Theme: Civilization

  • The west has always been a eugenic civ

    The west has always been a eugenic civ.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-06-28 04:32:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/747648737271488512

    Reply addressees: @mdavilamartinez @EndTaysachs @garrettlgray @Flatland_USA @Alt_Left @wolfe_fan @nunzioni @faktisk

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/747647750368563200


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/747647750368563200

  • “It was precisely this domestication of men and women into family units that pro

    —“It was precisely this domestication of men and women into family units that propelled Europeans forward. That the Germans were more monogamously disciplined than the Celts is why they went on to be the source of Northern European success, more so than the Irish. The eugenic footprint can be seen even to this day.”— Josh Jeppson


    Source date (UTC): 2016-06-28 00:38:00 UTC

  • “EUROPE’S BRUTAL HANGOVER IS INEVITABLE” “The individual can make all the differ

    “EUROPE’S BRUTAL HANGOVER IS INEVITABLE”

    “The individual can make all the difference.” One man, open-minded and curious, did very well for himself. By what he learned from his (independent) studies in economics, he was enabled to predict the approximate arrival time of the 2008 housing boom. By then, he had become a successful finance professional. Afterwards, in 2010, Michael Burry courageously took out an ad in the NYT and publicly asked the Federal Reserve and Congress what their excuse was for not predicting the collapse, for their negligence. Soon his company was harassed by government agents in various ways, which cost him millions of dollars in legal fees. LISTEN TO THE BALANCE OF HIS SPEECH, ESPECIALLY THE CONCLUSION.

    And I really like zerohedge’ lead in: Infamous for his prediction of the great recession, Europe’s demise, and the collapse of the US financial system (as well as profiting extremely handsomely from said predictions), so well captured in Michael Lewis’ book “The Big Short”, UCLA’s Dr. Michael Burry undertakes UCLA’s Economics Department’s commencement speech with much aplomb. In this “age of infinite distraction”, the astounding truthiness of this 15 minute speech is stunning from single-sentence summation of Europe’s convulsions that “when the entitled elect themselves, the party accelerates, and the brutal hangover is inevitable” he reminds us that Californians, and indeed all Americans, should take note. A quarter-of-an-hour well spent from a self-described ‘chicken-little’ who was “just trying to figure it all out”.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-06-24 12:14:00 UTC

  • DEFINING “BAD” Whenever profit takes precedence over commons. Whenever financial

    DEFINING “BAD”

    Whenever profit takes precedence over commons.

    Whenever financial markets take precedence over culture.

    Whenever law takes precedence over family.

    Whenever government takes precedence over industry.

    Whenever state takes precedence over tribe.

    Whenever empire takes precedence over nation.

    The British press are whining about the short-term impact of financial markets.

    The British people are worried about the long-term consequences to family, commons, culture, nation, and people.

    The madness is endemic.

    Kill the Napoleonic state.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-06-24 00:45:00 UTC

