Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • Do White People Feel Uncomfortable When They Hear Non-whites Mention The Word “racist” Around Them?

    Because when a white person is called a racist, they understand (a) they are being alienated by the threat of violence (b) they are being alienated so that others can achieve self image by denigrating others, (c) they are aware that only european whites and east asians have succeeded in building high trust polities. (d) they are aware the critics are just hateful and envious.

    “No man is a hero to his debtors.”

    And the whole world is our debtor.

    We dragged makinkind one civilization at a time out of ignorance, superstition, poverty, starvation, hard labor, child mortality, early death, disease, tyranny, the vicissitudes of nature, and the uncertainty of a universe hostile to human life, and they resisted, kicking and screaming all the while. All these people are doing is kicking and screaming at being dragged out of their ancestral childhoods.

    A parent must never take the words of his teenagers seriously, any more than europeans must take the words of the underclasses seriously.

    https://www.quora.com/Do-white-people-feel-uncomfortable-when-they-hear-non-whites-mention-the-word-racist-around-them

  • At incomes of $32,000 a year white Westerners, by an large, are the global one p

    At incomes of $32,000 a year white Westerners, by an large, are the global one percent (https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/050615/are-you-top-one-percent-world.asp) The rest of the world is being indoctrinated on French Revolutionary ethos and tactics of human rights (https://qz.com/462264/how-the-rest-of-the-world-learns-about-the-american-revolution-in-school/) Does this storming of the proverbial Bastille begin to make a little more sense https://youtu.be/LY_Yiu2U2Ts

  • At incomes of $32,000 a year white Westerners, by an large, are the global one p

    At incomes of $32,000 a year white Westerners, by an large, are the global one percent (https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/050615/are-you-top-one-percent-world.asp) The rest of the world is being indoctrinated on French Revolutionary ethos and tactics of human rights (https://qz.com/462264/how-the-rest-of-the-world-learns-about-the-american-revolution-in-school/) Does this storming of the proverbial Bastille begin to make a little more sense https://youtu.be/LY_Yiu2U2Ts

  • Where Can Social Anthropologists Create Value In The Market Economy?

    As far as I know the soft (pseudo) sciences are done. Economics has taken over social and political science, and cognitive science has taken over psychology. The reason being that we are unable to report or theorize objectively in any and all aspects of life.

    As Max Weber anticipated, all life is reducible to calculation and life that is not reducible is not true.

    https://www.quora.com/Where-can-Social-Anthropologists-create-value-in-the-market-economy

  • Do You Agree With The Assertion That Some Races Have Higher IQ Than Other Races Naturally?

    I want to add what I believe the science currently tells us about differences in group intelligence.

    1. Differences in demographic distribution. Rather than state that the races possess terribly meaningful differences, the data suggests pretty strongly that certain groups have expanded their middle and upper classes under agrarianism, and some have expanded their lower and subclasses under pastoralism.
    2. Success at Neoteny/Pedomorphism in other words, ‘self domestication’ of certain groups was more effective largely because of geography. This is why intensity and rate sexual development is the inverse of intelligence in all groups. And this is measurable by testosterone in each race and subrace. Africans a lot, steppe/desert people a bit less, caucasians quite a bit less, and east asians a lot less. Why? Early maturity is absolutely necessary in Africa if for no other reason than the disease gradient. Late maturity or reduced depth of maturity (see body odor differences between races and ages), is beneficial in the rigours of above 45th agrarianism, and the genetic underclass cannot survive the seasonal cycles.
    3. Balance of Dimorphism. Male and female brains differ in structure and chemistry. Verbal and spatial specializations (biases really) follow these differences. Some groups demonstrate both bias to the female reproductive strategy and verbal superiority, some balance, and some demonstrate the bias to male reproductive strategy and spatial superiority.

    As far as I know all substantive differences in Homo Sapiens Sapiens are explicable by minor variations in endocrine expression both in utero and in early development.

    And that our racial differences are largely due to (a) the generation we left africa or remained there, and (b) the degree of neoteny and balance we achieved during self-domestication, and (c) the number and diversity of competitors we faced in our geography.

    And so far the data agrees.

    https://www.quora.com/Do-you-agree-with-the-assertion-that-some-races-have-higher-IQ-than-other-races-naturally

  • Will The Meeting Between Putin And Trump Actually Accomplish Anything?

    (The correct answer for the many well intentioned f—-ls)

    Trump always and everywhere negotiates. Great negotiators are not afraid of opponents, they are thrilled by the competition. Trump is a ruthless negotiator who has made an industry out of baiting opponents, entrapping them, and then controlling them. He creates opportunity for greedy people to act greedy, traps them and the exploits them for their greediness. This is why the bankruptcies are merely a tactic he uses to entrap greedy people, and corrupt bureaucrats. Where the ignorant person sees failure, the sophisticated person sees strategy.

