Curt Doolittle

Theme: Civilization

  • THE THREE CULTS (PILLARS) OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION by Simon Ström (brilliant) I l

    THE THREE CULTS (PILLARS) OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION

    by Simon Ström

    (brilliant)

    I like to conceive of the essential ideology of the West, from which myths, tales, rituals and institutions emanate, as consisting of three basic interdependent sacraments, “sub-cults” or “pillars”, fashioned almost like a constitution for our civilization.

    Dumezil noted that the Indo-European gods mainly represented three societal functions.

    Duchesne successfully argued that Western Civilization fundamentally derives from Indo-European cultural impulses, stressing the Faustian spirit of transcendence.

    Doolittle has shown that truth-telling emanates from martial epistemology and that natural law (reciprocity) is empirically discovered by a militia of sovereigns pursuing markets in everything.

    So I think that we may craft an “articles of association” of Western Civilization, similar perhaps to the one above, to serve as a positiva-and-negativa framework for stories, rituals, etc. and perhaps also polity and law.

    1) The cult of transcendence, represented by an archetypical Sky Father (‘Odin’), the supreme sovereign and the god of wisdom and law. (truth, of which natural law is a subset)

    2) The cult of non-submission, and the virtues of sovereign militiamen, represented by the archetypical striker/thunderer (‘Thor’) entangled in a heroic cosmogonic duel against a serpent (chaoskampf).

    3) The cult of family and kindred, the complementary obligations of monogamous marriage and the virtues of community and commons, represented by a plethora of gods, demigods and apical ancestors honored in ancestral cult, ensuring continuity of any extant kinship organization whether tribe, nation state, house, clan, etc.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-16 16:08:00 UTC

  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: EASTERN MORAL CRITICISM VS ANGLO INTELLECTUAL CRITICISM

    ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: EASTERN MORAL CRITICISM VS ANGLO INTELLECTUAL CRITICISM

    (act in harmony with nature: eastern and western versions)

    I’m going to “anglicize” his statements because the buddhism is hard for me to wade through.

    (a) the movement is unnatural because they didn’t account for costs. if the algorithm accounted for a maximum watts of output in the human form: 400 for short periods, 100 for maybe an hour, and 60-75 for an 8 hour work day. or roughly 1200-1500 watts per day before exhaustion (or death). starting from a standing position, an algorithm ‘should’ eventually develop walking by trial and error, and hemispheric mirroring of successes. THe general problem with mathematical analysis, logical analysis, philosophical analysis, and all models that derive from them, is an insufficient allocation of costs which nature does not and cannot tolerate without immediate failure.

    So where Hayao Miyazaki speaks in eastern ethics of shame, an anglo like myself speaks in anglo ethics of stupidity.

    This in itself is an interesting observation of our cultural differences.

    Not that one or the other is better.

    Ours just provides more actionable results.

    Both of us are saying the same thing: “ACT IN HARMONY WITH NATURE” in different ways.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-16 14:20:00 UTC

  • WHY THE WEST COULDN’T ARTICULATE ITS STRATEGY AND THE JEWS COULD —” Curt, can

    WHY THE WEST COULDN’T ARTICULATE ITS STRATEGY AND THE JEWS COULD

    —” Curt, can you explain this part more fully, possibly in a new post?

    <quote>”just as all three jewish class philosophies (marxism/libertarianism/neo-conservatism), lacked a full accounting. And while western made did not lack this full accounting, he developed it by competition in war, rule, polities, markets, and marriage, by tradition and habit and trial and error, not by articulated reason and deliberative law as did the jews. So while western man could defeat with physical science the supernatural fictionalism of the jews, he could not resist marxism, libertarianism, and neo-conservatism of the jews. And Rand supplied that articulation.”<end quote>”—Brett Sterling

    The short answer (well, not so short) is that pastoral and diasporic peoples can privatize the commons or parasite upon the territorial commons, while land holding people must pay the high costs of holding the territorial commons. And so you see this difference in the ethics of the agrarian-militia, agrarian-imperial, and pastoral-raider, and diasporic merchant peoples.

