Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • It’s Not an Act. It’s a Methodology.

    May 10, 2020, 3:58 PM (Masculinity. Aversarialism. King of the Hill. War) (updated)(reposted) You know, people don’t understand the method to the madness. Nothing is random. It’s painfully deliberate.

    1. Equality was a false promise
    2. An aristocracy of everyone was a false promise.
    3. Aristocracy(Martial limits-via-negativa) > Nobility(Social-Political – choices-via-positiva) > Burgher(Economic practical) > Craftsman (productive, necessary) > Mother(reproductive, promising) > Children(Learning, the proposal) is not a false promise – it’s descriptive: the truth.

    We are not equal, we are interdependent. We earn respect despite our inequality by doing our duty to our interdependence. We maintain that respect and interdependence with loyalty despite our inequality. We demonstrate the obligation of the nobility, the duty of the citizenry, and this is how we work together. We are an army first and a polity second, a society third, bound by the EQUALITY UNDER OUR LAW despite our inequality in ability and value to one another. And that is our secret. Hence the ‘act like aristocracy’. You must be what you wish to become. Teach men Adversarialism. Teach by (forgiving) king of the hill games. Teach men across ages not by age – to lead, advise, follow. Teach by metaphor: 1. Kings (dominant male leadership – quarterbacks) 2. Bishops (cunning, intelligence, spies, advisors) 3. Knights (fast, maneuver – receivers, raiders ) 4. Rooks (Heavy Infantry – Bearers – linebackers) 5. Pawns (Infantry – Defense) 6. Fools ( Messengers, Negotiators) 7. Queens (Ambassadors) Teach Men

    • War – Adversarialism
      … … … (Evolution)
      … – Politics – the Proxy for War
      … … … … (Political War)
      … … – Law – The Organization of Polities
      … … … … … (Procedural War)
      … … … – Economics – the funding of Polities and War.
      … … … … … … (Productive War)
      … … … … – Engineering – the manipulation of the world
      … … … … … … … (Innovative war)
      … … … … … – Testimony – the art of truthful speech
      … … … … … … … … (War against ignorance error deceit)
      … … … … … … … – Negotiation – The art of compromise.

    TRADING MASCULINE EUROPEAN ADVERSARIALISM FOR FEMININE ABRAHAMIC UNDERMINING (important framing) The western canon consists of the study of Adversarialism: Truth(Science), Law, Politics, Economics, and War. That’s my ambition for the Propertarian Institute. The postwar doctrine consists in the eradication of Adversarialism – because women can’t compete. Without grasping that it is the foundation of our civilization. So we have replaced truthful Adversarialism with dishonest, sophomoric, and pseudoscientific feminine undermining. Why? Sexual Genetics: Truth and Systems Vs Approval and Experiences. Adversarialism: truth seeking, Discourse: consensus seeking, Undermining: deception seeking.

  • How Did the Uk End up To Be a Multicultural Root-Less Anti White Mess

    May 20, 2020, 2:16 PM

    —“In your view, how did the UK end up to be a multicultural root-less anti white mess that it is now? How did the police become increasingly militarized?”— Joshua Shalet

    1) The socialists were more effective postwar than here because the UK was destroyed by her ‘ahem’ civli war to prevent germany from taking over europe (as she traditionally had and western civlization needed her to. france has always been the enemy of europe.). 2) they failed to shrink the state in response to the loss of empire. 3) They were financially dependent on london in ways the USA is not. And they loved all the free money flowing in from europe by being ‘the other switzerland’. 4) They failed to control immigration into london and are now prisoners of it. We can shut down a NYC because any other major city can pick up the slack. But they can’t shut down london because they haven’t a backup. same for france. not the same for usa, canada, australia, germany or russia. 5) Brits don’t have ‘rights’ like Americans and the parliament can modify the constitution whereas the people have to modify the american constitution. 6) They don’t have sheriffs to compete with the police, they don’t have governors to compete with the federal government, the people don’t have rights to sue the government like we do in the states. And that’s just off the top of my head. ( The fact that the British working class is … a bunch of p—ies, addicted to milking the state… well, you know. )

