Curt Doolittle

Theme: Civilization

  • “Much of the difference between Germans and British is that the former saw the l

    —“Much of the difference between Germans and British is that the former saw the latter as ‘us, over there’ whilst the later saw the former as ‘them, over here.’”—Aaron Kahland

    (smart)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 11:42:00 UTC

  • ON DEMAND FOR THE SACRED: EUROPEAN MARKET OR SEMITIC MONOPOLY? 1 – Heidegger=ger

    ON DEMAND FOR THE SACRED: EUROPEAN MARKET OR SEMITIC MONOPOLY?

    1 – Heidegger=german, which is the point of the discussion. Whether the Truth (knowledge, science, history, heroes, evolution) or Wisdom Literature (parables, fictions, myths) are the basis for civic contract (Monopoly). Or whether a hierarchy of graceful failure from the scientific to the religious is the basis of our civic contract (Market)

    2 – The sacred can consist of us, ourselves, can be something else (creatures, anthropomorphic, or formless), can be of things (idols), can be of ideas (of books and words), or of anything that we owe a debt. Although, ideas, things, symbols-proxies for leaders, and ourselves is a very close to complete list of the possibilities.

    3 – The sacred serves as a proxy between those who are not good enough to submit to one another.

    4 – Religion consists of training (education) the intuition (emotions) so that people ‘feel like’ you do by taking advantage of our pre-cognitive biases.

    6 – We can measure increase and decrease demand for ‘the sacred’ (proxies) and I am fairly sure the science of it (like that of status) is simply one that generates denialism. That is to to say that such therapeutic measures are unnecessary, but that they are not explicable.In other words, exposing the content and drive behind the ‘sacred’ makes the sacred impossible, thereby removing which is why it is denied. I

    7 – So , to some people the scientific truth is sacred, to some of us (american constitutionalists) the constitution and by proxy ‘we, us, our-way’ is sacred. To some religious tradition is sacred. To some of us a monarchy or leader is sacred. To some of us family, tribe, and nation is sacred. To some of us mankind is sacred. To some of us the transcendence of mankind into the gods we imagine is sacred (that would include me). And to some of us we spread, combine, include, or exclude as suits our interests.

    8 – Since debts of submission can be created along those and other axis, the behaviors we want to develop in a polity need only be expressible in all those paradigms – or at least, be sufficiently compatible that group persistence survives competition and shocks.

    9 – So the question is, (a) what are those rules of group strategy obscured within and created by some sacred debt, (b) what paradigms within each grammar (system of thought) each system of thought which corresponds to a degree of agency and interests, given our age, class, and accumulated relationships and assets.

    10 – it is not … challenging … to understand that the occult is an expression of vulnerability or powerlessness, that ritual an expression of mindfulness, that gatherings are an expression of inclusion, and that festival an expression of trust creation is rather simple. That the narrative content of a mythos allows us categories, relations, and values that can be taught to children (or idiots) which allows graceful (simple) calculation and coordination of cooperation is rather simple.

    11 – I don’t do via positiva (religion, philosophy, and literature). I do via negativa law. While we differ in what is preferable and good, and we differ in demand for proportionality, and we differ in demand for liberty (opportunity), we do not differ in demand for reciprocity. Instead, we all seek to preserve our advantageous means of parasitism, predation, deception, and self deception.

    12 – philosophy religion and literature (via positiva ) is for others (and frankly, for those who need them). I don’t do either.

    13 – It is possible that the clash of civilizations between the german continental and the anglo scandinavian (naval) is simply that the british were smarter, better educated, and more evolved, and the germans, who were the “rednecks” of europe for all of her history, were, and remain a more sentimental people. I just don’t know if that’s an advantage or not. What it appears, is that it’s economically and militarily superior to follow the german model of TRUTH, DUTY, PIETY, AND RECIPROCITY.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 05:15:00 UTC

  • “Hey Curt, are you an American?”— By birth I am an american citizen. By upbrin

    —“Hey Curt, are you an American?”—

    By birth I am an american citizen. By upbringing, an anglo saxon. (WASP). In civilizational philosophy, I am an empiricist. In discipline I am a social scientist, in that specialization we call the Law.

    How’s that.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-31 21:48:31 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1057751193215270912

  • Untitled

    https://www.quora.com/Were-the-Sumerians-white-people/answer/Curt-Doolittle?ch=1&share=40204900&srid=u4Qv

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-31 21:03:00 UTC

  • The Genetics and Instincts of The Genders

    THE GENETICS AND INSTINCTS OF THE GENDERS AND A THREAT TO CIVILIZATION WITHOUT CONSTRAINING LIMITS. [M]ales are hyper-producers and females hyper-consumers. That’s the evidence. the problem is that without reciprocal markets in everything to limit women to trades, of family to limit women to family resources, or Paternalism to limit to women our local judgement, then the hyperconsumption includes everything: genetic capital, territorial capital, institutional capital, traditional capital, normative capital, There is no end to woman’s wants for self, nest, and self image by obtaining signals for giving away that which others (men) have produced. Women produce income, and offspring and consumption. Men produce civilization. And if not limited by men, they will destroy the very men who made their hyperconsumption possible.

  • The Genetics and Instincts of The Genders

    THE GENETICS AND INSTINCTS OF THE GENDERS AND A THREAT TO CIVILIZATION WITHOUT CONSTRAINING LIMITS. [M]ales are hyper-producers and females hyper-consumers. That’s the evidence. the problem is that without reciprocal markets in everything to limit women to trades, of family to limit women to family resources, or Paternalism to limit to women our local judgement, then the hyperconsumption includes everything: genetic capital, territorial capital, institutional capital, traditional capital, normative capital, There is no end to woman’s wants for self, nest, and self image by obtaining signals for giving away that which others (men) have produced. Women produce income, and offspring and consumption. Men produce civilization. And if not limited by men, they will destroy the very men who made their hyperconsumption possible.

  • “Were the Sumerians White?” (no)

    RACIAL CATEGORIES OF WEST EURASIANS I’ve covered this elsewhere in detail, but here, I’ll repeat: While even Aristotle used Racial Categories, (and was clearly a supremacist by every measure, and identified the same behaviors we do today due to geographic causes). It wasn’t until the western use of sail to cover the globe that we were able to observe and understand that all groups on the globe evolved on different continents and under different conditions and that all people could be categorized into three or four groups with common features and customs. (African, west asian, east asian, and the early people along the coastal route from africa to india, through the pacific into australia.) WHITE DIFFERENTIATION FROM OTHER GROUPS White (European, Western, Christendom) practices a unique combination of cultural traits, as well as two genetic traits. Cultural: (i) speaking the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, regardless of the impact on the status, dominance, and competence hierarchies that we inherited from the Yamna/Corded Ware, and Indo European Expansion (Paganism). This is in direct opposition to ‘Face’ practiced by all other cultures, and direct opposition to ‘postmodern political correctness’ and their attempt to restore the primitivism of ‘face’. (ii) the development of the corporation or commonsthat broke family barriers under bipartite manorialism, (high trust), (iii) the four principles of christianity also invented to break kinship bonds: iii.1 The eradication of hatred from the human heart. iii.2 The extension of kinship love to non-kin. iii.3 The extension of exhaustive forgiveness before punishment, enserfment, enslavement, death, or war. iii.4 The demand for personal charity until personally certain it didn’t work. Genetic: (i) greater neoteny than all but east asians but different dimorphic distribution of traits. (ii) a balance between both linguistic and spatial intelligence (iii) the additional successful reduction of the lower and underclasses and a downward expansion of the genetic middle classes, under (most recently) bipartite manorialism, but (apparently) back into prehistory as well. (iv) the additional successful reduction of the lower classes by aggressive hanging of scolds, malcontents, indolent, and criminals for over a thousand years (maybe as much as one half percent per year), (v) further culling of the impulsive during long winters, starvation, warfare, disease – despite better living standards under manorialism than the rest of the world – such that by 1200 europeans were already ahead in caloric consumption and military development than the middle east. THE MEANING OF WHITE We use white Today simply because ‘christendom’ and ‘european’, and ‘western’ have been intentionally undermined by the pseudoscientific postwar movement using marx(economics), boas(sociology), freud(psychology), the frankfurt school (culture), and the (literary sophism) of the french postmodernists (outright denialism), in order to prevent the continuation of the scientific revolution into the social sciences, which was started by Darwin, Menger, Maxwell, Poincare, Spencer, Nietzsche, and the Romanticists . So, white refers to the set of european ethnicities (Genetic Groups) consisting of Old Europe (Greeco-Byzantine Civilization, the boot of italy, sicily, and sardinia), The Southern Europeans, The Atlantics, Germanics/scandinavians, Slavs, Finnics. They consists of those people of the western indo european expansion of the Yamna ( Pit Grave, Militaristic, Technological, Paternalistic, Expansionist, Sky Worshipping, that gave us the uniqueness of western civilization, in combination with horse, bronze, and wheel.). WHITE is the identity of atlantic, germanic, scandinavian, finnic, slavic peoples, and for historical reasons we include Old Europeans even though they are of anatolian extraction, not european – hence the complexion, build, and hair. These are the people of the westward expansion of the indo europeans (Yamna, corded ware cultures). (and yes, they largely replaced (exterminated) those that they conquered. However, Whites are just the westernmost branches of west eurasians that resulted from the indo european expansion. We broadly group these people into the category caucasian, which might be better said either ‘peoples of the black sea’, or ‘people of the black sea that evolved during the ice age.

