Curt Doolittle

Theme: Agency

  • “I would like to know if there has always been a difference in the way women and

    —“I would like to know if there has always been a difference in the way women and men have voted, or if the women’s lib movement in the 60’s marked the time when women moved to the left.”—Susan Bigs

    Short answer: Men and women have different biological functions, abilities, instincts, intuitions, and incentives. We always follow our incentives. We always organize to promote our group’s incentives. The family is a compromise where in we share the same interests. The market for cmmons in the state, and the market for goods and services outside of the state, allow those already in the family to compromise in a market of mutual exchange. And allow the classes of families to cooperate on means even if we share different ends.

    The primary difference is between married women with children allied with husbands (conservatively), and unmarried, single mothers, and increasingly university indoctrinated women and men to vote left.

    For the first generation, women voted conservatively. It changed after that. It changed radically when the jewish marxists failed to create class warfare due to the failure of marxism and the success of european markets under rule of law, and when those marxists in the frankfurt school switched from to cultural marxism to undermine our culture, then the jewish postmodernists switched to identity politics to undermining cooperation between us, and then when jewish feminists switched to undermining cooperation with the genders.

    Birth control began it. The control over women over family spending and 70% of all spending and the influence of marketing to women increased promotion of it. The decline in economic necessity of husbands decreased it. The increase in entry of more women into the workforce, partly because of it increased it, the decline in births because of it also, the decline of marriages because of it, the decline in the duration of marriages because of it, and the decline in the two income household driving down average household wages did it. The increase in college debt -especially for women who took ‘gut’ courses (and mostly still do), provided incentive to the academy who promoted it. And the rest is history. In other words, men and women share the same interests in a famly, and historically, a married man, represented his family, if he and his family held property (and if he fought in the military when needed), then his vote was in the compromise interests of the family.

    Our failure was in maintaining one house of parliament/commons instead of continuing the practice of adding houses for the classes. Had women had their own house, and had labor had it’s own house, then the ‘evils’ of majoritarianism would not have destroyed our country and our demographics as a side effect of female differences in voting by demanding more resources from the state, and devoted resources to the reproduction of the underclasses, instead of the production of commons from which we had so long enjoyed the returns.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-31 15:18:00 UTC

  • “The agency that they currently possess is precisely the agency which we have af

    —“The agency that they currently possess is precisely the agency which we have afforded no more and no less.”—Leif Erickson

    (The elegance of the statement is that it forces you to ask that question, and in doing so, demonstrate your bias, when the only unbiased answer is “all”.)

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-31 07:01:00 UTC

  • MORE ON ‘CREEPY’ PEOPLE Just like women’s idea of creepy men, my Idea of a creep

    MORE ON ‘CREEPY’ PEOPLE

    Just like women’s idea of creepy men, my Idea of a creepy woman is pretty much any woman hits on me that I’m not mutually attracted to – and, that is the vast majority of women, and who pursues that relationship irrationally.

    Certain women make me ‘vibrate’ and my brain shut off. Those women can do or say anything they want and I lose all will, reason, sense of self preservation, and eventually the large portions of my wealth.

    Unfortunately some of these women are my friends, or more than friends, and they know how to make use of it. And I know this and I still don’t mind for some insane reason. lol I have no chance at all anywhere east of Warsaw. None.

    Find me a woman within ten years of my age with grace taste and similar aristocratic aesthetics and I’m done. That said, they’re gone, there aren’t any.

    Yes I have ‘an interest’ outside of the states. No I don’t have ‘an interest’ here. I hide any interests I have to protect them from harassment. I assume I would find ‘an interest’ by accident if I wasn’t in the middle of nowhere, in an intellectual cultural, and genetic wasteland. Which means, almost all of the united states.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 20:20:00 UTC

  • THE MOST IMPORTANT LESSON FROM THE CHURCH EXPERIENCE The most important lesson I

    THE MOST IMPORTANT LESSON FROM THE CHURCH EXPERIENCE

    The most important lesson I’ve observed, and perhaps the most important, is that sitting still in church, and the social pressure of… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=496040130992882&id=100017606988153

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 16:19:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1189577673540079617

  • THE CHOICE – AND OUR CIVILIZATION’S CHOICES Life separates plant from mineral. C