  • How Did the Uk End up To Be a Multicultural Root-Less Anti White Mess

    May 20, 2020, 2:16 PM

    —“In your view, how did the UK end up to be a multicultural root-less anti white mess that it is now? How did the police become increasingly militarized?”— Joshua Shalet

    1) The socialists were more effective postwar than here because the UK was destroyed by her ‘ahem’ civli war to prevent germany from taking over europe (as she traditionally had and western civlization needed her to. france has always been the enemy of europe.). 2) they failed to shrink the state in response to the loss of empire. 3) They were financially dependent on london in ways the USA is not. And they loved all the free money flowing in from europe by being ‘the other switzerland’. 4) They failed to control immigration into london and are now prisoners of it. We can shut down a NYC because any other major city can pick up the slack. But they can’t shut down london because they haven’t a backup. same for france. not the same for usa, canada, australia, germany or russia. 5) Brits don’t have ‘rights’ like Americans and the parliament can modify the constitution whereas the people have to modify the american constitution. 6) They don’t have sheriffs to compete with the police, they don’t have governors to compete with the federal government, the people don’t have rights to sue the government like we do in the states. And that’s just off the top of my head. ( The fact that the British working class is … a bunch of p—ies, addicted to milking the state… well, you know. )

  • Theosophy

    May 21, 2020, 9:58 AM

    —“Do you have any writings/thoughts on Theosophy?”—Bradley Morgan

    I know what what’s going on biologically. I know why it’s addictive. I know how training yourself for that experience rather than say muslim, buddhist or stoic or epicurean experiences, functions and how it differs. I know how drug use, and particularly hallucinogens perform their functions and how that differers. And I know what ‘god’ means in those contexts. And I know how horrifying the truth is for those who seek the spiritual experience by artificially induced, self induced, and group induced means. The rest of it is just the story the ‘users’ use to justify it. The dog can chase it’s tail. One can masturbate or have sex. one can have recreational sex or one can have reproductive sex. Likewise one can use drugs to disconnect from reason, one can practice the submission response to disconnect from reason, one can use social overloading to produce the submission response to disconnect from reason. These are just lies in place of ‘true’ association, attention, status, celebration, and achievement. They avoid the hunt-feast cycle. They seek the nursing cycle instead. Labeling the nursing reaction. Labeling the submission to dominance reaction with fanciful stories is just lying to cover the fact that one is engaged in masturbation. Or one can learn to practice mindfulness, virtue, and agency, and contribute to the world because one is human and can reason. === —“What is the nursing cycle?”—Michael Churchill The (dominance version) wake-hunt-feast-sex-sleep cycle, the predatory search, stalk, pounce, kill, cycle. And the female equivalent of search, evaluate, nurse(care), relax cycle (submissive version) and the child’s nurse version are all variations on the same regulatory cycles with slight variations in chemical composition (prepare the body, and incentivize the brain). We’re just biological machines. We make mechanical sense so to speak. Two sexes. Slightly different cognitive structures. Slightly different reproductive reward systems. Slightly different acquisition reward systems. Fairly different fear systems.