    Trump is a competitor in the Nietzschean mold. He sees a meeting with Putin as an opportunity to learn how to win just as he sees a meeting with Kim as an opportunity to learn how to win. The worst that happens is that nothing happens. The best that happens is that he finds (as did Regan) an opportunity. He does not care about ‘face’ or your approval. He only cares about opportunities to win.

    Putin is terribly rational and very simple: russians never want to repeat the 1990’s and they respect strength. He saved them from chaos and has given them self respect back. All his stunts that cause us to react are just image building. We are just a tool for him to show his people he is strong. Just as we are just a tool for Kim to demand cash when he is bankrupt. Putin is actually very weak because he is under the control of his dependence upon the export of petroleum. The difference is that Kim can starve his people and retain power, and Putin can’t. Stalin would have starved them. Putin isn’t that strong.

    Trump’s point of view, and it is not false, is that Americans are weak negotiators trying to win friends and make their jobs easy at the expense of the middle american work force. His opinion (and he’s right) is that china is rising to replace us by stealing our technology and undermining our markets. It does not take skill to negotiate an agreement that is favorable to your opponents.

    How do I know this. I do exactly the same thing. Why? Because Kings, Generals, and Entrepreneurs, unlike corporate heads, bureaucrats, and politicians have a constituency of one. Themselves. Some people go public to make a windfall. some of us stay private so that we remain our masters. Trump stays private to remain his own master. The only place a man can still be king is in commerce.

    Very few people in contemporary life actually participate in the market economy at personal financial risk. Kings, Generals, Investors, and Entrepreneurs of every scale, do it every day.

    Trump acts like a king, general, and entrepreneur because he has always been an entrepreneur, and he was trained in a military school.

    He’s not looking for your approval. He’s just always testing himself to see if he can out compete. Because that is the only test that the Nietzschean man cares about: the test of the markets.

    https://www.quora.com/Will-the-meeting-between-Putin-and-Trump-actually-accomplish-anything

  • What Is The Difference Between An Ideology And A Belief?

    Terrible answers. Here is the correct one.

    Belief and Faith, because of our theological heritage have been conflated quite intentionally. So we have to deconflate (disambiguate) them before we can answer the question.

    A belief or reported preference refers to that which you report (state) that you understand to be True, and honestly think you will or do, act as if is True. (whether or not you actually act as such is something different.)

    A demonstrated preference refers to what we do regardless of what we believe, say we believe. This is why social sciences and psychology were pseudosciences and economics was necessary to stop them from spreading pseudoscience: people demonstrate preferences when they vote or purchase things, and they report, and say they believe very differently from how they vote or purchase. Hence we use only indirectly produced information to test people’s demonstrated preferences, and nearly all surveys are to large part meaningless on anything that someone would virtue signal (Google “Virtue Signaling”).

    An article of Faith requires we preserve belief (act as if true) something that is contrary to the evidence in order to preserve the value of acting in accordance with Wisdom Literature in order to achieve desirable ends, even when we don’t understand the relationship between cause and effect. In economic terms faith allows us to buy cheap options on achieving a personal or collective good, and renders one’s plans and actions invulnerable to rational and scientific persuasion. That is their value. It turns out that faith in others is the optimum strategy for producing high trust cooperation. That was just a theory until we proved it in the past century.

    An ideology functions, like literature, to inspire individuals to action under democracy. Ideologies need not be rational or consistent, and are less vulnerable to criticism if they are not. Ideology is the result of our change to (limited) democracy.

    A philosophy provides methods of decidability in order to achieve a desired state of affairs. The domain of philosophy is individual preferences, and interpersonal good.

    A logic provides a grammar (rules of continuous disambiguation) for the testing (criticism) of sets of constant relations for internal consistency between two or more states (falsification by competition).

    All disciplinary languages (grammars) from math to logic, to programming, to contract language, to common language, to fiction (and even ficitnoalisms – meaning pseudoscience, and theology) consist of variations in the rules of grammar (rules of continuous disambiguation), including variations in permissible vocabulary (paradigms).

    A science provides a formal process and makes use of instrumentation for the use of measurements for the elimination of ignorance, error, bias, and deceit, by the falsification (passage of testing) of categorical consistency, internal consistency, external correspondence, existential possibility, scope completeness, limits, and parsimony. If the science is a social science it must also include tests of rational choice given available knowledge and incentives (rationality), and if a matter of law, tests of voluntary reciprocity (morality)

    As far as I know this is the ‘state of the art’ set of definitions.

    Curt Doolittle,
    The Propertarian Institute,
    Kiev, Ukraine.

    READING

    Andrew Heywood : Political Ideologies : An Introduction.

    Emmanuel Todd: The Explanation of Ideology

    Thomas Sowell: A Conflict of Visions: Ideological Origins of Political Struggles

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-an-ideology-and-a-belief

  • Why Do People In Russia And Ukraine Have Asian Looking Eyes Even Though They Are White?