    So the commons (capital inventories) produced by each of these people differs greatly. So inventory all that is necessary to hold a nation, and inventory what is necessary to hold a tribe or family under an agrarian or agrarian-pastoral empire, or to hold a tribe as a separatist free-rider on another group’s territorial commons.

    What you find is that self, family, tribe, nation capital distributions between private, familial, tribal, common, national, and portable, fixed capital, territorial capital, institutional capital, and normative capital investments vary between them – predictably.

    In other words, just as conservatives(fathers) invest equally in all six moral foundations, libertarians(brothers) in fewer, and progressives(mothers and sisters) in fewest, that land holders(aristocracy), landed merchants(classical liberals), diasporic merchants(jews), parasites(gypsies), and raiders (pirates, islamic slavers etc) collect the capital that they can make use of – and obtain the rewards of capital they either do posses, or the discounts from the elimination of capital that they don’t need to possess.

    In other words, people develop capital strategies, people hold moral, legal, cultural, codes, that reflect those strategies and people develop methods of argument (science or pseudoscience, reason or ‘pseudo-reason’, ‘religion or law’, history or myth, advice or command, low trust or high trust) – that reflect the needs of their group’s evolutionary strategy (competitive strategy, survival strategy). And as far as I know the cause of a group’s strategy was temporal and environmental (where they were when they encountered more or less advanced competition), but that over time their demographic distribution(low or high pedomorphism and iq) and genetic distribution (personality traits), evolved to reflect that strategy, and they cannot easily escape it without integration into a much larger host (genetically, strategically, culturally).

    So the problem was that ‘those who rule do’, and ‘those who wish otherwise write about it’. The aristocratic cultural tradition, the common law, the art of battle, the art of running a business, these were all handed down from generation to generation. They only needed replication once we started moving people into the middle class. It was only those lacking power that wrote anything.

    Western man debated real things in reality with real consequences. And he had no authority to appeal to (until christianity, which he subverted for his needs – at least in europe.)

    This was not true in the jewish tradition because they used the ability to debate jewish religion and law to force failures out of the group and indoctrinate group members. So this tradition was heavily articulated. And it was also abstract.

    So we hit the enlightenment and the agrarian and industrial revolutions and western man struggled to produce in each of his cultures a means of perpetuating his traditions in rational form.

    So we see:

    1 – (anglo) Empirical: locke/smith/hume/american-legalists,

    2 – (german) Rational: kant/schopenhauer/hegel,

    3 – (jewish) Pseudo-science: Mendelsohn/marx/freud/boaz/frankfurt-school,

    4 – (french) Literary: montesquieu/voltaire/rousseau/postmodernists

    Each trying to preserve their method of argument and their group evolutionary strategies, and their capital structures.

    THE UNDERLYING PROBLEM;

    The western group evolutionary strategy was to industrialize the domestication of man, for profit through dragging men through barbarism > slavery > serfdom > freeman > citizen and to profit from the proceeds of doing so.

    The abrahamic evolutionary strategy was to organize barbarians, slaves, serfs and some of the freemen to resist domestication and achieve in resistance and reproduction by declaration of solidarity to a cult, what could not be achieved by civilization.

    In other words: the west cant, or at least couldn’t until Darwin, Spencer and Nietzsche, that the success of the western tradition was largely in its eugenics: the domestication of the animal man for profit.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-16 13:51:00 UTC

  • THE WINTER CANDLE OF CHRISTIANITY AND THE SUMMER SUN OF PAGAN ACHIEVEMENT The ve

    THE WINTER CANDLE OF CHRISTIANITY AND THE SUMMER SUN OF PAGAN ACHIEVEMENT

    The velocity of everything ‘good’ was almost zero under the church compared to under paganism. And any claim otherwise is demonstrably false. One does not say ‘we did this few things here’ and say it compares to ‘we did these ten thousand here’ and not yet say that western many merely managed to light a few dim candles under ideal, supernatural, christianity compared to the blinding sun he produced under real, mythical, paganism.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-16 12:42:00 UTC

