Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • Read “You Gentiles” and substitute Jew with Woman, and Gentile with Men and the

    Read “You Gentiles” and substitute Jew with Woman, and Gentile with Men and the entire argument will make sense and explain our differences. They are cognitively female. It should not surprise us that they war from within as do females. They need a host like women need hosts.

    Let me help you Maruice Samuel: Because we are men, and you are women. And that is why you cannot think and feel as we do, and why we cannot as you. This is why you, like women endure but do not innovate, and possess self-confidence but not self-determination: you are all female.

    GENERATIONS OF MAN: Gen1: Kho-San, Gen2: Modern Africans, Gen3: South Eurasians, Gen4: East Asians, Gen5: Europeans.

    We don’t know the direction of jewish evolution – whether they were more feminine to begin with(doesn’t appear so) or whether they adapted to their strategy (appears so).

    They retain south Eurasian (a) features, (b) clannishness, (c) aggression – and have evolved (d) female neuroticism and female social order.
    Should be achievable within eleven or twelve generations of inbreeding and strong selection.

    Both we and they: strong selection pressure.

    Well, Europeans have heavily selected for ANE and Steppe traits, and against Anatolian Neolithic Farmer and WHG traits. But that said we are still hybrids. That’s not the same as east Asians. They’re less hybridized, and they are a direct notenization of the earliest diaspora.

    The IE revolution created a different race from the South Eurasian, just as the South Eurasian a different race from the African. There is a pattern to that evolution. And it is to rate of adaptation. We are trusting and trustworthy because of loyalty. You are only devoted.

    Once you see it you can’t unsee it.
    They’re cognitively female.
    And worse, they provide evidence of how all women really think and feel.
    Which is why men have been responsibile for their sisters, wives and daughters throughout history.

    Your femininity brings the advantage of empathy, verbal acuity, workload, acquisitiveness(shopping-trading vs producing-engineering), with neuroticism, moral panic, pettiness status-seeking, hyperconsumption, hypergamy, need for control, and inability to scale organizations …

    … and perhaps most importantly intolerance of variation in friends, causing the demand for socal construction of alternate realities of hyperconformity.
    You have demonstrated for all mankind the fully mature female order. And in doing so demonstrated its non-viability w/o men.

    That is what separates us – an inescapable gulf – between the Jewish feminine devotion that will not bear costs of commons, and the European male loyalty that will bear the costs of the commons. In other words – you are selfish. And that is why you have failed w/o men.

    You don’t expect a dog not to act like a dog. It will disappoint you. You just train the dog AND yourself, so that you and the dog are mutually free of disappointment.

    Humans need training.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-06-26 14:34:58 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106477525304091079

  • @Afterrthought Yep. We don’t realize that we’re the most recent speciation of ma

    @Afterrthought Yep. We don’t realize that we’re the most recent speciation of man and that in fact the others are archaic species. The question is only which species wins, or whether we hybridize at our cost.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-06-24 15:39:52 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106466455897754253

  • NO. FREDOM OF SPEECH TO SAY WHAT? — “You seriously want to ban free speech? You

    NO. FREDOM OF SPEECH TO SAY WHAT?

    — “You seriously want to ban free speech? You guys suck ass” — A Moron

    Don’t be stupid. We ban fraudulent speech today in commerce. There is no reason we can’t ban fraudulent speech in politics (‘in public, to the public, in matters public’). It’s more important. Why should anyone be able to commercialize, industrialize and institutionalize fraud?

    Speech that’s free from accountability for doing harm by error, bias, deceit or fraud is contrary to what founders intended? Absolutely not.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-06-24 15:28:03 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106466409443689426

  • COGFEM VS COGMALE THINKING (I’m just working through this line of reasoning.) Th

    COGFEM VS COGMALE THINKING
    (I’m just working through this line of reasoning.)

    There is a vast difference between disambiguation (what we do) and deconstruction (what the enemy does). We seek truth to adapt to the universe and benefit from transforming it (Power). They seek not to adapt and to parasitically live off the production of others. (Retaliation).