    Um, just to add tidbits for those fascinated by genetic heritage:

    Finnic peoples appear to have evolved around the Obskaya Gulf region (northern Russia near the arctic circle) as all of us seem to have evolved near waterways.

    It appears that they were invaded by (enslaved by, fought with) asiatic siberians in recent prehistory.

    We don’t think of it today, but the ‘eskimos’ (Inuit/Siberian/Arctic peoples) around the arctic circle were aggressive warriors and were successful at exterminating multiple tribal groups – including most of their predecessors in the new world.

    North Russians (Muscovites) are about 25% finnish composition. (If you are still one of those people that think ‘breeds of humans’ are indifferent science has arleady falsified the blank slate, and is in the process of falsifying tribe, subrace, and racial similarities – and we are pretty sure we know the sources of those differences.)

    Every gene study I have seen suggest that the mongol invasion had very little impact on the slavic peoples. Conversely, the slavic slave trade had a significant genetic impact on the Byzantine/Turkic population.

    The region’s major gene exporter was today’s Poland, and Poles, Ukrainians, and southern Russians (who are, contrary to russian ‘historicism’, ethnic and previously linguistic ukrainians) spread throughout the territory. They do not have this Finnic and Siberian admixture.

    Russia found eastern european and baltic countries too difficult to rule becasue they were more developed than ethnic russians. So the soviets moved rural russians who had been serfs (slaves) only one or two generations before, into eastern europe and the baltics as the work force.

    The asiatic population of siberia is trivial. Ethnic russians dominate the population everywhere except tribal areas just as canadians host tribal communities in the north.

    So we do see a bit of asiatic gene expression because of (a) russian relocation programs, (b) mongol invasion, (c) the usual territorial cross breeding, and (d) the mobility created by sail, rail, road, and the russian and soviet empires.

    Cheers

    https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-in-Russia-and-Ukraine-have-Asian-looking-eyes-even-though-they-are-white

  • What Are The Plausible Scenarios For A New Civil War In The U.s.? How Does It Start? How Is It Waged? What Are The Results?

    We are very close now. Very. At this level of agitation it will take a single spark that drives one side or the other to march. And I am pretty sure it will be the next election cycle.

    https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-plausible-scenarios-for-a-new-civil-war-in-the-U-S-How-does-it-start-How-is-it-waged-What-are-the-results

  • Why Do You Think Genetically And Ethnically Speaking Egyptians (they Are Usually Grouped Separately) Are So Distinct And Separate From Berbers And Other Groups Surrounding Egypt?

    There are two major admixture events that affected north africa.

    1. In historical order, Egyptians consist of about 45% late east africans, 45% South caucasians, and 10% Phoenicians.
    2. The last major migration out of africa was about 25000 years ago. Africa is best thought of as three or four separate “continents” due to its size and geography. The mediterranean, the desert, the ‘green band’ from west africa to ethiopia/Yemen, the inhospitable south, and the south/southeast coast.
    3. The civilization that developed on the trade route between ethiopia and yemen gave birth to that major migration. That migration “E”, spread north and then west into north africa.
    4. There was an admixture event between west eurasians (Caucasians “J1″) and these peoples. Current admixture (E+J1) is about even between the two. (An interesting nit is that it’s possible north africans domesticated cattle separately. ) I am not sure of the admixture relationship between the Phoenicians and Berbers, although I am certain there are people in the world who know that. It’s not an area that I have studied. As I understand it the Phoenicians (east mediterraneans) contributed about ten percent to the current distribution. So between Red Sea origins, north African expansion, conquest by or integration with, south caucasians (people with black hair), and conquest by/integration with the Phoenicians (as well as some mixture because of the usual mediterranean trade), I think we understand most of the genetic history of North Africans.
    5. The Arab conquest of North Africa that destroyed North African, Egyptian, and Levantine civilizations left less genetic impression on these peoples than one would think.
    6. In my understanding, there has been negligible crossover between subsaharan africans and north africans because the desert and distance has been prohibitive.
    7. The Roman defeat of Carthage (west phoenicians) was a catastrophe for mankind just as the battle between Sparta and Athens, and between Germany(ie: sparta) and england(ie:athens) were catastrophes. We never seem to learn from history that the farmer-army and merchant-navy require each other to compete successfully
    8. The Arab conquest was far worse however (as it was everywhere in the world), because islam is the last civilization to adjust to the end of the Abrahamic Dark Age and the Restoration of Science (the enlightenment) and the most resistant to it – and even if we are lucky, it will take another one to two hundred years of progress to bring north africa out of its current condition.

    Cheers

    https://www.quora.com/Why-do-you-think-genetically-and-ethnically-speaking-Egyptians-They-are-usually-grouped-separately-are-so-distinct-and-separate-from-Berbers-and-other-groups-surrounding-Egypt