Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • If Defenders Of Communism Could Not Use The Phrase “that Wasn’t Real Communism,” What Would Their Defence Be?

    (Thanks for asking me to answer, and yes this area (Pseudoscience Pseudo-rationalism, Abrahamism, and Pilpul) is one of my specialties. You will easily make note of other people’s use of pseudoscientific psychologisms, unrelated justifications, and outright excuses in some other answers.)

    My response would be the same scientific response that the entire empirical establishment settled by the 1960’s.

    1. The organization of economic calculation necessary for complex multi-part networks of production is impossible without money and prices. Imputations cannot be made. However, assuming a people desired a minimum autarkic (insulated from external trade) static economy (and underclasses often do), then at least in theory, aside from adaptation to shocks, it might be possible, albeit the middle class would be very unlikely to develop, and a managerial and bureaucratic elite might be able to direct production, distribution, trade, and consumption.
    2. Assuming the calculation of production was possible, we are stuck with the organization of people in the act of production, distribution, and transfer (trade). And people demonstrated universally, and continue to demonstrate universally, that they will both do the minimum possible, engage in false reporting, and engage in corruption and fraud to do the minimum possible, because they have no incentive to do otherwise.
    3. Humans need to demonstrate status signals in order to obtain mates. Without access to markets of all kinds to do so, they do so by political, and black market means. Humans need new experiences. Black markets form and black markets compete with command driven production.
    4. In every place it has been tried, the centralization can be used to rapidly advance a backward country without incurring external financial debt, but as a byproduct the people never develop the middle class of managers and resource calculators necessary to develop middle class norms, manners, ethics and morals.
    5. The reverse solution has won out, which is to preserve status signaling, preserve markets, and produce common goods where markets fail. Poor people in america wear designer clothes cast off by the middle class in thrift stores for example.
    6. The failure of the american model is due to heterogeneity since no people will permit the sacrifice of their own in order to let loose a political competitor.
    7. The failure of the european model is the intertemporal version of the failure of communism: people reproduced insufficiently and engaged in work lives insufficiently to perpetuate the one-generation of benefits of redistribution under american protection that obviated their spending on defense.
    8. There is no difference between communism, socialism, and social democracy except the time for to accumulate consequences. Or as others have said, any kind of democracy is just the slow road to communism – and the deterministic outcome of communism: suicide.
    9. The abrahamic deception (pseudoscientific religion) of the ancient world killed something on the order of 500M people – mostly due to the Arabs – and destroyed four great civilizations of profound achievement and duration – creating the Abrahamic Dark Age. The second Abrahamic deception of Marxism, Boazianism, Freudianism, the Frankfurt and Postmodern schools, has killed no less than 100M, so far, and set large parts of the globe back a century. The chinese were the smartest and walled off the barbarian peoples. The romans began the project but were overwhelmed, and cold not complete it. Had we walled off europe from the urals to the bosphorus we might have saved ourselves from the Abrahamic Dark Age. However, due to northern european persistence and isolation it was possible to restore western civilization and climb out of the Abrahamic Dark Age via empiricism, and eventually science, technology, accounting, contract, and the western natural law of torts.
    10. Europeans have dragged mankind out of ignorance, superstition, poverty, hard labor, disease, and tyranny by one means: markets. Why? Because european civilization is predicated upon sovereignty and non-submission. An as such the only means of cooperation is via market competition. And markets calculate what men cannot through that continuous process of trial and error we call ‘innovation’.

    Marxism was and always will be a pseudoscience. Marxist ‘economics’ and history, Boazian athropology, Freudian Psychology, Cantorian sets, and Frankfurt school aesthetics, were all pseudoscientific at best, and outright lies at worst. Just as the Abrahamic Pilpul that they originated from:the invention of the industrialization of lying.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev Ukraine

    https://www.quora.com/If-defenders-of-communism-could-not-use-the-phrase-That-wasnt-real-communism-what-would-their-defence-be

  • Is Communism Unstable?

    it’s impossible, so it cannot come into being such that it could be stable or unstable.

    https://www.quora.com/Is-communism-unstable

  • Why Is Innovation Worshipped In Modern Societies Around The Globe?

