Curt Doolittle

Theme: Civilization

  • LAWRENCE VANCE HAD NUMEROUS TERMINOLOGICAL ERRORS IN HIS RECENT POST ON LRC. – I

    LAWRENCE VANCE HAD NUMEROUS TERMINOLOGICAL ERRORS IN HIS RECENT POST ON LRC. – I FIXED THEM. NOW IT’S ACCURATE 😉

    Apparently Larry doesn’t know his etymology, or his history, and like the progressives appropriated the term ‘liberal’, larry is a rothbardian who wants to appropriate the term “libertarian”. Apparently he thinks ‘libertarian’ isn’t a bias toward liberty. And libertarianism isn’t both the philosophy of liberty AND the name rothbard tried to appropriate for rothbardian anarcho capitalism.

    Because larry seems to think that liberty is somehow about the appropriate use of violence instead of liberty. That makes him a rothbardian. Because the opinions of the rest of the libertarians in the world, and one’s analysis of the history of the use of the term libertarian, lead one to conclude that the term ‘libertarian’ means the primacy of liberty first – and before all other political goods. Not that there are no other political goods.

    ACCORDING TO LARRY:

    —“I am a Rothbardian. I am not Democrat or Republican. I am not liberal or conservative. I am not left or right. I am not moderate or progressive. I am not a fusionist. I am not a constitutionalist.

    I am a Rothbardian. I am both thin and brutalist. I am not holist or solipsist. I am not moralist or consequentialist. I am not open or closed. I am not a modal, cosmopolitan, cultural, regime, sophisticated, or Beltway libertarian. I do not have a bleeding heart. I am not a neo, second wave, or millennial libertarian. I am a plain old Rothbardian – one who needs no labels, issues no caveats, and makes no apologies.

    I am a Rothbardian. Rothbardianism is a political philosophy concerned with the permissible use of force or violence. It is not a political philosophy that says limited government is the best kind of government. It is not a political philosophy that is socially liberal and economically conservative. It is not a political philosophy that says government is less efficient than the private sector. It is not a political philosophy that says freedom can be achieved by promoting some government policies over others. It is not a political philosophy that is low-tax liberalism. Libertarianism is not the absence of racism, sexism, homophobism, xenophobism, nationalism, nativism, classism, authoritarianism, patriarchy, inequality, or hierarchy. Libertarianism is not diversity or activism. Libertarianism is not egalitarianism. Libertarianism is not toleration or respect. Libertarianism is not a social attitude, lifestyle, or aesthetic sensibility.

    I am a Rothbardian. I subscribe to the non-aggression principle that says, in the words of Murray Rothbard: “The only proper role of violence is to defend person and property against violence, that any use of violence that goes beyond such just defense is itself aggressive, unjust, and criminal. Libertarianism, therefore, is a theory which states that everyone should be free of violent invasion, should be free to do as he sees fit except invade the person or property of another.” I am concerned with actions; I am not concerned with thoughts: I am concerned only with the negative consequences of thoughts. I believe that the non-aggression principle extends to government. Libertarians should therefore oppose or otherwise seek to limit the domestic and foreign meddling and intervention of governments, which are the greatest violators of the non-aggression principle.

    I am a Rothbardian. I believe in the golden rule. I believe in live and let live. I believe that a person should be free to do anything he wants, as long as his conduct is peaceful. I believe that vices are not crimes.

    I am a Rothbardian. Our enemy is the state. Our enemy is not religion, corporations, institutions, foundations, or organizations. These only have power to do us harm because of their connection with the state. And since war is the health of the state, the state’s military, wars, and foreign interventions must be opposed root and branch.

    I am a Rothbardian. I believe in laissez faire. Anyone should be free to engage in any economic activity without license, permission, prohibition, or interference from the state. The government should not intervene in the economy in any way. Free trade agreements, educational vouchers, privatizing Social Security, etc., are not the least bit libertarian ideas.

    I am a Rothbardian. The best government is no government. That government that governs least is the next best government. Government, as Voltaire said, at its best state is a necessary evil and at its worst state is an intolerable one. The best thing any government could do would be to simply leave us alone.

