Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • We Know the Devil – His Name Was Abraham

    —“The entire libertarian ideology is baiting into hazard via suggestion.”—Chris Moyer

    Yes. christianity, islam, marxism, postmodernism, feminism, libertarianism and neoconservatism are all baiting into hazard – so are freudianism, boasianism, cultural marxism, political correctness, and human-biodiversity-denialism. Europeans speak in the language of the gods written in the hands of the gods, math, science, natural law, and testimony. If you are a devil what language would you speak? What does our foundational myth of the blacksmith and the demon tell us? The devils bait you into hazard with false promise. We know the name of the devil.His name was Abraham.He was from Ur.

  • We Know the Devil – His Name Was Abraham

    —“The entire libertarian ideology is baiting into hazard via suggestion.”—Chris Moyer

    Yes. christianity, islam, marxism, postmodernism, feminism, libertarianism and neoconservatism are all baiting into hazard – so are freudianism, boasianism, cultural marxism, political correctness, and human-biodiversity-denialism. Europeans speak in the language of the gods written in the hands of the gods, math, science, natural law, and testimony. If you are a devil what language would you speak? What does our foundational myth of the blacksmith and the demon tell us? The devils bait you into hazard with false promise. We know the name of the devil.His name was Abraham.He was from Ur.

  • The Deal with The Devil – False Mindfulness

    “[T]he Smith and the Devil” may be one of the oldest European folk tales, with the basic plot stable throughout the Indo-European speaking world from India to Scandinavia, possibly being first told in Indo-European 6,000 years ago in the Bronze Age. A blacksmith strikes a deal with a malevolent supernatural being, such as the Devil, Death or a genie. The blacksmith exchanges his soul for the power to weld any materials together. He then uses this power to stick the devil to an immovable object, such as a tree, to renege on his side of the bargain. In Faust, the protagonist is highly successful yet dissatisfied with his life, which leads him to make a pact with the Devil at a crossroads, exchanging his soul for unlimited knowledge and worldly pleasures. Faust is irrevocably damned One may not have mindfulness by making a bargain with a devil in god’s dress. This basic plot is stable throughout the Indo-European speaking world, from India to Scandinavia, according to the research. The study said this tale could be traced back to the Proto-Indo-European society when metallurgy likely existed and there was archaeological and genetic evidence of massive territorial expansions by nomadic tribes from the Pontic steppe (the northern shores of the Black Sea) between 5,000 and 6,000 years ago.

  • The Deal with The Devil – False Mindfulness

    “[T]he Smith and the Devil” may be one of the oldest European folk tales, with the basic plot stable throughout the Indo-European speaking world from India to Scandinavia, possibly being first told in Indo-European 6,000 years ago in the Bronze Age. A blacksmith strikes a deal with a malevolent supernatural being, such as the Devil, Death or a genie. The blacksmith exchanges his soul for the power to weld any materials together. He then uses this power to stick the devil to an immovable object, such as a tree, to renege on his side of the bargain. In Faust, the protagonist is highly successful yet dissatisfied with his life, which leads him to make a pact with the Devil at a crossroads, exchanging his soul for unlimited knowledge and worldly pleasures. Faust is irrevocably damned One may not have mindfulness by making a bargain with a devil in god’s dress. This basic plot is stable throughout the Indo-European speaking world, from India to Scandinavia, according to the research. The study said this tale could be traced back to the Proto-Indo-European society when metallurgy likely existed and there was archaeological and genetic evidence of massive territorial expansions by nomadic tribes from the Pontic steppe (the northern shores of the Black Sea) between 5,000 and 6,000 years ago.

  • “Libertarians Are Welfare Queens”

    —“In the same way libertarians rally about welfare bad actors in terms of economics, libertarians are “welfare queens” in the sense that they want all the trappings of a high trust society and commons without their own participation in it. They’re Just welfare queens of the flip side of the coin.”—Zachary Bert

    Robert Danis That’s why I stopped becoming a libertarian you have to have some type of restrictions but you don’t need odorous laws like we have today and are trying to be created. Mikey Lirón Altho there certainly after Libertarians who feel entitled to things and not have to pay for them Adam Jacob Robert Walker Mikey Lirón A slave contributes to the wishes of his master, obligated by threat of violence or harm. He contributes for his own survival. A slave eats food in order to survive and surviving means enduring slavery. A slave has no choice other than to hope for an early death, opportunity for suicide, or chance to revolt and gain his freedom. “This is no endorsement of it, nor is it an acceptance of obligation to contribute.” This is the point the OP is making. Libertarians don’t contribute or accept the obligation to contribute when granted liberty. They do this by using the NAP (half truth) as an excuse to free ride and not contribute to the commons. Curt’s question gets at the heart of it. What choice do you have? What incentive do sovereigns (those with a monopoly on violent coercion ie govt) have to grant you liberty if you don’t respect the commons created by those who granted it to you? Curt Doolittle Why should those of with numbers, capital, and territorial control, let you live? Abigail Elizabeth The Libertarians who agree to contribute to and respect the commons are probably Propertarians who just don’t know it yet. 😉

  • “Libertarians Are Welfare Queens”

    —“In the same way libertarians rally about welfare bad actors in terms of economics, libertarians are “welfare queens” in the sense that they want all the trappings of a high trust society and commons without their own participation in it. They’re Just welfare queens of the flip side of the coin.”—Zachary Bert

    Robert Danis That’s why I stopped becoming a libertarian you have to have some type of restrictions but you don’t need odorous laws like we have today and are trying to be created. Mikey Lirón Altho there certainly after Libertarians who feel entitled to things and not have to pay for them Adam Jacob Robert Walker Mikey Lirón A slave contributes to the wishes of his master, obligated by threat of violence or harm. He contributes for his own survival. A slave eats food in order to survive and surviving means enduring slavery. A slave has no choice other than to hope for an early death, opportunity for suicide, or chance to revolt and gain his freedom. “This is no endorsement of it, nor is it an acceptance of obligation to contribute.” This is the point the OP is making. Libertarians don’t contribute or accept the obligation to contribute when granted liberty. They do this by using the NAP (half truth) as an excuse to free ride and not contribute to the commons. Curt’s question gets at the heart of it. What choice do you have? What incentive do sovereigns (those with a monopoly on violent coercion ie govt) have to grant you liberty if you don’t respect the commons created by those who granted it to you? Curt Doolittle Why should those of with numbers, capital, and territorial control, let you live? Abigail Elizabeth The Libertarians who agree to contribute to and respect the commons are probably Propertarians who just don’t know it yet. 😉

  • European and East Asian Gods vs Desert Gods

    [E]uropean titans or giants ( the distant unknown past), gods(immortals with powers) demigods(mortal with powers) and heroes(mortal with exceptional talents) are unlike semitic and iranic gods (omniscient and omnipotent) they are more akin to ancestor spirits. To declare one’s self a god was to personify the state, and demand loyalty to the people, the state, and the emperor, as one did the gods. Sacrifice was a demonstration of loyalty just as immaterial prayer, belief in a falsehood, ritual, is a cost as a demonstration of loyalty)

  • European and East Asian Gods vs Desert Gods

    [E]uropean titans or giants ( the distant unknown past), gods(immortals with powers) demigods(mortal with powers) and heroes(mortal with exceptional talents) are unlike semitic and iranic gods (omniscient and omnipotent) they are more akin to ancestor spirits. To declare one’s self a god was to personify the state, and demand loyalty to the people, the state, and the emperor, as one did the gods. Sacrifice was a demonstration of loyalty just as immaterial prayer, belief in a falsehood, ritual, is a cost as a demonstration of loyalty)

  • Eliminate the Capitalism vs Socialism Extremist Problem.

    —“Jacob Schiff and Paul Warburg showed that ethnocentrism trumps the dichotomy “isms” of economics but we’re still bound to an “ism” at a group strategy level.”—Chris Moyer

    In other words ethnocentrism and rule of law of reciprocity will eliminate the capitalism vs socialism extremist problem.

  • Eliminate the Capitalism vs Socialism Extremist Problem.

    —“Jacob Schiff and Paul Warburg showed that ethnocentrism trumps the dichotomy “isms” of economics but we’re still bound to an “ism” at a group strategy level.”—Chris Moyer

    In other words ethnocentrism and rule of law of reciprocity will eliminate the capitalism vs socialism extremist problem.