    —”Why is innovation worshipped in modern societies around the globe?”—

    Because it provides (a) marginally different market goods, and markets require either marginally different market goods to decrease prices or on the down side to encourage continuous spending cycles on the up side. (b) marginally different goods provide a people with competitive market advantage and therefore wealth. (c) with wealth generated in markets people can produce commons that are cannot be produced without the wealth generated by markets. (d) innovation provides people with status signals and status signals are increasingly necessary as we become aware of our relative positions outside of the relative position of our local group. Yes really. Why? Primitive people when made aware of their poverty commit suicide in vast numbers. Adam and eve is a good story. But the truth is, they both hang themselves after biting the apple and discovering their ignorance.

    https://www.quora.com/Why-is-innovation-worshipped-in-modern-societies-around-the-globe

  • Why Do Americans Love To Sue Each Other?

    —-”Why do Americans love to sue each other?”—-

    TWO REASONS, 1-COMMERCIAL, and 2-CIVIL

    1 – COMMERCIAL. Europeans and most of the world REGULATE ability to engage in agreements. Americans RESOLVE conflicts in court instead. This is why there is such a big difference between american and european innovation at all but the macro industrial levels, and frankly why europeans are poorer than americans (aside from the number of hours worked).

    So europeans and most others use BUREAUCRATIC PRIOR RESTRAINT to limit conflict at the expense of experimentation, innovation, and the size of the entrepreneurial classes, and Americans use JURIDICAL RESOLUTION to resolve conflict in order to obtain experimentation, innovation, the size of the entrepreneurial classes, despite the (lower) cost of juridical resolutoin.

    Americans consider the RIGHT TO FAIL part of liberty. Europeans (it seems strange to us) are afraid of failure. For example Bankruptcy for an american entrepreneur who tries again, simply means he’s heroic for having tried, and more heroic for getting up and doing it again. Whereas in europe it’s still socially unacceptable. (Which in modern economic terms is rather ridiculous).

    So different societies place controls at different places and pay different prices for those controls. Americans favor rule of law by the natural law of tort while what we consider the ‘nanny state’ prohibits such experimentation.

    (I have owned businesses internationally and … I wouldn’t even consider doing business in France because of laws, or Italy because of the impossibility of the tax code). It’s 10x as hard in canada, and 50x as hard in the UK. For no good reason. It’s always seems like some moron takes great pride in throwing up requirements and objections to suppress non existent or marginal risks. (That and brits tend to be fairly lazy.) Germans are wonderful people at all levels but the bureaucracy inhibiting entrepreeneurship is just daunting.

    In america you can pretty much lose money for three years and never pay a dime in taxes. If you do it right you can lose money for ten years an never pay a dime in taxes. This is how people learn to become entrepreneurs – by failing a little bit until they succeed.

    2 – CIVIL. We have nothing in common except commerce, and all claims of a melting pot outside of dense urban centers are false. Unlike European countries we have been prohibited sine the 1960’s from enforcing norms. So Americans had the same problem with Jewish conformity in the 20th century that Europeans are having with Islamic conformity – and for the same reasons. We allowed this process to continue with tolerance and it ended up destroying our nation by way of ‘diversity’. Ergo, without norms enforced we must LITIGATE disputes. This will come to europe if it hasn’t already.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

    https://www.quora.com/Why-do-Americans-love-to-sue-each-other

  • Which European Ethnicity, Country, And People Have The Biggest Noses On Average?

    Greeks and southern italians because they are genetically west asian (anatolian/mesopotamian) rather than genetically european (german/scandinavian/polish/ukrainian/russian) and the difference being lower pedomorphic development in the anatolian/mesopotamian world.

    https://www.quora.com/Which-European-ethnicity-country-and-people-have-the-biggest-noses-on-average

  • If Defenders Of Communism Could Not Use The Phrase “that Wasn’t Real Communism,” What Would Their Defence Be?