    I am a Rothbardian. Taxation is government theft. The government doesn’t have a claim to a certain percentage of one’s income. The tax code doesn’t need to be simplified, shortened, fairer, or less intrusive. The tax rates don’t need to be made lower, flatter, fairer, equal, or less progressive. The income tax doesn’t need more or larger deductions, loopholes, shelters, credits, or exemptions. The whole rotten system needs to be abolished. People have the right to keep what they earn and decide for themselves what to do with their money: spend it, waste it, squander it, donate it, bequeath it, hoard it, invest it, burn it, gamble it.

    I am a Rothbardian. I am a libertine. I am a hedonist. I am a moral relativist outside of the use of violence. I am a devotee of an alternative lifestyle never seen by man.

    I am a revolutionary. I am a social and moral nihilist. I neither wish to associate with nor aggress against those who are. I believe in the absolute freedom of association and discrimination.

    I am a Rothbardian.”—

    YES, LARRY, YOU ARE A ROTHBARDIAN. I AM NOT SURE YOU ARE A LIBERTARIAN.

    We have this big tent kind of thing. So we’ll let you in. No matter how silly your concept of how to obtain liberty is. Because we’re that kind of folk, you know. We’re libertarians.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-10 02:44:00 UTC

  • FAMILY HISTORY The earliest record is apparently in France, and concerns someone

    FAMILY HISTORY

    The earliest record is apparently in France, and concerns someone who

    served William I who continued to rule Normandy after he became king of

    England.

    “Radulphus de Dolieta: For forgiveness of misdeeds of himself and his predecessors and successors he grants in the time of William, King of England, to the Monks of St. Michael for the brotherhood and the prayers of St. Michael and the Monks, his servants, all the dues on his lands, etc.”

    [Recorded in original charters in archives of La Manche, Abbey of Mont St.

    Michael for Benedictine monks in Diocese of Avranche, France, A.D.

    1085-1087. ]

    Dolieta was the name of a place on the coast of Normandy, probably in the province of Manche (which included the peninsula on which Cherbourg is located) near the town of Avranches and the neighboring Mt. St. Michael; and this Rudolph of Dolieta, a Norman noble, who accompanied the Conqueror appears to have been the progenitor of all our family in England.

    The next record is Wiliam, son of Alan Dolatel or Dolitel, is mentioned m8d.patent 7, Edward I, year 1279.

    Followed by Robert Dolittel for some offense, was granted a royal pardon “by reason of his services in Scotland”. Guildford, Jan. 20. Calendar of Patent Rolls 31, Edward I. year 1303.

    In the 16th century wills and church and other records, the Doolittle family

    turn up in Kidderminster, Worcestershire. Actually a half dozen Doolittle

    families turn up in Kidderminster and its surrounding villages.

    Kederminster (Kidderminster) developed a fair (1228) and later a market (1240). And was home to the weaving and clothing trades (Kederminster “standeth most by clothing”).

    (We have records dating to Kidderminster in 1490 actually. We also have the original allocation of lands for the area to an unstated number of families who asked for new lands ‘in the north’. Although I cannot recall the date. In 1086 William owned a large manor there. )

    Very hard to tell how or why the family moved from Guildford to Kidderminster, and when. But the departure from Kidderminster to Ireland, London and America seems to be both because of the civil war (puritans) and because of the collapse of the textile trade.

    Then we get to the states where we get generals, and captains and all sorts of people against the crown. 🙂

    So Anarchism is I guess, a genetic trait. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-09 08:53:00 UTC

  • WE ARE BOTH FIGHTING FOR TRIBALISM The islamists are fighting for tribalism. If

    WE ARE BOTH FIGHTING FOR TRIBALISM

    The islamists are fighting for tribalism. If their tribalism wasn’t wrapped in islamic anti-science and anti rationalism, I’d support it. But should we look at it another way? Did their states just fail faster because they were poorer? They want to preserve their low trust tribalism. we want to preserve our high trust tribalism. But both from the islamist and the aristocratic sides, we are trying to restore tribalism against the anti-tribal corporate state.