  • SCIENCE IS THE PRODUCT OF MAN AND MAN ALONE – AND METAL WAS HIS MUSE —“Science

    SCIENCE IS THE PRODUCT OF MAN AND MAN ALONE – AND METAL WAS HIS MUSE

    —“Science did not develop apart from God somehow. “—

    Science developed by human trial and error – largely in the pursuit of the competitive utility of metal, and all that metals brought us. Aristotle and Archimedes developed what we call the foundations of science today, and aristotle, zeno, and the stoics developed the foundations of law that we use today. These were inventions of man.

    The romans specifically rejected the idealism of the greeks, and it was their pragmatism that led them to build what the greeks failed to: a civilization. And to avoid what the greeks had done, which was philosophical utopianism, and democratic overextension.

    Science evolve little during the church’s reign and often under some degree of persecution. Although not as much prosecution as under islam. Or as much as its total absence under judaism.

    Science evolved rapidly after Bacon. And despite the anglo enlightenment and industrial revolution, the german second enlightenment and industrial revolution, and the current (albeit weak) American attempt at ending the Second Abrahamic Conquest of the West by Marxism, Socialism, Feminism, and Postmodernism, we still have not completed ending the revolt by athens(idealism), jerusalem(judaism), Constantinople/Anatolia(christianity), and the Damascus/Bekaa-Valley(Islam) against the people of action (Sparta, northern/germanic Europe).

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-16 12:37:00 UTC

  • THERE WAS NOTHING GOOD IN CHRISTIANITY THAT WAS NOT THERE BEFORE IT. —“Peterso

    THERE WAS NOTHING GOOD IN CHRISTIANITY THAT WAS NOT THERE BEFORE IT.

    —“Peterson’s point in theism, using Christianity as his usual example, is that we didn’t develop somehow without it and if we cut it off we shouldn’t assume we’ll retain the good we got from it as a society. This has happened and it never goes that way. In fact it goes.the other way. If your Utopia is with God than your on the right track. Are you criticizing having ideals in general as well? Also, what is the basis for people having ideals?”— Billy Duke

    (a) that does not survive scrutiny, because everything good in christianity was demonstrably there beforehand in the pagan versions and everything bad in christianity was not there but added to politicize those pagan versions against aristocracy and reason.

    (b) It is very hard to make the argument that abrahamic religions, including the licensing of christianity and the forcible imposition of christianity, were concocted as other than a rebellion against the commercial market meritocracy, military meritocracy, legislative meritocracy, political meritocracy, religious meritocracy, and use of reason by the aristocracy both persian and greco-roman. Judaism, christianity, and islam were just the separatist fundamentalism(judaism), socialism(christianity), and militant communism(islam) of the ancient world. And visa-versa.

    The eastern empire was able to ally the underclasses against the weakened aristocracy and take power over (defeat) the western empire, in the same way the Marxists/Postmodernists/Feminists have allied against the aristocracy weakened by the french revolution and the world wars.

    There are only two existentially possible group evolutionary strategies to man: the aristocratic meritocratic (k-selection, eugenic, or “packs”), and the communist equalitarian (r-selection, dysgenic, or “herds”). Any order not explicitly meritocratic and eugenic will evolve into unmeritocratic and dysgenic. Just as all human organizations eventually calcify. It’s not consistency that makes us strong but constant ‘testing’ (competition).

    The most important competition however, is that between masculine eugenic(“pack”), and feminine dysgenic(“herd”). And we achieve the optimum possible nash equilibrium through markets for association, reproduction(marriage), commercial markets, intellectual markets, markets for commons (govt), and political markets (nations), when polities are small and homogenous, and can produce commons necessary for them without coming at the expense of others. But the consequence of those markets is suppression of the reproduction of the underclasses. And that is a good thing. Because the condition of each individual in a polity is determined more by the reduction of the underclass than by any other action we can take.