  • Theosophy

    May 21, 2020, 9:58 AM

    —“Do you have any writings/thoughts on Theosophy?”—Bradley Morgan

    I know what what’s going on biologically. I know why it’s addictive. I know how training yourself for that experience rather than say muslim, buddhist or stoic or epicurean experiences, functions and how it differs. I know how drug use, and particularly hallucinogens perform their functions and how that differers. And I know what ‘god’ means in those contexts. And I know how horrifying the truth is for those who seek the spiritual experience by artificially induced, self induced, and group induced means. The rest of it is just the story the ‘users’ use to justify it. The dog can chase it’s tail. One can masturbate or have sex. one can have recreational sex or one can have reproductive sex. Likewise one can use drugs to disconnect from reason, one can practice the submission response to disconnect from reason, one can use social overloading to produce the submission response to disconnect from reason. These are just lies in place of ‘true’ association, attention, status, celebration, and achievement. They avoid the hunt-feast cycle. They seek the nursing cycle instead. Labeling the nursing reaction. Labeling the submission to dominance reaction with fanciful stories is just lying to cover the fact that one is engaged in masturbation. Or one can learn to practice mindfulness, virtue, and agency, and contribute to the world because one is human and can reason. === —“What is the nursing cycle?”—Michael Churchill The (dominance version) wake-hunt-feast-sex-sleep cycle, the predatory search, stalk, pounce, kill, cycle. And the female equivalent of search, evaluate, nurse(care), relax cycle (submissive version) and the child’s nurse version are all variations on the same regulatory cycles with slight variations in chemical composition (prepare the body, and incentivize the brain). We’re just biological machines. We make mechanical sense so to speak. Two sexes. Slightly different cognitive structures. Slightly different reproductive reward systems. Slightly different acquisition reward systems. Fairly different fear systems.

  • The difference is agency.

    May 21, 2020, 11:42 AM Can I say something politically incorrect that’s rather obvious in the political data, that’s made more obvious by the current crisis? Democrats and women are more unhappy and fearful. Conservaties and men are more disgust sensitive and paranoid but less fearful- and much happier. The difference is agency. Evaluate women’s opinions not as truth, or fact, or opinion, but as demand for men to do something to satisfy them. So is the underlying question teaching women how to express themselves in female terms of approval and disapproval, fear and want, rather than attempting to teach women to think in truth and fact? I mean, that’s what the postmodern program is about right?

  • The difference is agency.

    May 21, 2020, 11:42 AM Can I say something politically incorrect that’s rather obvious in the political data, that’s made more obvious by the current crisis? Democrats and women are more unhappy and fearful. Conservaties and men are more disgust sensitive and paranoid but less fearful- and much happier. The difference is agency. Evaluate women’s opinions not as truth, or fact, or opinion, but as demand for men to do something to satisfy them. So is the underlying question teaching women how to express themselves in female terms of approval and disapproval, fear and want, rather than attempting to teach women to think in truth and fact? I mean, that’s what the postmodern program is about right?

  • Human Behavioral Cycles

    May 21, 2020, 1:29 PM

    —“What is the nursing cycle?”—Michael Churchill

    1. The (dominance version) wake-hunt-feast-sex-sleep cycle.

    2. The predatory search, stalk, pounce, kill, cycle.

    3. And the female equivalent of search, evaluate, nurse(care), relax cycle (submissive version) and the child’s nurse version.

    Are all variations on the same regulatory cycles with slight variations in chemical composition (prepare the body, and incentivize the brain). We’re just biological machines. We make mechanical sense so to speak.

  • Human Behavioral Cycles

    May 21, 2020, 1:29 PM

    —“What is the nursing cycle?”—Michael Churchill

    1. The (dominance version) wake-hunt-feast-sex-sleep cycle.

    2. The predatory search, stalk, pounce, kill, cycle.

    3. And the female equivalent of search, evaluate, nurse(care), relax cycle (submissive version) and the child’s nurse version.

    Are all variations on the same regulatory cycles with slight variations in chemical composition (prepare the body, and incentivize the brain). We’re just biological machines. We make mechanical sense so to speak.