    The CogFem consists of ‘shopping’ (gathering) and the CogMale consists of ‘engineering’ (hunting). And I think that paradigm might provide the intuitionistic explanatory power – the model – that helps us understand the difference between the sexes.

    The sex differences in the way we do math, and the limits in math and all theoretical construction, expose the substantial differences in the sexes. But as I’ve tried to point out reductio testing does not expose that difference in intuitions – needs real-world problem-solving.

    Shopping, Parasitism, and Non-Adaptation (CogFem), vs Engineering, Producing and Adapting (CogMale). Civ was the result of domestication that made possible sufficient asymmetric production, that the hyperconsumption, maladaptation, and dysgenia of females could be domesticated.

    One of the core insights of the European vs Jewish Systems of Decidability: Compromise, Reasonableness, Consensus are limited to preferences and reduce the cognitive burden of the individual when ability and information are lacking. But aren’t “True or adaptive.”

    We’re bots. Mothers have the behaviors they need. Men have the behaviors they need. Voluntary cooperation assists us in calculating an equilibrium between needs, wants ability and resources in time.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-06-24 15:24:57 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106466397238693134

  • “(venomous rant against white people)”— No. They just resent those who try to

    –“(venomous rant against white people)”—

    No. They just resent those who try to ALTER the civilization’s manners, ethics, morals, traditions, institutions, laws, economy, education, religion, history, and knowledge that their ancestors demonstrated is the most innovative and adaptive, and prosperous, and beneficial to man, in all of human history across all civilizations- at the expense of suppression of the reproduction of the unfit for markets of merit in all walks of life – and is the reason why all these idiots demanding change and immigration come here is to create a conflict between what makes our civilization possible and their genetics and culture which only serve to undermine it.

    So FULL INTEGRATION if you can, and if you can’t, then leave. It’s not complicated.

    The fact that races stick together in all walks of life: friendship, work, neighborhoods, marriage, social groups, activities, religion and political organization.

    These are facts. Secondly yes, there are vast differences in the cotnitive and social abilities of the races. No one would care if everyone fully integrated, but they don’t.

    They burn down our civilization by wanting it to suit them when it can’t. Becuase they’re unsuitable for the civilization.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-06-24 14:55:03 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106466279658561749

  • Boost of @a Susan Sontag (born Susan Rosenblatt) decried in 1967. “The white rac

    Boost of @a Susan Sontag (born Susan Rosenblatt) decried in 1967. “The white race is the cancer of human history; it is the white race and it alone—its ideologies and inventions—which eradicates autonomous civilizations wherever it spreads,” she wrote, “which has upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of life itself.” When people ask for a definition of CRT, point them to Sontag. – @Emeriticus

    Source date (UTC): 2021-06-24 02:57:03 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106468331364279922

  • @Afterrthought @StJ Generally speaking, AFAIK, differences in locality are due t

    @Afterrthought@StJ Generally speaking, AFAIK, differences in locality are due to which sex produces the greatest productivity in the division of labor. There is a reason for the success of patrilocal peoples. Same for the evolution of matriarchal influence – becuase the men are off at war, or dead, and women must manage home and society.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-06-23 09:48:58 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106459413799293136

  • @StJ @Afterrthought (Hello StJ. Thanks for the work you do.) 😉

    @StJ@Afterrthought (Hello StJ. Thanks for the work you do.) 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2021-06-23 09:40:18 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106459379674332263

  • YES WE CAN OUTLAW THE ENEMY’S METHOD AND USE THE GOVERNMENT AND COURT AND MILITI

    YES WE CAN OUTLAW THE ENEMY’S METHOD AND USE THE GOVERNMENT AND COURT AND MILITIA TO DESTROY THEM.

    Well, in simple terms, all entertainment contains metaphysics, contains a group strategy, and produces behavior by suggestion using imitation, sympathy, and empathy – just as does religion – as an extension of religion: mythos propagation.

