Source: Original Site Post

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1543935364 Timestamp) Right(M)=conservative=empirical (truth) Left(F)=consumptive=ideal (fraud We are out of the period of family due to AMPF (Abrahamism, Marxism, Postmodernism, Feminism) and as such no longer ‘a people’ but Males and Females in Competition.

  • (FB 1543933688 Timestamp) THIS IS WHY THERE AREN’T AMAZON DRONES, ROBOTS, AND JE

    (FB 1543933688 Timestamp) THIS IS WHY THERE AREN’T AMAZON DRONES, ROBOTS, AND JETSONS The problem of batteries that have the energy density of gasoline, so that the weight of the energy and it’s means of conversion to physical movement. Or more simply, power to weight ratio. Rolling wheels, floating water, lift via air, all make use of land, water, air, to discount the cost of defeating gravity (compared to launching a rocket). If you want the distance coverage of an automobile without refueling (4 hrs), or planes (14 hrs), or boats (HP/.6 pr hr), or ships (150 tons per day or 75T for 8 hrs) we still lack the battery technology. And it is this battery technology that is the principle limitation on mechanical evolution. Hence why biological life forms are so vastly more complicated, but vastly more energy efficient. (You, by contrast, cost about the equivalent of a 100w light bulb to live).

  • (FB 1543935167 Timestamp) THERE IS NO COMPARISON TO OR EQUIVALENT OF CAPTURING N

    (FB 1543935167 Timestamp) THERE IS NO COMPARISON TO OR EQUIVALENT OF CAPTURING NATURAL DECAY (ENTROPY)

  • Curt Doolittle shared a link.

    (FB 1544068470 Timestamp) REQUIRED WATCHING https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aw_dIFcqtW4

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1543931717 Timestamp) YES, LACK OF AGENCY DRIVES POSTMODERN THOUGHT —“The postmodernists say that agency is a comforting falsehood. How does one adjudicate between you and them?”— John Tangney They are correct – for them. Agency is demonstrably the entire problem. And postmodernists, feminists, women, and the underclass are completely correct: they don’t have it. On the other hand, enough ‘men’ do if trained in what IS (the conservative empirical) rather than what SHOULD BE (the consumptive ideal), to govern in everyone’s interests despite the lack of agency by the vast majority of peoples. The question is why someone some group or some class would consider rule if one was in fact lacking agency — and worse, if both lacking agency and f–king aware of it.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1543934848 Timestamp) THE GRAMMARS AND THEIR FRAMES (important) Theology readers, vs philosophy readers, vs literature readers, vs historians, vs biologists, vvs jurists, s economists, vs physicist, vs programmers, vs mathematicians. Teach: Arts, Technologies, Economies, Laws, and Wars. In other words DEMONSTRATED history, not REPORTED history. Or stated differently, theology, philosophy, literature, and history, are just as vulnerable to REPORTING BIAS as are the pseudosciences of metaphysics, psychology, sociology, and ‘political science’. What’s the difference, and why have the pseudosciences (reportings) of the written word been so damaging compared to the law, sciences, logics, and mathematics? Lack of agency. Utility of coercion. Utility of deceit. -Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute

  • Answering Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals

    05 December 2018  (in progress… saving) The Female Method of Warfare:

    • Reputation Destruction,
    • Alliance Destruction,
    • Trust Destruction,
    • Social Destruction.

    RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)

    Curt Doolittle: The only material power is violence. Everything else is tolerance by the powerful. If you cannot use violence you are not in fact powerful. If you can use violence and you do not then you are unworthy of rule, and merely free riding, parasitizing, or conspiring. What does this teach you? Master Organized Violence. Use it with Zero Tolerance.

    RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don’t address the “real” issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)

    Curt Doolittle:: Straw manning is only effective if we are tolerant of straw manning, and avoiding the central issues at hand. The only reason not to engage in war, decimation, enslavement, and enserfment of the various type available, is truthful, productive, discourse on the central issues. If we cannot discourse on issues then we either war if we can, or are destroyed if we cannot. Ergo, the only power is Violence.

    RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

    Curt Doolittle:: Again, straw manning is effective in particular because those who specialize in truth, duty, sovereignty, reciprocity, voluntary exchange under the natural law, and markets in all aspects of life, develop specialization and habituation of doing so. Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Nietzsche (and me for that matter), and The Great Generals, are not telling us how to fight war. They are telling us that we must not be ‘christianized’ by our own moral rule. This is one of the secrets to the west’s success outside of the abrahamic dark age: rule by warriors ensures we are not victims of ingroup morality extended to outgroup conflict. It is also one of the reasons for the success of islam: it is a continuous call to war against aristocracy, by every living soul, to reverse aristocracy and restore dysgenic pastoralism.

    RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

    Curt Doolittle:: Critique is a powerful means of avoiding the act of providing a solution that ‘in total’ is more (need to understand how they seek reciprocity)

    RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)

    Curt Doolittle: Ridicule is not discussion, debate, or argument… it is admission one lacks one, and as such breaks the incentive for non violence necessary to negotiate. Therefore all cases of ridicule that are tolerated are nothing more than you avoiding the cost of policing the commons against those who would undermine, free ride, parasite, and predate.

    RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that any other human being. We all avoid “un-fun” activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)

    Curt Doolittle: tolerating small wins by the enemy only gives them positive reinforcement. If you are practicing truth, duty, sovereignty, reciprocity, natural law, and markets in everything the only objective people can have is falsehood and duty(debt) avoidance, reciprocity and non-sovereignty, arbitrary rule, and free riding, parasitism and predation, and in such cases they are almost always unwilling to trade improvement in their behavior for commons and consumption that results from their improved behavior.

    RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)

    CD: …

    RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)

    CD …

    RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists’ minds. The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)

    CD …

    RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management’s wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)

    CD …

    RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. (Old saw: If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have to have a compromise solution.)

    CD …

    RULE 12: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

    CD: …

  • (FB 1543933688 Timestamp) THIS IS WHY THERE AREN’T AMAZON DRONES, ROBOTS, AND JE

    (FB 1543933688 Timestamp) THIS IS WHY THERE AREN’T AMAZON DRONES, ROBOTS, AND JETSONS The problem of batteries that have the energy density of gasoline, so that the weight of the energy and it’s means of conversion to physical movement. Or more simply, power to weight ratio. Rolling wheels, floating water, lift via air, all make use of land, water, air, to discount the cost of defeating gravity (compared to launching a rocket). If you want the distance coverage of an automobile without refueling (4 hrs), or planes (14 hrs), or boats (HP/.6 pr hr), or ships (150 tons per day or 75T for 8 hrs) we still lack the battery technology. And it is this battery technology that is the principle limitation on mechanical evolution. Hence why biological life forms are so vastly more complicated, but vastly more energy efficient. (You, by contrast, cost about the equivalent of a 100w light bulb to live).

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1544033582 Timestamp) GODS AS UNITS OF MEASURE —“Curt, when you say ‘A GOD is a unit of measure’, what do you mean? This idea hit me strictly from the judeo christian “god made man in his image”. Like a blue print. But i have found that referring to god as a unit of measure only seems to offend christians jews and muslims. My point was never meant to insult. Yaweh , Allah, Odin, even Satan are units of measure. Where as men we are meant to measure ourselves against as to see how and where we need to grow to become better. …i had to quit talking about this at work.”— First, while most people consider the big ideas, very few people think very deep thoughts. And the vast majority who try (like anything else) fail catastrophically. I tend to avoid such conversations unless others start them and make some error that I feel they would benefit from, or the commons would benefit from, correcting. And then, it might be better to say that a god or gods function as a system of measurement, by which people of the same god, make the same measurements (judgments), because those measurements are commensurable (compatible). Different gods require different sets of measurements, producing different judgements, that are internally commensurable (compatible) but externally not. So in this sense it’s a system of measurement we are referring to. And that is because anthropomorphism is much easier for we simple human animals to work with that reason science, and calculation. There are some relatively universal traits among all gods, but there are many differences. Particularly when ‘gods’ are ‘spirits’ or ‘ancestors’ rather than fictional characters. Those gods we ‘thank’ and persist their investments in us (ancestors), those gods that are like fickle humans and fickle nature for us to thank for the good, and outwit for the bad (european), those gods that provide wisdom (buddha), those gods that are slave-owners (abrahamic), each function as a system of measurement by which we understand, judge, and act in response to the universe and gods and politics and each other. The western Method of math, logic, Science, Economics, Law, History and Literature is a better system of measure – for an aristocracy of the middle class and higher. It does however require a great deal more training for a great deal longer, than children’s stories and anthropomorphic systems of measurement.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1543931717 Timestamp) YES, LACK OF AGENCY DRIVES POSTMODERN THOUGHT —“The postmodernists say that agency is a comforting falsehood. How does one adjudicate between you and them?”— John Tangney They are correct – for them. Agency is demonstrably the entire problem. And postmodernists, feminists, women, and the underclass are completely correct: they don’t have it. On the other hand, enough ‘men’ do if trained in what IS (the conservative empirical) rather than what SHOULD BE (the consumptive ideal), to govern in everyone’s interests despite the lack of agency by the vast majority of peoples. The question is why someone some group or some class would consider rule if one was in fact lacking agency — and worse, if both lacking agency and f–king aware of it.