  • Conservatives = Happier Becuse Lower Neuroticism

    May 21, 2020, 1:46 PM (and higher disgust) Conservative states tend to have higher levels of life satisfaction because they have lower levels of neuroticism compared to liberal states, according to new research from a psychologist at Cape Breton University. The study, published in the journal Psychological Reports, helps explain why there is a correlation between higher conservatism and higher life satisfaction. “I have had longstanding interests in social, personality, and political psychology,” explained study author Stewart J. H. McCann. “My special interest in personality and its state-level correlates was sparked in 2008 when Dr. P. Jason Rentfrow of the University of Cambridge and his colleagues produced average scores for each of the 50 states on each of the five main personality dimensions—openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism—based on the responses of 619,397 residents of the USA to a widely used 44-item personality questionnaire. “Since that time, I have published 17 research articles showing relations between state-levels of these personality variables and various other important differences between states such as political attitudes, work satisfaction, illness, mortality, residential mobility, creativity, volunteering, emotional health, smoking, and obesity.” “Previous research by others had shown that conservatives generally were happier and more satisfied with their lives than liberals. But why?” McCann told PsyPost. “Three different explanations had been put forward by others. However, I thought that there might be a fourth and more convincing explanation.” “Existing research demonstrated that there are associations not only between higher conservatism and higher life satisfaction but also between lower neuroticism and higher life satisfaction and between lower neuroticism and higher conservatism. Perhaps if neuroticism was statistically controlled or effectively held constant, the association between higher conservatism and higher life satisfaction would vanish.” “The relation between conservatism and life satisfaction might be dependent upon neuroticism levels. The present study was conducted to test this possibility in a state-level analysis.” McCann analyzed data from Rentfrow’s study, Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index, U.S. Census Bureau, CBS News and the New York Times polls, and the presidential election results from 2000 to 2008. He found that differences in the levels of neuroticism in each state could account for the state-level association between higher conservatism and higher life satisfaction. Other factors he examined, including socioeconomic status, did not account for the association. “The results of the present study strongly suggest that there is nothing inherent in a conservative worldview as opposed to a liberal worldview that promotes greater happiness and life satisfaction,” McCann explained. “Rather it is the underlying higher neuroticism that tends to be more likely in liberals and the underlying lower neuroticism that tends to be more likely in conservatives that accounts for the greater happiness and life satisfaction in conservatives.” “For example, higher neuroticism is characterized by higher levels of vulnerability, self-consciousness, depression, tenseness, moodiness, angry hostility, impulsiveness, nervousness, anxiety, worry, emotional instability, and poor stress management. Clearly, such a constellation does not bode well for happiness and satisfaction with life.” The study used a cross-sectional methodology, meaning McCann cannot make inferences about cause and effect. He believes, based on previous research, that higher neuroticism fosters lower life satisfaction and that lower neuroticism promotes higher conservatism — but the reverse could also be true. His study has another caveat as well. “Readers must understand that this was a study carried out with the 50 states rather than a sample of individuals as the cases,” McCann explained. “What was found is that state levels of resident neuroticism can account for the relation between state levels of conservatism and state levels of life satisfaction. “I am assuming that the state-level relations are dependent upon parallel individual-level relations. Caution must be exercised in making such cross-level extrapolations. However, some comfort is taken from the fact that other researchers (Burton, Plaks, & Peterson, 2015) also have found the same dynamics in an individual-level analysis and reached the same conclusion regarding why conservatives tend to be happier and more satisfied with life.” The study was titled: “State Resident Neuroticism Accounts for Life Satisfaction Differences Between Conservative and Liberal States of the USA”. Source: https://www.psypost.org/2017/09/study-suggests-lower-levels-neuroticism-explain-conservative-states-happier-49627 DEFINING NEUROTICISM Neuroticism Neuroticism is one of the Big Five higher-order personality traits in the study of psychology. Individuals who score high on neuroticism are more likely than average to be moody and to experience such feelings as anxiety, worry, fear, anger, frustration, envy, jealousy, guilt, depressed