    —“[CREVELD] His first conclusion was that the nation-state, as we know it, is in decline. The second was that warfare is undergoing a transformation to a new form that will be impossible for nation-states to defeat.”—

    Robb, John (2008-04-01). Brave New War: The Next Stage of Terrorism and the End of Globalization (p. 28). Turner Publishing Company. Kindle Edition.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-06 07:08:00 UTC

  • WEAKNESS OF OUTBREEDING AT SCALE

    https://occamsrazormag.wordpress.com/2014/03/15/the-achilles-heel-of-northern-europeans-outbreeding/THE WEAKNESS OF OUTBREEDING AT SCALE

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-05 04:24:00 UTC

  • (restoration) QUESTION: Does someone keep track of the extant members of the ari

    (restoration)

    QUESTION: Does someone keep track of the extant members of the aristocratic families?

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-04 09:10:00 UTC

  • NOBILITY: A NOBLE PHILOSOPHICAL ENDEAVOR Extricate the philosophy of liberty fro

    NOBILITY: A NOBLE PHILOSOPHICAL ENDEAVOR

    Extricate the philosophy of liberty from the mythology of the ghetto, and return it to the aristocracy where it was created – and restore the aristocracy and our liberty by doing so.

    The arguments are simple. Learn them.

    Aristocratic Egalitarianism.

    Propertariansim.

    Moral Realism.

    Scientific Realism.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-04 04:41:00 UTC

  • I REALLY DISLIKE RACISM One should blame one’s own people for their failures, no

    I REALLY DISLIKE RACISM

    One should blame one’s own people for their failures, not others for taking advantage of them. If you are occupied and conquered by others through immigration or displacement, it is no different from being occupied or conquered by others through religious conversion, political usurpation, or military conquest. It is your failure to prevent it. Not theirs for taking advantage of it.

    I see the world as families and tribes that can all prosper if we cooperate productively, without free riding, parasitism and predation. Unfortunately, free riding, parasitism and predation are much easier than mutually beneficial production. So humans prefer free riding, parasitism and predation whenever possible.

    I agree that the distribution of talents in the races is different, and that performatively, we can see that the median distribution of talents is indeed hierarchical.

    I agree that people act as political groups, acting in the favor of their group at the expense of other groups, whenever possible. I believe that the evidence tells us that race is on of the most influential factors in determining group membership, if not the most influential factor.

    I agree that because of those differences, our means and ends are different. But that does not mean that the different classes of all the races, and tribes, particularly the upper classes, cannot work together for the benefit of each tribe rather than abandoning the lower classes to conflict over resources and opportunities. The lower classes exist, and without their upper classes to grant them opportunities through superior competitiveness and cooperation, then they lose the competitive advantage that elites provide.

    The most heinous crime that an upper class can commit is to prey upon it’s own people, rather than provide competitive value for it’s lower classes, in relation to other lower classes.

    This is one of the primary reasons why the middle and lower classes support their elites and act as a group: because its in their interest to do so.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-01 06:01:00 UTC

  • ARISTOCRATIC ORIGINS OF LIBERTY AND THE CIVIL SOCIETY Heroism: Status Through Cr

    ARISTOCRATIC ORIGINS OF LIBERTY AND THE CIVIL SOCIETY

    Heroism: Status Through Creating Change (metaphysics)

    Nation (an extended family)

    Nuclear Family (the organizational unit of society)

    Property (the means of cooperation on means)

    Common Law (the means of dispute resolution)

    Independent Judiciary (the defenders of civilization)

    Monarchy (veto power) (house 1)

    Aristocracy (dispute resolution between nations) (house 2)

    Nobility (commerce with in the nation) (house 3)

    Priesthood (redistribution within the nation) (house 4)

    Militia (ownership)

    Hospitaliers (care taking)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-01 05:47:00 UTC

  • HAPPY MAY DAY!!!! BELTANE! –“May Day is related to the Celtic festival of Belta

    HAPPY MAY DAY!!!! BELTANE!