    (c) The central difference between, the aristocratic method and the underclass method is in cost vs demographics. It is one thing to use expensive high investment education in the development of meritocracy, truth, and reason, among the middle and upper classes, and much cheaper to develop low investment education in the development of resistance, fictionalism, and obedience in the lower classes. And this is still what we see in religiosity today. While morality remains constant, religiosity vs rational action is merely one of intelligence. The central problem being a full standard deviation in median IQ between the lower, middle, and upper classes. (90, 105, 120, 135). Hence the vehement militant religiosity of muslims (87), the tepid ratio-religiosity of christians 100, and the legalism of the educated (115), the and the virtue-signaling atheism of the intergenerational commercial, financial, and intellectual classes (130).

    (d) The church exemplifies the adage that he who writes history authors it. The church has a long history of ‘appropriation’ and almost no history of innovation. A long history of taking credit rather than giving it. A long history of advocating faith(submission) rather than reason(autonomy). A long history of attribution to the divine intention rather than natural consequence. A long history of claiming education, but failing to use the high time devotion to the church to literacy. A long history of claiming charity, but forcible accumulation of private property(largest land holder in europe). A long history of criticizing the aristocracy, but the major collector of land rents. A long history of claiming good, but persistent evidence of doing evil – most notably the templars, indoctrination, persecution, and ‘indulgences’.

    (e) there is but one utopia, and that is that man should make an eden of this world and every other. And he cannot do so with lies. If there are any gods, they have written their language in the structure of the universe, and it is through uncomfortable truth reason knowledge and calculation that we transcend the animal through comfortable falsehood, faith, ignorance, and storytelling.

    (f) As far as I know, the philosophy of the west has been that of the truth of martial aristocracy and the philosophy the failed peoples has been the lies of priestly communism. And while the chinese succeeded at building a wall to keep the ‘people of lies’ out, they were not able to develop the trust of the aristocratic west, any more than the aristocratic west was able to complete the roman project of building a wall to protect the west from the people of desert, steppe, and tundra. And it is this failing – to learn isolation from the chinese – that has been our downfall. Just as much as it is their failing – to learn trust from europeans – that was theirs. The difference is, that they have learned from us now, but we have not yet learned from them.

    (g) “Christendom without Christianity.”

    1) Extend familial love to brothers in arms, first above all.

    2) Extend kinship love to the polity

    3) Extirpate hatred from the human heart.

    4) Show tolerance of honest error, intolerance of all else; and respect for those who earn it, and disrespect for those who don’t. Kneel to none.

    5) Speak the truth without exception.

    6) Master an art, a science, a craft, and a trade.

    7) Bear and raise children to be husbands and warriors and wives and mothers.

    8) Preserve, Maintain and Beautify the commons

    9) Safeguard the young, weak, and elderly.

    10) Take nothing not paid for, seek nothing not earned.

    11) Place no burden of notice, attention or impediment upon others.

    12) Perform and enforce restitution for all wrongs.

    13) Punish or kill the criminal, wicked, and lazy.

    14) Defeat and exterminate all enemies completely

    15) Leave life having transcended yourself, your line, your polity, man, and this land, closer to omniscience, omnipotence, sovereignty, and beauty.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-16 10:42:00 UTC

  • “CAN WE END THE USE OF LITERATURE FOR SUBVERSION OF THE WEST?”— Daniel Gurpide

    —“CAN WE END THE USE OF LITERATURE FOR SUBVERSION OF THE WEST?”— Daniel Gurpide

    WHEREAS

    I agree that the (abrahamist’s) strategy was to ally three underclasses (through women in particular), to communism as a means of defeating the aristocracy.

    Furthermore, I agree with the theory that the purpose for the licensing of christianity and the invention of the church was to defeat the “Old” aristocracy.

    And I think we can agree that Marxism/Communism/Postmodernism, are the modern version of the attack on the aristocracy, by replacing a supernatural cult’s promise of afterlife with a pseudoscientific cult’s promise of utopia within one’s lifetime.