mood, and loneliness. People who are neurotic respond worse to stressors and are more likely to interpret ordinary situations as threatening and minor frustrations as hopelessly difficult. They are often self-conscious and shy, and they may have trouble controlling urges and delaying gratification. Neuroticism is a trait in many models within personality theory, but there is a lot of disagreement on its definition. Some define it as a tendency for quick arousal when stimulated and slow relaxation from arousal, especially in concern to negative emotional arousal; others define it as emotional instability and negativity or maladjustment, in contrast to emotional stability and positivity, or good adjustment. Others yet define it as lack of self-control, poor ability to manage psychological stress, and a tendency to complain.[6] Various personality tests produce numerical scores, and these scores are mapped onto the concept of “neuroticism” in various ways, which has created some confusion in the scientific literature, especially with regard to sub-traits or “facets”.[6] Individuals who score low in neuroticism tend to be more emotionally stable and less reactive to stress. They tend to be calm, even-tempered, and less likely to feel tense or rattled. Although they are low in negative emotion, they are not necessarily high on positive emotion. Being high in scores of positive emotion is generally an element of the independent trait of extraversion. Neurotic extraverts, for example, would experience high levels of both positive and negative emotional states, a kind of “emotional roller coaster”.[7][8] (Impulsive) Neurotic <-> Calm (Agency) ======= STUDIES 1) State Resident Neuroticism Accounts for Life Satisfaction Differences Between Conservative and Liberal States of the USA Stewart J. H. McCannFirst Published August 11, 2017 Research Article Find in PubMed https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294117725072 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0033294117725072 Abstract Past research indicates associations between higher conservatism and higher life satisfaction, lower neuroticism and higher life satisfaction, and higher conservatism and lower neuroticism. Qualified deduction led to the following hypothesis: Neuroticism can account for the association between higher conservatism and higher life satisfaction. The 50 American states served as the units of analysis. Responses of 619,397 residents to the 44-item Big Five Inventory in an internet survey conducted from 1999 to 2005 provided mean neuroticism scores for each state. Conservative-liberal leaning of over 84,000 respondents to CBS News/New York Times polls from 1999 to 2003 and the percent voting Republican in each state in the 2000 to 2008 presidential elections combined to form a conservatism score for each state. The Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index provided life satisfaction scores for over 1,000,000 respondents, transforming to a 2008 to 2010 composite score for each state. In a sequential multiple regression equation with life satisfaction as the criterion, state socioeconomic status and white population percent entered first as a block, conservatism entered second, and neuroticism entered third, the demographic controls accounted for 45.7% of the variance, conservatism accounted for another 10.4%, and neuroticism accounted for an additional 10.6%. However, with the entry order of conservatism and neuroticism reversed, neuroticism accounted for another 19.6% but conservatism accounted for only an additional nonsignificant 1.4%. Therefore, the hypothesis was supported. Three alternative explanations suggested by other researchers were not supported in the state-level analysis. 2) Why Do Conservatives Report Being Happier Than Liberals? The Contribution of Neuroticism Caitlin M. Burton*a, Jason E. Plaksa, Jordan B. Petersona [a] Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. https://jspp.psychopen.eu/article/view/117/html Abstract Previous studies suggest that conservatives in the United States are happier than liberals. This difference has been attributed to factors including differences in socioeconomic status, group memberships, and system-justifying beliefs. We suggest that differences between liberals and conservatives in personality traits may provide an additional account for the “happiness gap”. Specifically, we investigated the role of neuroticism (or conversely, emotional stability) in explaining the conservative-liberal happiness gap. In Study 1 (N = 619), we assessed the correlation between political orientation (PO) and satisfaction with life (SWL), controlling for the Big Five traits, religiosity, income, and demographic variables. Neuroticism, conscientiousness, and religiosity each accounted for the PO-SWL correlation. In Study 2 (N = 700), neuroticism, system justification beliefs, conscientiousness, and income each accounted for PO-SWL correlation. In both studies, neuroticism negatively correlated with conservatism. We suggest that individual differences in neuroticism represent a previously under-examined contributor to the SWL disparity between conservatives and liberals.