    (Thanks for asking me to answer, and yes this area (Pseudoscience Pseudo-rationalism, Abrahamism, and Pilpul) is one of my specialties. You will easily make note of other people’s use of pseudoscientific psychologisms, unrelated justifications, and outright excuses in some other answers.)

    My response would be the same scientific response that the entire empirical establishment settled by the 1960’s.

    1. The organization of economic calculation necessary for complex multi-part networks of production is impossible without money and prices. Imputations cannot be made. However, assuming a people desired a minimum autarkic (insulated from external trade) static economy (and underclasses often do), then at least in theory, aside from adaptation to shocks, it might be possible, albeit the middle class would be very unlikely to develop, and a managerial and bureaucratic elite might be able to direct production, distribution, trade, and consumption.
    2. Assuming the calculation of production was possible, we are stuck with the organization of people in the act of production, distribution, and transfer (trade). And people demonstrated universally, and continue to demonstrate universally, that they will both do the minimum possible, engage in false reporting, and engage in corruption and fraud to do the minimum possible, because they have no incentive to do otherwise.
    3. Humans need to demonstrate status signals in order to obtain mates. Without access to markets of all kinds to do so, they do so by political, and black market means. Humans need new experiences. Black markets form and black markets compete with command driven production.
    4. In every place it has been tried, the centralization can be used to rapidly advance a backward country without incurring external financial debt, but as a byproduct the people never develop the middle class of managers and resource calculators necessary to develop middle class norms, manners, ethics and morals.
    5. The reverse solution has won out, which is to preserve status signaling, preserve markets, and produce common goods where markets fail. Poor people in america wear designer clothes cast off by the middle class in thrift stores for example.
    6. The failure of the american model is due to heterogeneity since no people will permit the sacrifice of their own in order to let loose a political competitor.
    7. The failure of the european model is the intertemporal version of the failure of communism: people reproduced insufficiently and engaged in work lives insufficiently to perpetuate the one-generation of benefits of redistribution under american protection that obviated their spending on defense.
    8. There is no difference between communism, socialism, and social democracy except the time for to accumulate consequences. Or as others have said, any kind of democracy is just the slow road to communism – and the deterministic outcome of communism: suicide.
    9. The abrahamic deception (pseudoscientific religion) of the ancient world killed something on the order of 500M people – mostly due to the Arabs – and destroyed four great civilizations of profound achievement and duration – creating the Abrahamic Dark Age. The second Abrahamic deception of Marxism, Boazianism, Freudianism, the Frankfurt and Postmodern schools, has killed no less than 100M, so far, and set large parts of the globe back a century. The chinese were the smartest and walled off the barbarian peoples. The romans began the project but were overwhelmed, and cold not complete it. Had we walled off europe from the urals to the bosphorus we might have saved ourselves from the Abrahamic Dark Age. However, due to northern european persistence and isolation it was possible to restore western civilization and climb out of the Abrahamic Dark Age via empiricism, and eventually science, technology, accounting, contract, and the western natural law of torts.
    10. Europeans have dragged mankind out of ignorance, superstition, poverty, hard labor, disease, and tyranny by one means: markets. Why? Because european civilization is predicated upon sovereignty and non-submission. An as such the only means of cooperation is via market competition. And markets calculate what men cannot through that continuous process of trial and error we call ‘innovation’.

    Marxism was and always will be a pseudoscience. Marxist ‘economics’ and history, Boazian athropology, Freudian Psychology, Cantorian sets, and Frankfurt school aesthetics, were all pseudoscientific at best, and outright lies at worst. Just as the Abrahamic Pilpul that they originated from:the invention of the industrialization of lying.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev Ukraine

    https://www.quora.com/If-defenders-of-communism-could-not-use-the-phrase-That-wasnt-real-communism-what-would-their-defence-be

  • Can The Middle East Conflict Ever Be Solved?

    The middle eastern conflict can only be resolved by ending the false borders imposed by the europeans at the end of the world wars, and converting to ethnic (tribal) governments. The middle east is going through its enlightenment, and they are the last people on the planet to do so – and putting up the strongest resistance in no small part because they were the furthest behind. Every civilization has resisted modernity. It’s logical that the primitive power structures be replaced with ratio-empirical structures.

    https://www.quora.com/Can-the-Middle-East-conflict-ever-be-solved

  • Why Is Innovation Worshipped In Modern Societies Around The Globe?

    —”Why is innovation worshipped in modern societies around the globe?”—

    Because it provides (a) marginally different market goods, and markets require either marginally different market goods to decrease prices or on the down side to encourage continuous spending cycles on the up side. (b) marginally different goods provide a people with competitive market advantage and therefore wealth. (c) with wealth generated in markets people can produce commons that are cannot be produced without the wealth generated by markets. (d) innovation provides people with status signals and status signals are increasingly necessary as we become aware of our relative positions outside of the relative position of our local group. Yes really. Why? Primitive people when made aware of their poverty commit suicide in vast numbers. Adam and eve is a good story. But the truth is, they both hang themselves after biting the apple and discovering their ignorance.

    https://www.quora.com/Why-is-innovation-worshipped-in-modern-societies-around-the-globe

  • Which European Ethnicity, Country, And People Have The Biggest Noses On Average?

    Greeks and southern italians because they are genetically west asian (anatolian/mesopotamian) rather than genetically european (german/scandinavian/polish/ukrainian/russian) and the difference being lower pedomorphic development in the anatolian/mesopotamian world.

    https://www.quora.com/Which-European-ethnicity-country-and-people-have-the-biggest-noses-on-average

  • —”What is the minimum average group IQ needed before civilization can independen

    —”What is the minimum average group IQ needed before civilization can independently arise? Base your answer on an IQ test normed for today’s population.”—- RULES: 1) Pareto always rules. 20% of the people always (and must) control 80% of the assets in order to organize a polity into voluntary (non slave/serf) production. Cities are markets are markets are formed by trade, and trade requires volition, and markets and volition make innovation possible if not only because the incentive exists. 2) Roughly speaking you need the top 20% of your population able to calculate in whatever means of calculation is available to you, in law, in accounts, in seasons, etc. 3) Empirically it appears that it’s pretty hard unless 20% is above 95 (the ability to learn by being taught without extraordinary repetition by the teacher), Above 105 to repair a system or a machine or a tool. Above 115 to learn by reading. About 122 to invent a machine or tool. A above 130 to synthesize new ideas and communicate them. Above 140 to originate an idea in the market for ideas. Although I think that limit is now approaching 150. 4) It depends greatly upon the means of economic productivity available to the population. lowest IQ’s for pastoral, higher for agrarian, higher for commercial, higher for industrial, higher for technological and assumedly higher for post technological. Worse, as technology increases the value of lower IQ’s decreases. Worse, as the distribution of technology increases, the value of lower IQ’s decreases (this is the world’s next upcoming great disaster – if it isn’t already). 5) If you can import knowledge of 140’s, 130’s 120’s into your group then you can benefit from the knoweldge and technollgy invented elsewhere. 6) what appears today, is that it is extremely difficult to modernize a country today with IQ’s under 97, and I think the real number is 105. The reason being that the window of opportunity for those countries to modernize and develop middle class (market) behaviors because of their ability to import institutions and technologies and knowledge, has passed. (I’m almost certain of it). BTW: thank the communists for destroying that window of opportunity. If your country has an aggregate IQ under 97, and certainly if it is below 90, it will be very difficult, for the simple reason that ther eis no human capital unused in relation to the available means of producing the profitability necessary to create a voluntary organization of production (market economy and a middle class to run it.) 7) as far as I know the primary competitive asset a country has going forward is a) homogeneity, b) median IQ >105, and a militia army dedicated to protecting both. That means china/korea/japan win. Europe could have but between immigration and civil war we have already (I’ve talked to the leading people about this repeatedly), lost something on the order of half to one standard deviation between 1800 and today through asymmetric reproduction. And we have lost the rest between 1965 and today through immigration. Cheers. Knowledge is not always pleasant.