  • Let’s Correct History A Bit

    (I will get hate mail over this rather grand deflowering) http://www.scientificamerican.com/…/how-2-pro-nazi-nobelis…/ Some of us have to clean up history a bit: (1) There is nothing strange about a popular political movement generating crackpots, and the state not shutting down the crackpots. I mean, world academia is full of them. We don’t even have to get to bloggers, and newsletters and their progenitors. (2) Naziism was an aesthetic movement in the same way that socialism was a pseudoscientific movement, or the movements of religiosity of prior eras. All movements create nonsense mythos. Nazis were not unique. (3) Hitler’s mistake was purely military. And had nothing to do with his attempt to ‘cleanse’ the population of cosmopolitan, bolshvik, and socialist activism. Germany’s enlightenment, thanks ot the failures of Kant and his followers, was incomplete and just reaching maturity under Wagner, Nietzsche and their contemporaries. The Ashkenazi enlightenment (Jewish enlightenment) arrived just as the German was peaking, but beause it was commercial where the german was cultural and aesthetic, was able to take advantage of new technologies and far lower cost of distribution of propaganda. The cosmopolitan (socialist) vision was not compatible with the german (hierarchical duty), and to some degree, this “Clash of Civilizations” turned out to be a war over the soul (Germany) of Europe. The two battling cultures (german heartland agrarian, and borderland diasporic Jewish) fought with their historical methods: germans with war and jews with propaganda. The bolshevik-cum-Stalinist Russians took advantage of this weakness, in hopes of not only seizing the borderlands, as they had the land east of the Urals, but possibly the german heartland as well. Had not the Americans intervened and de facto conquered and colonized Europe, that clash between agrarian hierarchy and cosmopolitan socialism would have been settled with that war. Hitler’s war was a civil war between the Jewish/Slavic borderlands previously held by Russia/Poland/Lithuania and their borderland enlightenment, and the ancient germanic martial civilization, and their heartland enlightenment and the bolshevik-stalinist fantasies of russia to escape third tier status among the great powers. The rest of us were just players until Hitler moved west – easily baited by the Russians into entrapping himself with Poland. His error was that he did not understand the stakes, any more than the Americans did. And in both world wars, Americans most likely fought ont he wrong side. It was germany that was trying to protect the west, as she had for millennia against invasion from the east. (4) Had Hitler attacked Bolshevism, and had he not exhausted his resources so that the ‘ex-patriation’ camps did not become slave-labor and finally death camps, he would have accomplished the same ends by militarily, politically, and morally defensible means that we today would still find substantive. The British invented the idea of using camps as processing centers, the Nazi’s adopted it, and the Russians industrialized it. And the Chinese merely circumvented it by direct, outright killing opponents wherever they could find them – setting china back into destitution from which western influence by example, finally extracted them. (5) The postwar propaganda campaign was probably appropriate, if not necessary, for the era in which so much cost was born by citizens, but has been overplayed since the early sixties – so much so that we are at risk at present (I monitor the scholarship) of reversing the historical narrative. History will look at these events very differently in a century than we do now and the above narrative is more likely to be the one that survives and endures. It’s my job to tell people unpleasant truths about their moral fantasies. I don’t particularly like the fact that my people have largely been wrong about everything they have done since the grand accident of the Louisianna Purchase. But truth is merciless to all of us. There is just as much pseudoscience if not more among Jewish intellectuals than there was ever imagined by the Nazis. And the difference is that no one took nazi propaganda seriously other than the semi literate, but the entire western intellectual and political system embraced jewish pseudoscience enthisiastically simply becuase it was better written ‘crackpot’ pseudoscience. Boazian antropology = anti-Darwinian pseuoscience. Freudian psychology = anti-Nietzschean pseudoscience. Marxism / Socialism = anti-Economic pseudoscience. Leninism = Justification of totalitarianism and murder. Trotskyism = Justification of totalitarianism and murder The Frankfurt School = anti-Spencerian sociological pseudoscience Postmodernism = resorting to lying and repetition by propaganda having failed with pseudoscience. Neo-Conservatism = Leo Strauss and his followers, attempting to use the german kantian technique of pseudo-rationalism to load, frame, and overload, and thereby decieve. Let us assess the damage done by: The Anglo struggle for its enlightenment: worldwide expansion. (an empirical one) The French struggle for its enlightenment (the massacres of the French revolution, and the tyranny of napoleon), ( a romantic one) and its replacement of the existing nobility with a new bureaucratic one. The Russian struggle for its enlightenment (a literary one)and its truncation by Bolsheviks. The German struggle for its enlightenment (a philosophical one) and failure to transition to the empirical. The second german struggle for its enlightenment (an aesthetic one) The Jewish struggle for its enlightenment (a pseudoscientific one) How many of these enlightenments were stopped dead by the Jewish pseudoscientific enlightenment? How many more murders and how much more suffering was caused by the success of the Jewish pseudoscientific enlightenment, it’s conquest of Russia, it’s failed conquest of Germany, it’s failed conquest of China, it’s existing hinderance of Indian political development, and the saturation of the formerly great academies of the west with pseudoscience? So let us not revel in self-compliment and congratulate ourselves on our moral standing when we are greater fools than those few who found purchase in such nonsense. You cannot compare the ineffectual propaganda of the Nazi fringe in support of anti-bolshevism and anti-cosmopolitanism in a fight over control of the borderlands with the extremely effective propaganda of the Jewish pseudosciences, and the 100m dead, and billiions idoctrinated into falsehoods because of them. Look at the crisis the resistance to the enlightenment is causing in the Islamic world. They’ve been fighting it since they started suppressing knowledge and expanding Islam to the masses in the thirteenth century. Civil wars, and border wars, and clashes of civilizations are bloody things. The fact that some of us fight more with armies(germans), some of us fight more with economics (anglos), some of us fight more with fabricated religions and pseudoscience (jews), some of us fight with reproduction and raiding (Islam), some of us fight with parasitism (gypsies), is just a matter of the resources and populations at our disposal. Nothing more. We are all in competition. Cooperation is merely useful or it is not. Thankfully it is usually more useful than not. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.
  • Let’s Correct History A Bit