  • “Were the Sumerians White?” (no)

    RACIAL CATEGORIES OF WEST EURASIANS I’ve covered this elsewhere in detail, but here, I’ll repeat: While even Aristotle used Racial Categories, (and was clearly a supremacist by every measure, and identified the same behaviors we do today due to geographic causes). It wasn’t until the western use of sail to cover the globe that we were able to observe and understand that all groups on the globe evolved on different continents and under different conditions and that all people could be categorized into three or four groups with common features and customs. (African, west asian, east asian, and the early people along the coastal route from africa to india, through the pacific into australia.) WHITE DIFFERENTIATION FROM OTHER GROUPS White (European, Western, Christendom) practices a unique combination of cultural traits, as well as two genetic traits. Cultural: (i) speaking the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, regardless of the impact on the status, dominance, and competence hierarchies that we inherited from the Yamna/Corded Ware, and Indo European Expansion (Paganism). This is in direct opposition to ‘Face’ practiced by all other cultures, and direct opposition to ‘postmodern political correctness’ and their attempt to restore the primitivism of ‘face’. (ii) the development of the corporation or commonsthat broke family barriers under bipartite manorialism, (high trust), (iii) the four principles of christianity also invented to break kinship bonds: iii.1 The eradication of hatred from the human heart. iii.2 The extension of kinship love to non-kin. iii.3 The extension of exhaustive forgiveness before punishment, enserfment, enslavement, death, or war. iii.4 The demand for personal charity until personally certain it didn’t work. Genetic: (i) greater neoteny than all but east asians but different dimorphic distribution of traits. (ii) a balance between both linguistic and spatial intelligence (iii) the additional successful reduction of the lower and underclasses and a downward expansion of the genetic middle classes, under (most recently) bipartite manorialism, but (apparently) back into prehistory as well. (iv) the additional successful reduction of the lower classes by aggressive hanging of scolds, malcontents, indolent, and criminals for over a thousand years (maybe as much as one half percent per year), (v) further culling of the impulsive during long winters, starvation, warfare, disease – despite better living standards under manorialism than the rest of the world – such that by 1200 europeans were already ahead in caloric consumption and military development than the middle east. THE MEANING OF WHITE We use white Today simply because ‘christendom’ and ‘european’, and ‘western’ have been intentionally undermined by the pseudoscientific postwar movement using marx(economics), boas(sociology), freud(psychology), the frankfurt school (culture), and the (literary sophism) of the french postmodernists (outright denialism), in order to prevent the continuation of the scientific revolution into the social sciences, which was started by Darwin, Menger, Maxwell, Poincare, Spencer, Nietzsche, and the Romanticists . So, white refers to the set of european ethnicities (Genetic Groups) consisting of Old Europe (Greeco-Byzantine Civilization, the boot of italy, sicily, and sardinia), The Southern Europeans, The Atlantics, Germanics/scandinavians, Slavs, Finnics. They consists of those people of the western indo european expansion of the Yamna ( Pit Grave, Militaristic, Technological, Paternalistic, Expansionist, Sky Worshipping, that gave us the uniqueness of western civilization, in combination with horse, bronze, and wheel.). WHITE is the identity of atlantic, germanic, scandinavian, finnic, slavic peoples, and for historical reasons we include Old Europeans even though they are of anatolian extraction, not european – hence the complexion, build, and hair. These are the people of the westward expansion of the indo europeans (Yamna, corded ware cultures). (and yes, they largely replaced (exterminated) those that they conquered. However, Whites are just the westernmost branches of west eurasians that resulted from the indo european expansion. We broadly group these people into the category caucasian, which might be better said either ‘peoples of the black sea’, or ‘people of the black sea that evolved during the ice age.

  • “Hey Curt, are you an American?”— By birth I am an american citizen. By upbrin

    —“Hey Curt, are you an American?”—

    By birth I am an american citizen. By upbringing, an anglo saxon. (WASP). In civilizational philosophy, I am an empiricist. In discipline I am a social scientist, in that specialization we call the Law.

    How’s that?

    —“By birth I am an Anglo Saxon colonial. By upbringing I am an Anglo Saxon colonial. In civilizational philosophy I am an Anglo Saxon colonial. In discipline I am an Anglo Saxon colonial, in that specialization we Anglo Saxon colonials call the Law’”— Rock Mandjinn

    That’s pretty good, except it fails to connect innovation in technology with Aryanism, Aryanism with Colonialism, Christianity as an ‘excuse’ for Colonialism and Aryanism.

    Aryanism: “Militaristic, Expansionist, Sky-Worshipping, Paternalist, Sovereign, Technologicals.”

    Where Paternalist and Expansionist means “Domesticating the Animal Man for Profit.”

    I get it. I do. The problem is that domesticating humans other than our own turns out to be a losing proposition for us. So separation in the chinese, korean, japanese model is the only solution to coexistence with ‘less domesticated’ peoples.

    😉

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-31 17:48:00 UTC

  • THE GENETICS AND INSTINCTS OF THE GENDERS AND A THREAT TO CIVILIZATION WITHOUT C

    THE GENETICS AND INSTINCTS OF THE GENDERS AND A THREAT TO CIVILIZATION WITHOUT CONSTRAINING LIMITS.

    Males are hyper-producers and females hyper-consumers. That’s the evidence. the problem is that without reciprocal markets in everything to limit women to trades, of family to limit women to family resources, or Paternalism to limit to women our local judgement, then the hyperconsumption includes everything: genetic capital, territorial capital, institutional capital, traditional capital, normative capital,

    There is no end to woman’s wants for self, nest, and self image by obtaining signals for giving away that which others (men) have produced. Women produce income, and offspring and consumption. Men produce civilization. And if not limited by men, they will destroy the very men who made their hyperconsumption possible.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-31 09:43:00 UTC