Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • (Religion is the most difficult problem in social science. Now that I understand

    (Religion is the most difficult problem in social science. Now that I understand it, the problem is knowing what to do about it. And while I now what to do. The existing fundamentalist population is … a challenge.)

    Reply addressees: @pocalypsehustle

  • We Are Unique

    We Are Unique https://t.co/iuhpe6vn94

  • We Are Unique

    —” We (european men) must stop making this mistake: we must stop thinking, wishing, or hoping that other groups (including our own women) are like us.”— by John Mark

    This mistake has plunged us into long dark ages before. Let’s not do it again. Let’s learn this lesson once and for all.

  • We Are Unique

    —” We (european men) must stop making this mistake: we must stop thinking, wishing, or hoping that other groups (including our own women) are like us.”— by John Mark

    This mistake has plunged us into long dark ages before. Let’s not do it again. Let’s learn this lesson once and for all.

  • The National Socialism Question. It Won the 20 Th Right?

    The National Socialism Question. It Won the 20 Th Right? https://t.co/7V3ZBbogjn

  • The National Socialism Question. It Won the 20 Th Right?

    THE NATIONAL SOCIALISM QUESTION. IT WON THE 20TH RIGHT? I know history is currently overturning the mythology but I want to address the National Socialist community for a moment, even if it’s politically incorrect for now. My problem with supporting the NS political program is limited to the strange german obsession with recreating a secular religion to replace the devotion of the catholic church. It’s in everything they do. It’s also why they’re the most moral people on earth most of the time. So this remains one of my most frustrating problems: the germans have pretty much always ‘been right’, throughout all of history. And I know why (customary law). Am I right that we must create this formal law, but that we must also produce a secular political religion on top? NS won the 20th right? I mean, that’s what China is practicing, and that’s what Russia wants to practice – if we’d let them. Democracy failed as always. Representative democracy failed as always. and the only decent countries are those with intact monarchies, or politicians … … who in practice act as monarchs rather than CEO’s. Now. I prefer a monarchy, under our traditional rule of law of sovereignty and reciprocity, with the purpose of the government the intergenerational persistence of family and nation. Where the monarchy appoints a cabinet … … but in english fashion, a jury of the people (or multiple houses acting as juries) approve or veto requests from the cabinet, which are all to be structured as contracts of the commons. This depoliticizes society, which has been a catastrophe for western civlization. There is precious little evidence that political competition does anything except undermine the nation. And by limiting people to voluntary means of cooperating, we deprive them of pursuit of rents. But given our historical mistake of not making the state treasury the bank of the realm, and separating credit to the people, with credit in business and industry, we allowed creation of rents against the people that belong to them in the first place, not to the finance sector. This problem is easily rectified.

  • The National Socialism Question. It Won the 20 Th Right?

    THE NATIONAL SOCIALISM QUESTION. IT WON THE 20TH RIGHT? I know history is currently overturning the mythology but I want to address the National Socialist community for a moment, even if it’s politically incorrect for now. My problem with supporting the NS political program is limited to the strange german obsession with recreating a secular religion to replace the devotion of the catholic church. It’s in everything they do. It’s also why they’re the most moral people on earth most of the time. So this remains one of my most frustrating problems: the germans have pretty much always ‘been right’, throughout all of history. And I know why (customary law). Am I right that we must create this formal law, but that we must also produce a secular political religion on top? NS won the 20th right? I mean, that’s what China is practicing, and that’s what Russia wants to practice – if we’d let them. Democracy failed as always. Representative democracy failed as always. and the only decent countries are those with intact monarchies, or politicians … … who in practice act as monarchs rather than CEO’s. Now. I prefer a monarchy, under our traditional rule of law of sovereignty and reciprocity, with the purpose of the government the intergenerational persistence of family and nation. Where the monarchy appoints a cabinet … … but in english fashion, a jury of the people (or multiple houses acting as juries) approve or veto requests from the cabinet, which are all to be structured as contracts of the commons. This depoliticizes society, which has been a catastrophe for western civlization. There is precious little evidence that political competition does anything except undermine the nation. And by limiting people to voluntary means of cooperating, we deprive them of pursuit of rents. But given our historical mistake of not making the state treasury the bank of the realm, and separating credit to the people, with credit in business and industry, we allowed creation of rents against the people that belong to them in the first place, not to the finance sector. This problem is easily rectified.

  • No You Don”t Understand Ukraine. (Really)

    No You Don”t Understand Ukraine. (Really) https://t.co/QDx3u3FaaV

  • No You Don”t Understand Ukraine. (Really)

    NO YOU DON”T UNDERSTAND UKRAINE. (REALLY) I don’t think any American who hasn’t lived in Kiev and talked with these people has the vaguest ideal how good the legislature and law is, but who owns the various judiciaries, and how corrupt the bureaucracy is, and it’s not because these are bad people, but because everyone is so poor, that it’s the only way to make a decent living: charging for government services. The Kremlin is far more byzantine than the Rada (parliament) and like the chinese communist party, far more a group of powerful families. Ukrainian power is outside of the government in the 40+ oligarchs (Gangsters), and they have more money than the state (and more men and guns). Putin could put down the Oligarchs in Russia with the Chechens, and the FSB, and so could the chinese with the red army but the conspiracy between moscow and kiev to undermine ukrainian military and bureaucracy so that they could restore the union of the two countries was so far along that once the revolution started, there is no possible way to put down the oligarchs, fight a war with russia in the east, and survive as a country without descending into internecine warfare. States need wealth for this reason. And every libertarian is completely unaware he’s advocating for the condition in Ukraine now and in the Pale in the past. Where do they think Rothbard, Rand and Mises got their ideas from? Useful idiots whether left, right, or libertarian. Edit

  • No You Don”t Understand Ukraine. (Really)

    NO YOU DON”T UNDERSTAND UKRAINE. (REALLY) I don’t think any American who hasn’t lived in Kiev and talked with these people has the vaguest ideal how good the legislature and law is, but who owns the various judiciaries, and how corrupt the bureaucracy is, and it’s not because these are bad people, but because everyone is so poor, that it’s the only way to make a decent living: charging for government services. The Kremlin is far more byzantine than the Rada (parliament) and like the chinese communist party, far more a group of powerful families. Ukrainian power is outside of the government in the 40+ oligarchs (Gangsters), and they have more money than the state (and more men and guns). Putin could put down the Oligarchs in Russia with the Chechens, and the FSB, and so could the chinese with the red army but the conspiracy between moscow and kiev to undermine ukrainian military and bureaucracy so that they could restore the union of the two countries was so far along that once the revolution started, there is no possible way to put down the oligarchs, fight a war with russia in the east, and survive as a country without descending into internecine warfare. States need wealth for this reason. And every libertarian is completely unaware he’s advocating for the condition in Ukraine now and in the Pale in the past. Where do they think Rothbard, Rand and Mises got their ideas from? Useful idiots whether left, right, or libertarian. Edit