    (I will get hate mail over this rather grand deflowering) http://www.scientificamerican.com/…/how-2-pro-nazi-nobelis…/ Some of us have to clean up history a bit: (1) There is nothing strange about a popular political movement generating crackpots, and the state not shutting down the crackpots. I mean, world academia is full of them. We don’t even have to get to bloggers, and newsletters and their progenitors. (2) Naziism was an aesthetic movement in the same way that socialism was a pseudoscientific movement, or the movements of religiosity of prior eras. All movements create nonsense mythos. Nazis were not unique. (3) Hitler’s mistake was purely military. And had nothing to do with his attempt to ‘cleanse’ the population of cosmopolitan, bolshvik, and socialist activism. Germany’s enlightenment, thanks ot the failures of Kant and his followers, was incomplete and just reaching maturity under Wagner, Nietzsche and their contemporaries. The Ashkenazi enlightenment (Jewish enlightenment) arrived just as the German was peaking, but beause it was commercial where the german was cultural and aesthetic, was able to take advantage of new technologies and far lower cost of distribution of propaganda. The cosmopolitan (socialist) vision was not compatible with the german (hierarchical duty), and to some degree, this “Clash of Civilizations” turned out to be a war over the soul (Germany) of Europe. The two battling cultures (german heartland agrarian, and borderland diasporic Jewish) fought with their historical methods: germans with war and jews with propaganda. The bolshevik-cum-Stalinist Russians took advantage of this weakness, in hopes of not only seizing the borderlands, as they had the land east of the Urals, but possibly the german heartland as well. Had not the Americans intervened and de facto conquered and colonized Europe, that clash between agrarian hierarchy and cosmopolitan socialism would have been settled with that war. Hitler’s war was a civil war between the Jewish/Slavic borderlands previously held by Russia/Poland/Lithuania and their borderland enlightenment, and the ancient germanic martial civilization, and their heartland enlightenment and the bolshevik-stalinist fantasies of russia to escape third tier status among the great powers. The rest of us were just players until Hitler moved west – easily baited by the Russians into entrapping himself with Poland. His error was that he did not understand the stakes, any more than the Americans did. And in both world wars, Americans most likely fought ont he wrong side. It was germany that was trying to protect the west, as she had for millennia against invasion from the east. (4) Had Hitler attacked Bolshevism, and had he not exhausted his resources so that the ‘ex-patriation’ camps did not become slave-labor and finally death camps, he would have accomplished the same ends by militarily, politically, and morally defensible means that we today would still find substantive. The British invented the idea of using camps as processing centers, the Nazi’s adopted it, and the Russians industrialized it. And the Chinese merely circumvented it by direct, outright killing opponents wherever they could find them – setting china back into destitution from which western influence by example, finally extracted them. (5) The postwar propaganda campaign was probably appropriate, if not necessary, for the era in which so much cost was born by citizens, but has been overplayed since the early sixties – so much so that we are at risk at present (I monitor the scholarship) of reversing the historical narrative. History will look at these events very differently in a century than we do now and the above narrative is more likely to be the one that survives and endures. It’s my job to tell people unpleasant truths about their moral fantasies. I don’t particularly like the fact that my people have largely been wrong about everything they have done since the grand accident of the Louisianna Purchase. But truth is merciless to all of us. There is just as much pseudoscience if not more among Jewish intellectuals than there was ever imagined by the Nazis. And the difference is that no one took nazi propaganda seriously other than the semi literate, but the entire western intellectual and political system embraced jewish pseudoscience enthisiastically simply becuase it was better written ‘crackpot’ pseudoscience. Boazian antropology = anti-Darwinian pseuoscience. Freudian psychology = anti-Nietzschean pseudoscience. Marxism / Socialism = anti-Economic pseudoscience. Leninism = Justification of totalitarianism and murder. Trotskyism = Justification of totalitarianism and murder The Frankfurt School = anti-Spencerian sociological pseudoscience Postmodernism = resorting to lying and repetition by propaganda having failed with pseudoscience. Neo-Conservatism = Leo Strauss and his followers, attempting to use the german kantian technique of pseudo-rationalism to load, frame, and overload, and thereby decieve. Let us assess the damage done by: The Anglo struggle for its enlightenment: worldwide expansion. (an empirical one) The French struggle for its enlightenment (the massacres of the French revolution, and the tyranny of napoleon), ( a romantic one) and its replacement of the existing nobility with a new bureaucratic one. The Russian struggle for its enlightenment (a literary one)and its truncation by Bolsheviks. The German struggle for its enlightenment (a philosophical one) and failure to transition to the empirical. The second german struggle for its enlightenment (an aesthetic one) The Jewish struggle for its enlightenment (a pseudoscientific one) How many of these enlightenments were stopped dead by the Jewish pseudoscientific enlightenment? How many more murders and how much more suffering was caused by the success of the Jewish pseudoscientific enlightenment, it’s conquest of Russia, it’s failed conquest of Germany, it’s failed conquest of China, it’s existing hinderance of Indian political development, and the saturation of the formerly great academies of the west with pseudoscience? So let us not revel in self-compliment and congratulate ourselves on our moral standing when we are greater fools than those few who found purchase in such nonsense. You cannot compare the ineffectual propaganda of the Nazi fringe in support of anti-bolshevism and anti-cosmopolitanism in a fight over control of the borderlands with the extremely effective propaganda of the Jewish pseudosciences, and the 100m dead, and billiions idoctrinated into falsehoods because of them. Look at the crisis the resistance to the enlightenment is causing in the Islamic world. They’ve been fighting it since they started suppressing knowledge and expanding Islam to the masses in the thirteenth century. Civil wars, and border wars, and clashes of civilizations are bloody things. The fact that some of us fight more with armies(germans), some of us fight more with economics (anglos), some of us fight more with fabricated religions and pseudoscience (jews), some of us fight with reproduction and raiding (Islam), some of us fight with parasitism (gypsies), is just a matter of the resources and populations at our disposal. Nothing more. We are all in competition. Cooperation is merely useful or it is not. Thankfully it is usually more useful than not. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.
  • ***Proles. We are supposed to conquer, disempower, civilise, and if necessary en