    –“May Day is related to the Celtic festival of Beltane and the Germanic festival of Walpurgis Night. May Day falls half a year from November 1 – another cross-quarter day which is also associated with various northern European paganisms and the year in the Northern Hemisphere – and it has traditionally been an occasion for popular and often raucous celebrations.”–

    I want a raucous celebration to attend. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-01 05:33:00 UTC

  • RUSSIA: THE WHITE PEOPLE WHO FAILED (use this meme) Why is it, that throughout t

    RUSSIA: THE WHITE PEOPLE WHO FAILED

    (use this meme)

    Why is it, that throughout their history, at every opportunity, Russians consistently make the wrong decision? What is it that Russians incorrectly intuit about the world? Why do they have the lowest trust most corrupt nation of all the white peoples? Why is it that Russians are the one white people who have failed.

    If any people was ever incapable of self government, it’s Russians. If any people was less capable of governing others. It’s the Russians. What is it about the Russian character that causes them to consistently fail? What metaphysical assumption about the nature of man and his relationship to the world is so flawed that unless tightly bound to europe they contribute nothing to legacy of white people? Why is it that western peoples have dragged the entire world out of ignorance mysticism sickness and poverty, while russians try consistently to reverse the trend by dragging those white people near them into their failed civilization?

    Why is it that Russians have nothing to offer the world other than corruption, violence, fear and poverty?

    Why are Russians the only white people who have failed?

    Curt Doolittle

    Kiev

    ===

    FROM ANDRAS TOTH (edited)

    Russian peculiarity, to a certain extent is a consequence of geography – as with any other nation and state in premodern and to a certain extent, lesser degree in modern times.

    1) Few big rivers channeling into closed sees – obstructs trade and industrial development, favours self-sustaining closed economies.

    2) Far away from big cultural centres, which lessened the impact of other cultures, and learning by transactions, copying, emulating and transfer of ideas, new practices.

    3) Russia only entered into European history in the XVIIIth century, when expanded borders westward (absorbing Ukraine and Eastern Poland and the Baltics) and with the advent of railways, which made possible the larger scale involvement in trade and world markets.

    4) Unfortunately for Russia, when technically was able to join to the world economy, key countries moved to economic nationalism, beginning with Germany which imposed custom tariff on agriculture products to save East Prussian Junkers from Russian wheat and agricultural products.

    5) Nothing else left to Russia than turn to imperialism and try to expand to get to the seashore through the Balkans to circumvent German trade barrier.

    6) Hence the I.WW, where Russian expansion was blocked by Austria Hungary backed by Germany.

    7). Bolshevik revolution due to the extreme hardship and delegitimization of Czarist regime as a direct consequence of I. WW.

    8) Communist destruction.

    ===

    To which I’ll add:

    (1) the desert and steppe people are a problem and always have been, and have been exceedingly so for the Rus who sit between us, and those people. The chinese character is likewise informed by that same concern, although the chinese do have a nearly impassable desert between them and the ‘undesirable’ people. So just as we in the west have tried to keep the ‘near east’ at bay since the bronze age, the people in both Russia and China have tried to keep the ‘steppe’ people at bay – and failed most of the time. The mongols the most obvious case.

    (2) When Russians sought to modernize, the had the choice of selecting european or byzantine christianity. They chose poorly. Their main trading partner was still byzantium / Islam. The origin of much of the Rus culture is slave trade with Byzantium / Islam.

    (3) As a large poor backward country, they kept their expropriation serfdom until a couple of hundred years ago, the better of the Czars couldn’t modernize fast enough, the soviets (the underclasses) restored that totalitarianism. It’s a very nihilistic low trust culture that seeks easy solutions to problems and has no problem with the win-lose ethic. The win-win ethic is something they actually assume is some kind of deception.

    (4) Without the catholic church’s ban on intermarriage, the west would not have broken familial and tribal bonds, and we would not have outbred, and created the high trust society. Although one reason we broke those bonds easily was that north sea peoples had already been practicing outbreeding and manorialism, which is the origin of the protestant ethic. Not much protestant about it.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-01 04:15:00 UTC