    THE CHOICE – AND OUR CIVILIZATION’S CHOICES

    Life separates plant from mineral.
    Consciousness separates animals from plants.
    Agency separates man from animals.
    And not everyone has agency…. https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=496036987659863&id=100017606988153

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 16:15:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1189576491035746310

  • I only do compatibilism, for the purpose of maximum quality of life while in pur

    –I only do compatibilism, for the purpose of maximum quality of life while in pursuit of maximum eugenic evolution, with maximum speed, for the maximum achievement of mankind, in the shortest possible time, given the hostility of the planet and the universe to the development of intelligent life forms, that require long periods of stability and short periods of stress to incrementally evolve.–

    (worth repeating)

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 16:12:00 UTC

  • INTUITION IS UNDERSTOOD, SORRY. ITS NOT COMPLICATED —“Any thoughts on empirici

    INTUITION IS UNDERSTOOD, SORRY. ITS NOT COMPLICATED

    —“Any thoughts on empiricism ever incorporating intuition into its epistemology? It is, though not yet understood, a sensory… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=496025434327685&id=100017606988153

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 15:56:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1189571781687951361

  • THE CHOICE – AND OUR CIVILIZATION’S CHOICES Life separates plant from mineral. C

    THE CHOICE – AND OUR CIVILIZATION’S CHOICES

    Life separates plant from mineral.

    Consciousness separates animals from plants.

    Agency separates man from animals.

    And not everyone has agency.

    — Ryan Drummond

    Thus we have a choice.

    – Evolve the rest of man into agency (Aryanism, Africanism)

    – Cooperate at our current level of agency (Hinduism)

    – Farm the rest of man that lacks agency (Asianism)

    – Devolve man into the lack of agency (Judaism and Islam)

    — Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 12:15:00 UTC

  • WOMEN EVOLVED to make use of the market for sovereignty, particularly sovereignt

    WOMEN EVOLVED to make use of the market for sovereignty, particularly sovereignty from males seeking to limit their choice of reproduction and limits to their consumption.

    Conversely, men in collections of brothers, evolved to kill off rival collections of brothers, in order to obtain their property and their females. And men evolved cooperation using tools to constrain alphas in order to redistribute access to females for sex, and care. (reproduction is not in male minds until property evolves)

    —“Women initiate more divorces because we’re more easily persuaded by the modern-day mantra of “Whatever makes you happy”. It is entirely due to our capacity to prioritise feelings over truth.’—Lisa Outhwaite

    Lisa is insightful. But i’ll clarify a bit that that women have always and everywhere been hypergamic, and men willing to kill more so over women than any other reason by orders of magnitude, which is the origin of our ‘pairing off’ prior to our institution of marriage. When we evolved a division of labor, specialized tools, equipment, and constructions, animal property, and territorial property, we evolved marriage, but the property division was a women and her children and a man and his assets – which is a necessary division of the means of survival.

    So in contemporary economic productivity, there is no cost to women’s exercise of disassociation, and there are, as she says above, many incentives from the feminist movement, the postmodernist movement, and the anti-white male, anti-western civilization movement, and women always conform to whatever higher status women conform to, no matter what those women conform to.

    I’ll state “Whatever Makes You Happy” scientifically: the organization of the female brain, it’s developmental differences in connectivity and size, and it’s bias in hormones to cause that differences (brains are grown), creates a far more numerous, for more intense, far more urgent, stimulation of independent networks creating far more demand for her attention, and attention that causes her to bear costs (effort) to maintain in stable state (control). This is a purely physical process she has ver little control over and evolution prohibited her from having control over. Men by contrast ‘use less of our brains’ which is better said as men’s brains evolved for the opposite function, and they are organized to “compartmentalize information” so that it is limited to the physical world and physical body, so that we will bear physical costs on behalf of one another, of women, and of children they raise.

    Between work on the constitution, work on completing religion, work on migrating to the mainstream, work on the institute, work on Michael’s collection of my essays, and not working on the main book I need to publish, I am trying to make time to finish the Foundations course, and the explanation of the brain and behavior in operational terms, so that we are no longer attribute to petty psychologizing that which is a physical difference instructions of our brains, that evolution discovered was necessary for us to rise to the top of the planetary food chain. Once that is done, we will see the relationship between the structure of the brain, operational language, testimonial speech, psychological acquisitionism, ethical and moral propertarianism, and social compatibilism, that is only optimized by extending the structure of the brain into our institutions: markets in everything.