    ***Proles. We are supposed to conquer, disempower, civilise, and if necessary enslave these people. And for the good of humanity limit their ability to reproduce. Aren’t we? Why do we give them political power over us rather than place political power over them?***


    Source date (UTC): 2016-06-23 05:33:00 UTC

  • CONSERVATIVES CANNOT BE HONEST UNDER DEMOCRACY Why? Conservatism is a eugenic so

    CONSERVATIVES CANNOT BE HONEST UNDER DEMOCRACY

    Why? Conservatism is a eugenic social order. And the ‘good’ families are dwarfed in number by the ‘not good’ families.

    Western success is due in no small part to its adoption of eugenic institutions and policies in every walk of life. Puritan american was an attempt to create a eugenic civilization.

    But America, like every other attempt at creating a eugenic state has failed for the same reason: insufficient understanding of the reasons for the west’s rise; insufficient honesty in its constitution; and insufficient violence to preserve it.

    And this is why traditionalism and conservatism in all their variations have failed. Conservatism is a deterministically eugenic social, political, legal, and economic system that arose in the era of productive scarcity.

    Majoritarian democracy, redistributive socialism, and feminism are deterministically dysgenic social, political, legal, and economic systems that arose in the era of productive plenty.

    Western eugenics were negative: constraining the lower classes and devoting resources to the reproduction of the middle and upper classes. They were not positive in any sense: arranged breeding. This conflation of negative eugenics and positive eugenics is what brought an end to the movement. Even if medically induced positive eugenics is probably a future we can assume will expand.

    Assuming that we must preserve the means of constructing commons, and assuming we want to preserve prosperity and western creativity, we have two choices: we can either remove the franchise from the non-producers and restore the family to the central object of policy, or we can construct houses for the production of commons that once again reflect that interests of the genders and classes. The first will create an oligarchy open to corruption. The second will create a market whereby genders and classes cannot impose costs upon one another without benefit in exchange.

    If we fail to do the second, we will be forced to do the first. And if we fail to do the first, we will no longer exist as a civilization.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, UKraine


    Source date (UTC): 2016-06-23 05:31:00 UTC

  • Want to reiterate. That as far as I can tell white people discovered truth for e

    Want to reiterate. That as far as I can tell white people discovered truth for environmental reasons. The were superior at warfare for the same reasons. And white people were more successful at eugenic reproduction because of environment warfare and truth.

    In this sense we are just less bad as a group than most others. Primarily because we have eliminated more of our bad folk.

    An achievement we have rapidly reversed.

    As far as I know no race or tribe is prohibited from transcendence. If every group practiced eugenic reproduction for a few centuries they would progress as well.

    Why? Be cause the best of us cannot compensate for the worst of us.

    This is fairly obvious.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-06-20 12:42:00 UTC

  • We’ve Been Focused On The Wrong Institution. We Need the Church

    (important piece) Group evolution is not a matter of specialization, of but the addition of layers of competency in increasingly abstract techniques.

    One cannot abandon the militia for the state. One cannot abandon rule of law for market expansion. One cannot abandon land holding for the commercial universalism.. The milita must exist hold the territory and limit the law. The Law must exist to hold the nation and limit commerce. The Church must exist to hold the mythos and The state- that which we call government – is a temporary organization for the purpose of producing temporal commons. And that is all. it is a purely utilitarian entity with short term objectives. We are focused on the wrong institutions. Government does not matter. Church, law, and militia do. Church, and family. Law and Nation. Militia and Land THUS ENDETH THE LESSON. WE START WITH THE CHURCHES. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine