Curt Doolittle

Theme: Civilization

  • THE CULTURE OF NON-SUBMISSION : HEROISM The indo european peoples, as sky-worshi

    THE CULTURE OF NON-SUBMISSION : HEROISM

    The indo european peoples, as sky-worshipping, technology-adapting, meat-eating pastoralists, invented heroic, aristocratic, egalitarianism, and managed to survive only in northern Europe. This value system, which we call heroism, is the very antithesis – the opposite – of the ideology of submission that is the identifying characteristic of islamic and Chinese civilizations.

    The western high trust ethic is incompatible with postmodernism just as it was incompatible with socialism and early christianity. And it’s even more incompatible with Islam.

    Aristocracy is pagan, egalitarian, and the antithesis of submission.

    Libertarians are commercially aristocratic, in the same way that conservatives are militarily aristocratic. But while our concepts of excellence vary, our embrace of heroic, egalitarian, excellence is the same.

    Liberty is property. And property and liberty are aristocratic virtues.

    The rest of people want nothing to do with them.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-04-27 12:40:00 UTC

  • REGARDING WHITE MALES AND LIBERTARIANISM White males (the european, or perhaps g

    REGARDING WHITE MALES AND LIBERTARIANISM

    White males (the european, or perhaps germanic, race) seek status under the ancient indo-european proscription for heroism via competition. The west is unique for having produced this philosophy of aristocratic egalitarianism – inclusion in equalitarian leadership, and therefore obtaining the reward of property rights, by demonstrated heroism. And the high trust society of the west is the result of aristocratic egalitarianism (heroic achievement, demonstrated excellence, virtue).

    For most of history, and pre-history, males could achieve this only through combat. With the advent of manorialism, males could demonstrate their fitness through hard work. With the advent of chivalry males could demonstrate their heroic status by charitable service. With the advent of consumer capitalism, males could demonstrate their heroic fitness in commerce.

    Heroic achievemnet grants access to mates (we have a lof of data on this now that confirms this fact – to the point where we know how many dollars in income per inch of height under 5’10” you must earn to gain the same quality of attractive woman…. Really.) Women are as shallow about status as men are about physical attraction – and the data is the data.

    As such, white males are intuitively attracted to libertarianism if they see in libertarianism a means of pursuing traditional signals for mating, social status, and wealth.

    That libertarianism is a rigorous philospohy equalled in detail only by Marxism, and is articulated in economic language and analytical philosophy. It is accessible only to those people with both incentive to learn it, and the ability to understand it. This is why libertarianism is a minority white male philosophy. It is an aristocratic philosophy and difficult to access.

    Other cultures lack both the mythology and cultural values for heroism and egalitarianism Which is why other cultures also cannot produce the high trust society. And without the high trust society, the wealth necessary for redistribution (charity) is impossible to achieve at scale.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-04-27 03:57:00 UTC

  • What Are Some American (us) Ways That Cause People From Other Cultures To Find Them Hard To Work With?

    For whom are they hard to work with?

    We follow the Protestant Work Ethic. Tell the truth, the whole truth, up front, make a promise and stick to it regardless of change.

    https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-American-US-ways-that-cause-people-from-other-cultures-to-find-them-hard-to-work-with

  • “Group selection constrains surplus and spreads subsistence.” Aristocracy defeat

    “Group selection constrains surplus and spreads subsistence.”

    Aristocracy defeats group selection.

    I think I can reduce the western canon to that statement.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-04-25 01:34:00 UTC

  • BEAUTY AND EXCELLENCE Why are western academics afraid of Truth, Beauty, Excelle

    http://www.iep.utm.edu/aris-eth/TRUTH, BEAUTY AND EXCELLENCE

    Why are western academics afraid of Truth, Beauty, Excellence? And god forbid, our martial virtues, and the aristocratic creation of civilization through conquest of the primitive.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-04-24 05:29:00 UTC

  • FUTURE OF EUROPE IS GERMANY AND RUSSIA – OR IRRELEVANCE. The catholic countries

    http://www.social-europe.eu/2013/03/germany-has-created-an-accidental-empire/THE FUTURE OF EUROPE IS GERMANY AND RUSSIA – OR IRRELEVANCE.

    The catholic countries are dead weights.

    As a political economist, I will have to say, in technical terms, this article is utter nonsense.

    Strategically the best scenario, long term, for Europe, is a strong Germany allied with a strong Russia. Catholic Europe is a basket case and will remain so, because the family is the economic unit and the moral boundary, and corruption is pervasive for this reason. Germanic countries treat the individual as the economic unit, and the entire society as the moral boundary, with the family responsible for manufacturing good citizens. This is why these cultures are so much less corrupt that the catholic cultures.

    An ongoing ‘euro’ project that allows political rather than economic dependency of the southern states will leave a weak Germany, and an expansionist russia.

    Why the past, whose economics are completely irrelevant today, should be what europeans fear, rather than a future wehre the USA is no longer economically able to police world trade and therefore grant Europe client state privileges. The only solution for Europe is integration of european labor with Russian resources and russian militarism.

    I’m happy to argue this with any economist in the world., But the fact of the matter is, that any economist in the world able to argue it, will probably agree with me.

    The catholic countries are irrelevant. Absolutely irrelevant. The problem is natural resources, economic interdependence with Russia, and the slow conversion of the catholic and byzantine states to credible commercial economies, dependent upon the alliance of the two countries capable of producing competitive goods and services.

    http://www.social-europe.eu/2013/03/germany-has-created-an-accidental-empire

    Source date (UTC): 2013-04-21 13:56:00 UTC

  • Plato: What Are The Key Takeaways From The Republic?

    Plato, like Confucius (孔夫子), could not solve the problem of politics and resorted to trying to manufacture virtue in a factory, in order to justify totalitarianism. Western Civilization has suffered from him ever since.

    And if it were not for Aristotle correcting him, we might not have been able to recover from it.

    https://www.quora.com/Plato-What-are-the-key-takeaways-from-The-Republic

  • WHICH CULTURES ARE THE MOST FAMILIAL? Worst is the USA, Ireland was second (24.3

    WHICH CULTURES ARE THE MOST FAMILIAL?

    Worst is the USA, Ireland was second (24.3 percent), followed by New Zealand (23.7 percent). At the other end, Greece, Spain, Italy and Luxemborg had among the lowest percentages of children in single-parent homes.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-04-12 03:23:00 UTC

  • How Might A Private Law Society Be A Reasonable Solution For Most Of The Social Ills Of Civilization?

    The question is somewhat misleading. A private law society requires a homogeneity of interests, and therefore is a small society.  An argument in favor of a private law society is an argument in favor of many small societies (private cities). Since society’s ills are largely the product of the opposing vales of credit at scale, but diversity of interests at scale, we generally need governments to resolve conflicts between groups with competing interests, all of whom dislike compromising, but all of whom benefit from the insurance value and credit value of a large government.

    What is important here is that Hoppe has solved the problem of large monopolistic bureaucratic government acting as an extortionary, self-interested monopoly insurer maximizing it’s profit for employees, with small cities and competing insurance companies. That this is advocating a return, en large, to the pre-empire german city states, is probably not lost on historians. It isn’t lost on  Hoppe.

    So it is a reasonable solution except that the value of credit to large populations is that they can finance the wars necessary to keep other large states at bay.  This is where the banking and fiat credit system as we understand it comes from: the finance of the wars of napoleon and britain.  Which is one of rothbard and hoppe’s reasons for trying to undermine the large monpoly state: is that it is used to finance warfare.  However, if the USA uses it to finance warfare, that means europe can use it for social programs, because europe doesn’t have to. The US then sells enough dollars as petrodollars to pay for its military, and then inflates the debt, effectively charging these countries – and the whole world, for the cost of its military.

    I hope this helps put such things in context.

    https://www.quora.com/How-might-a-Private-Law-Society-be-a-reasonable-solution-for-most-of-the-social-ills-of-civilization

  • Does Fernand Braudel’s Analysis In Civilization & Capitalism (1955-79) Still Hold?

    The problem is, I’m not sure what you are really asking here.

    If you mean, that the success of europe was due to the independence of small city-states that were privately owned enterprises (oligarchies), with heavy integration between the governemtn and privileged (monopolist) industries, and that european success can be attributed in part to this relationship rather than ‘free trade and Smithian compeition”  then his analysis holds as far as that statement is concerned.  I think Smith’s argument was an attempt to suggest free trade would limit wars caused by these monopoly interests, since the transformation that we call the enlightenment was an effort to correct the problem of the 30 years war by finding an alternative social order.

    If we mean, that capital has been divorced from the city state by more widespread production networks, I think that’s accepted wisdom. I think it’s become apparent that capital is mobile and that states have a limited ability to control it.  States generally desire to remain autarkic and capitalists have the polar opposite position.

    If we mean, do norms and culture matter and does it matter that they remain constant and uninterrupted, I think Hayek and others have supported that pretty aggressively, and that the right agrees and the left hates it because it violates postmodernism’s religious doctrines.

    That governments operate almost entirely today as insurance companies, and that in retrospect it looks like city states insured their industries, I think also that this is accepted wisdom. 

    That capitalists compete against the state is also true, and if we understand that the state has appropriated the capitalist-oligarchical-industrial organization that was the reason for the success of europe, I’m not sure that the fact that the insurance company (the state) has invaded and stolen the assets of the business people, on behalf of the common people, is probably the way most look at it. But that is what happened.

    That Braudel may have attempted to justify state monopoly and socialism rather than small states, is propbably an incorrect deduction to make from that analysis. 

    Braudel is one of many historians, social scientists, economists and  philosophers, that have tried to solve the problem of the theory of the social sciences.  One thing I would suggest and so would have Nietzsche, is that the fundamental disconnect in Braudel’s argument is that there is a common good, and one that can be known, and certainly one that is homogenous, and about which we can achieve consensus. Instead, this is one of the mistakes we inherited with the conquest of European paganism by judeo-christian totalitarian mysticism.   Democracy being yet aother instantiation of that monotheistic and therefor monopolistic and therefore totalitarain mysticism. (If you can follow that line of Nietzscheian reasoning. 🙂

    https://www.quora.com/Does-Fernand-Braudels-analysis-in-Civilization-Capitalism-1955-79-still-hold