    The brain evolved to function as a market for attention, with differences in the cost of attention, by region, module, and sub-organ, determining differences in costs of providing attention to that region, module, and sub-organ.

    Even this description describes compatibilism.

    I only do compatibilism, for the purpose of maximum quality of life while in pursuit of maximum eugenic evolution, with maximum speed, for the maximum achievement of mankind, in the shortest possible time, given the hostility of the planet and the universe to the development of intelligent life forms, that require long periods of stability and short periods of stress to incrementally evolve.

    In other words, I always and everywhere take a question to its last criteria of decidability using what we call in computer science ‘exhaustive search’.

    Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 11:57:00 UTC

  • WOMEN EVOLVED to make use of the market for sovereignty, particularly sovereignt

    WOMEN EVOLVED to make use of the market for sovereignty, particularly sovereignty from males seeking to limit their choice of reproduction and limits to their consumption.

    Conversely, men in collections of brothers, evolved to kill off rival collections of brothers, in order to obtain their property and their females. And men evolved cooperation using tools to constrain alphas in order to redistribute access to females for sex, and care. (reproduction is not in male minds until property evolves)

    —“Women initiate more divorces because we’re more easily persuaded by the modern-day mantra of “Whatever makes you happy”. It is entirely due to our capacity to prioritise feelings over truth.’—Lisa Outhwaite

    Lisa is insightful. But i’ll clarify a bit that that women have always and everywhere been hypergamic, and men willing to kill more so over women than any other reason by orders of magnitude, which is the origin of our ‘pairing off’ prior to our institution of marriage. When we evolved a division of labor, specialized tools, equipment, and constructions, animal property, and territorial property, we evolved marriage, but the property division was a women and her children and a man and his assets – which is a necessary division of the means of survival.

    So in contemporary economic productivity, there is no cost to women’s exercise of disassociation, and there are, as she says above, many incentives from the feminist movement, the postmodernist movement, and the anti-white male, anti-western civilization movement, and women always conform to whatever higher status women conform to, no matter what those women conform to.

    I’ll state “Whatever Makes You Happy” scientifically: the organization of the female brain, it’s developmental differences in connectivity and size, and it’s bias in hormones to cause that differences (brains are grown), creates a far more numerous, for more intense, far more urgent, stimulation of independent networks creating far more demand for her attention, and attention that causes her to bear costs (effort) to maintain in stable state (control). This is a purely physical process she has ver little control over and evolution prohibited her from having control over. Men by contrast ‘use less of our brains’ which is better said as men’s brains evolved for the opposite function, and they are organized to “compartmentalize information” so that it is limited to the physical world and physical body, so that we will bear physical costs on behalf of one another, of women, and of children they raise.

    Between work on the constitution, work on completing religion, work on migrating to the mainstream, work on the institute, work on Michael’s collection of my essays, and not working on the main book I need to publish, I am trying to make time to finish the Foundations course, and the explanation of the brain and behavior in operational terms, so that we are no longer attribute to petty psychologizing that which is a physical difference instructions of our brains, that evolution discovered was necessary for us to rise to the top of the planetary food chain. Once that is done, we will see the relationship between the structure of the brain, operational language, testimonial speech, psychological acquisitionism, ethical and moral propertarianism, and social compatibilism, that is only optimized by extending the structure of the brain into our institutions: markets in everything.

    The brain evolved to function as a market for attention, with differences in the cost of attention, by region, module, and sub-organ, determining differences in costs of providing attention to that region, module, and sub-organ.

    Even this description describes compatibilism.

    I only do compatibilism, for the purpose of maximum quality of life while in pursuit of maximum eugenic evolution, with maximum speed, for the maximum achievement of mankind, in the shortest possible time, given the hostility of the planet and the universe to the development of intelligent life forms, that require long periods of stability and short periods of stress to incrementally evolve.

    In other words, I always and everywhere take a question to its last criteria of decidability using what we call in computer science ‘exhaustive search’.

    Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 09:55:00 UTC