    ASSERTION

    We can only kill a virus by killing its hosts. That seems to be out of the question – although not for the muslims it isn’t.

    We can regulate the spread of a virus(law). We can innoculate against the virus. (education). And these actions raise the cost of replication of the virus. To the point where it may live on, but not spread, because it can find no hosts.

    Now, just as we can operationalize language, by limiting it to warranty of due diligence, we can to the same for plots.

    Why? Because there is no difference between a literary recipes and legal recipes.

    For example, there is but one monomyth plot > so many archetypes > so many subplots (variations), and so many virtues and vices(sins). And we know that that hierarch refers to transcendence(learning), psychological portfolios, methods of resistance to transcendence, and an accounting of those changes virtues, vices. So we can in fact analyze any such literature. The evolution of post-literary persuasion will be through ‘harmonics’, which is a series of ‘reports’ the synthesis of whcy by any individual will feed a narrative. We can defend against this also by the same means.

    our primary problem is that we are denied the protection of the courts, and that church and state manage the commons rather than the MARKET manages the informational commons.

    So it is just as possible to perform a propertarian analysis of a piece of literature, no matter how subtle as it is to perform a propertarian analysis of advertisement, propaganda, or proposed law.

    The postmodern literary attempt was to circumvent the monomyth by creating little windows into the lives of people who were not heroic. THe postmodern and marxist artistic attempt was to circumvent the monomyth by removing narrative and relying entirely on design, and even then, anti-heroic design.

    And they do this under the auspices that the army common people fight in, and the economy common people labor in, and the families common people struggle with, are not in fact empirically better than they would be under non heroic civilizations that persist in ignorance and poverty. After all, the primary beneficiaries of consumer capitalism have not been the upper middle and upper classes. We have lost our status under capitalism to the middle and working classes. And we don’t like it very much.

    REVERSAL

    But we must remember that just as we must preserve cheaters in the gene pool to insure we retain defense against cheaters, we must preserve deceptions in the informational pool in order to preserve defense against deceptions.

    The northern europeans developed high trust to an extent where it was a fault. It was exploited. So it is not so much that we want to eliminate it as evolve in parrallel to it so that we preserve the ability to defeat it.

    I am attracted to the same general approach as the chinese: “these people are inferior’ but our solidarity is somewhat dependent upon their inferiority”

    in other words, it may be that we just need to create a wall and continuously defend against them otherwise there is no reason for the very heroism that has driven us despite our small numbers, to transcend the beast man.

    FORWARD

    I think this conversation would be very fruitful if you and I were to have it in a larger forum. Because this is the central question.

    I find nothing in middle eastern abrahamism that is good, that is not in pagan europeanism. I find no techniques in the world disciplines that are not in stoicism (action). And I find frightening parallels between the Roman authors of 0-100AD and the authors of 1880-1929.

    We have lost almost a century. The question is, can we save ourselves from what appears to be a certain dark age. Because while it is one thing to occupy and defeat a high trust people, once that high trust people, and their high trust are gone, it does not appear that other than levantine chaos and poverty remain.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-15 10:23:00 UTC

  • by Simon Ström Consider this authorative copypasta. (@Simon pls provide author)

    by Simon Ström

    Consider this authorative copypasta. (@Simon pls provide author)

    Europeans are a mix of Neolithic farmers coming in from the south, and the autochthonous Mesolithic foragers. Toward the end of the Neolithic the predominant genotype of Western Europe, extending homogeneously from Iberia to the TRB/Funnelbeaker culture in Germany, Poland and Scandinavia, was very similar to modern Basques; a mixture of what genetic literature calls Early European Farmers (EEF) and Western European Hunter-Gatherers (WHG). Notably, there was a pocket of pure WHG persistence throughout the Neolithic in the East Baltic region, which pulls Balts and Finns slightly away from their neighbors genetically today, toward the WHG. In most of Eastern Europe however, the so-called Steppe (or Yamnaya) genotype was predominant; also a mixture of northern hunter-gatherers and agriculturalists to their south, although both of these northern and southern components were more eastern shifted than their western counterparts, sharing significant affinity with Upper Paleolithic foragers from Siberia; the Ancient North Eurasians (ANE).