    So? In law, it’s testable for SEDITION.

    So the enemy uses sedition by the industrialization of lying, because we do not defend our informational commons, from sedition and treason by hostile religions, that use suggestion rather than testimony that conforms to self-determination by sovereignty and reciprocity.

    So you see that once law is a science, and its formal logic has been articulated (P-Law) there are no longer any means of WARFARE against the institutions of cultural production other than testifiable, truthful reciprocal argument free of circumvention of human reason.

    So we need to limit truth, possibility, and want claims, in public, to the public, in matters public, to self determination, by sovereignty and reciprocity in display word and deed. This would cleanse the informational commons of falsehood, false promise, deceit, and fraud.

    Everyone wants to get away with their own petty crimes, but they don’t want others to get away with theirs. So yes there is a natural tendency from petty criminals to object to the incremental suppression of petty crimes. But the enemy religion is spread by petty crime.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-06-22 14:59:10 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106454971247629994

  • The Culture by Culture War Against Anglo Restoration Of Empirical Law of Sovereigns.

    NOTES: (General Criticisms, not of Prof Toombs, but in general, of the 20th-century social pseudosciences including that of economics and law. The interesting question is why did we begin pseudosciences in parallel with darwin and why did we evolve so many pseudosciences in the postwar period? ) 1. “Correctly Describe How The Engine Works” = Circular Argument(sophistry). “Why do we need an engine at all?” = Science (Decidability). 2. Natural Law = Cooperation = Self Determination, Sovereignty, Reciprocity (Law) – within the limits of Proportionality (Legislation). That’s science. Everything else requires the starting point where were are not sovereign, but some degree of slave or serf. 3. Natural Law = Science = Rule of Law, where each of us is sovereign and where legislation consists in, and is limited to, contracts between sovereigns: where sovereignty are the commons equivalent of private-sector shareholders: investors by demonstrated behavior. 4. Positive Law = Sophistry = Rule by Men, where each of us is serf, and legislation consists of command by others who are sovereign. It’s not complicated. 5. Rule of Law where we are sovereign and have the right to self-determination… if we choose. Otherwise, we must be freemen, serfs, or ‘slaves’. It’s not an opinion. It’s simply a fact. Versus Rule by Man, absence of sovereignty, and reciprocity. 6. The violation of our history of a hierarchy of man, family, serfdom > MANOR LAW. Freeman > Common Law. Sovereign > Court Law. 7. So there exists an enlightenment demand for the security of Manor Law (serfdom) in conflict with the demand for common law (freemen) and court law (citizens). The enlightenment ‘one class of everyone’ is as ridiculous as the Marxist, and libertarian and liberal ‘one class of everyone’. We need three economies, and three sets of laws, in a hierarchy if we are to have a diverse population no longer pacified by centuries of northern European or east Asian Manorialism and Credit Service both of which suppressed the reproduction of those unfit for markets. 8. Failure to understand why the west evolves so much faster than the rest of mankind leads to failure to understand that our law was the cause of that rapid adaptation – because it fosters maximum calculation by trial and error of means of advancement. 9. The western law is the most hyper-adaptive because it has the lowest friction and the least abstraction. 10. FWIW: Raz, Kelsen, Dworkin, and Hart are not culturally European but from a subculture that relies on POSITIVE LAW: Rule by Judges (Kritarchy). Not rule of Law (sovereignty). Smith+Locke > {Blackstone + Jefferson + Adams et al) > (Hayek + Epstein) VERSUS: Hobbes > { Anglo: Austin + Bentham } > { Germans: Schmidt et al } > Jews { Raz, Kelsen, Hartt, Dworkin etc} … maybe the Russians are next in the sequence of continuing the empirical spread of anglo empiricism and the culture-by-culture attempt to justify authority instead … thus repeating with democracy the continuous war against the usurpation of the natural law (traditional, common, germanic) by kings. It’s no different today than in the past.