisters.

    b. Inheritance: Egalitarian – equality between brothers.

    c. Family Home: cohabitation of married sons with their parents.

    d. Representative Regions: southern India.

    e. Representative Ideology: Same

    7: Anomic Family:

    a. Spouse selection: Free, but without obligatory exogamy; consanguine marriage possible and sometimes frequent.

    b. Inheritance: Indifference – uncertainty about equality between brothers, inheritance rules egalitarian in theory but uncertain in practice.

    c. Family Home: cohabitation of married children with parents rejected in theory but accepted in practice.

    d. Representative Nations, Peoples, Regions:

    e. Representative Ideology: Buddhism, Christianity, and Communism, but potentially anything.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-07 10:27:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-07 10:15:00 UTC

  • ( Ok. What kind of woman hides your nice new container of freshly ground coffee

    ( Ok. What kind of woman hides your nice new container of freshly ground coffee in the morning, just to make you exasperated looking for it? )

    …

    …

    …

    (btw: it’s my hobbling, hunched over, oxygen-wearing, little old lady of a mother pulling this prank, not some tattooed twinker I found under a bridge.)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-07 10:12:00 UTC

  • @Ahmed Reda Thank you for what you have done, and are doing for me, and for all

    @Ahmed Reda

    Thank you for what you have done, and are doing for me, and for all of us.

    Really.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-07 10:10:00 UTC

  • FROM THE THEOLOGICAL TO THE LITERARY – ANSWERING A COMPETENT CRITIC. (useful) —

    FROM THE THEOLOGICAL TO THE LITERARY – ANSWERING A COMPETENT CRITIC.

    (useful)

    —“Certain kinds of allegorical story try to teach a moral but most of what we consider great literature instead dramatizes a question like what does it mean to be a hero, or is it possible to find meaning in the world that we haven’t placed there ourselves? These questions don’t have univocal answers which is why we find the dramatizations more interesting than anybody’s opinion about such matters. We hate poetry that has palpable designs on us, as Keats said. Also, the dramatizing of ambiguous questions creates the beauty that “tease[s] us out of thought” and is the real payload of these stories, rather than some socially utilitarian archetype that you install in people like software, even if it’s open-source software. Beauty can be found in a postmodern novel like The Crying of Lot 49 as readily as in a heroic story like the Odyssey, or indeed in the wisdom books of the old testament, or the writings of medieval mystics. I think Norman Mailer was right that if the universe is a lock then the key is a metaphor, not a measure, but then he belonged to the class of intellectuals who haven’t given up on the question of why there’s something rather than nothing and therefore placed more importance on the inner life as a source of sovereignty than on being a member of a pack, the inner life being that by virtue of which we are incommensurable. I’m new here, but initial signs are that planet Doolittle is a place for people who have prematurely closed their accounts with reality.”— John Tangney

    —

    John,

    Intelligent, Articulate, Traditional, Conventional, but just another take on secular theology, closing with self service, contradiction, and error – and entirely missing the point of the challenges of the present, the purpose of my work, what I’m doing here with followers and lurkers, and the post.

    1 – What faculties are you advocating exercising – and why? What faculties are those following me seeking to exercise?

    2 – You use experiential terms for entertainment, or mindfulness, or escapism, as if they are moral goods, when they are simply forms of consumption, avoidance, and escape – self medication. Yet people who follow me are seeking the capacity to understand, improve, and act – particularly to act to change the current conflict.

    3 – You ‘appear’ to assume that knowledge of right action, morality, and the virtues is complicated. It isn’t. it’s actually trivial, and can be taught by allegory, analogy, history, and rule. The difference is that what is objectively moral (what we do here) and what is subjectively open to interpretation as moral, are the difference between truth and preference.

    4 – There is a very good reason Women, Mailer, and someone like you prefer the ‘undecidable’ metaphor, and Men, Aristotle, and someone like me, prefers the ‘decidable’ rule. The first conveys meaning while preserving the ability to cheat, the second conveys rule and eliminates the ability to cheat.(See my post earlier today to Eric Weinstein).

    5 – The warrior prefers the conflict, the judge the law, the merchant the ability to weasel and negotiate, the women the ability to bait and not deliver, and the thief the ability to predate. We know your moral pretense by which degree of moral intolerance/intolerance you advocate (demand).

    6 – Where you assume people are programmed or resistant to programming (a) they ARE programmed, and (b) they ARE resistant to programming, because they search for confirmation of their personal survival, consumptive, and reproductive strategies. In other words, people seek programming that they want. And norm encourages, and the law enforces rules that they must obey even if they contradict with the programming that they have sought.

    7 – So as a specialist in the ‘Grammars’ (paradigms of programming and decidability) it’s quite obvious that you’re invested in a form of escapism (and perhaps denialism) that is indifferent from Mysticism, Theology, Idealism, Utopianism, Fictionalism, Self Medication, or drug use. Where most here are looking for non-escapism. For the opposite. FOR AGENCY.

    So it is not that I or we escape reality – it is that we seek to understand it, and take advantage of it. It is those who seek sedation that seek to escape reality.

    QUESTIONS/PROBLEMS I SEEK TO ANSWER/SOLVE

    How do we end lying in economics, politics, and law?

    How do we solve the conflict of our current attempts at speciation by moral intuition (left-feminine, right-masculine)?

    How do we end the systematic destruction of western civilization which is the only one to produce a high trust labor, working, middle, and professional class?

    How do we prevent another abrahamic dark age of ignorance, superstition, and dysgenia?

    I am one of the most innovative thinkers working today.

    That is not a compliment to myself. It is a criticism of the current state of thought – and the near loss of the 20th century – and the second fall of Europa.

    Affections.

    Curt

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-07 10:05:00 UTC