    When the Proto-Indo-Europeans of the Yamnaya culture (/the geographically and temporally adjacent kindred of Yamnaya) had not only domesticated the horse, but also invented the world’s first viable wheeled vehicles, they expanded rapidly across the Eurasian steppe and spread the Anatolian language family (Hittite etc.) through the Balkans and eventually across the Bosphorus; and the Proto-Tocharian language family to the east of the PIE homeland (most likely represented by the Afanasevo culture).

    All other known Indo-European languages, both living and extinct, including languages such as Latin, Greek, Sanskrit and Old Norse, share more features with each other than with the two previously mentioned branches and derive from ‘Late Proto-Indo-European’, spoken in the area of the Corded Ware phenomenon as a Western portion of Yamnaya (/Sredny Stog culture) ran over and mixed with the Late Neolithic farmers of the TRB culture (“Basques”), producing the modern North European genotype, which has not changed considerably since the Early Bronze Age. Although the area of Ukraine and south-central Russia was the Proto-Indo-European urheimat, the bifurcation hotspot (core area) of Indo-European language families shifted to the North European plain during its late phase, and the original dispersal of all currently living Indo-European languages were, therefore, profoundly implicated in the formation of the present-day North European genotype, roughly ~3,000 BC.

    No population has a better claim to the Aryan label than Europeans, and especially North Europeans, whose western (“Basque”) ancestral component lives on in modern Iberia while the eastern component (“Yamnaya”, Proto-Indo-European) went extinct during the mid-Bronze Age expansion of the Proto-Indo-Iranians from Eastern Europe to Central Asia.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-14 18:40:00 UTC

  • NATIONAL SOCIALISM WAS A DISASTER by Daniel Gurpide National-Socialism was “not

    NATIONAL SOCIALISM WAS A DISASTER

    by Daniel Gurpide

    National-Socialism was “not that bad” compared to the economic chaos and civil-war spirit which characterized the Weimar Republic; otherwise, it was a disaster:

    -The NS economic recipe (Keynesianism+Autarky+Welfare State) made military expansionism (Lebensraum) unavoidable.

    -Pan-Germanism necessarily provoked Pan-Slavism and the rest of fratricidal petty nationalisms. Only after Stalingrad did the III Reich raise the flag of Europe (the only reality with potential historically to mobilise the European population) when everything was already lost.

    -Eugenics, a promising movement which had taken root in most Western countries, was forced to a halt due to the pseudo-scientific misuse of genetics and racial studies by NS Germany.

    -Aryanism, an eminently aristocratic project, was trampled under plebeian foot.

    Is there anything to be rescued from the Hitlerian adventure?

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-14 11:35:00 UTC

  • SURE, BUT WERE THEY WRONG? (FALSE?) by Daniel Gurpide I would argue that German

    SURE, BUT WERE THEY WRONG? (FALSE?)

    by Daniel Gurpide

    I would argue that German morality has historically led to catastrophic political decisions:

    -Luther, the German Reformation and the subsequent European wars of religion.

    -Kant, German Idealism, and Pan-Germanism (the wars for the unification of Germany, I & II World Wars).

    -Modern secular German religion, i.e: National-Masochism (the refugee crisis of 2015, Brexit and the subsequent collapse of the EU maybe sometime in the near future if present trends continue?)

    History is obviously not monocausal, but German hyper-morality was the necessary, if not sufficient, condition for the development of these historical events.

    “Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus” (Let justice be done, though the world perishes) was Kant’s motto.

    One cannot conduct politics with categorical imperatives. Germany ends up always irritating everyone: Brits, Americans, Scandinavians, Dutch, French, Italian, Poles, Russians, etc. It is no coincidence.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-13 17:43:00 UTC