Curt Doolittle

Theme: Class

  • WHY DOES UKRAINE NEED EUROPE? OLIGARCHS. Ukraine was always a tax-toy of other s

    WHY DOES UKRAINE NEED EUROPE? OLIGARCHS.

    Ukraine was always a tax-toy of other states.

    Ukraine was subject to horrors under the Soviets.

    Ukraine has been subject to predation and poverty under post soviet oligarchs.

    The Ukrainian government and judiciary is OWNED by the oligarchs – and organized crime (the fantasy of libertarians).

    If the Ukrainian Government tries to take over oligarchs, it is too weak, and Ukraine will fall into civil war, so that the Russians have an excuse to conquer them again, and deprive them of their potential for a high trust society, sovereignty, and nationhood.

    NATO MEANS DEFEAT OF OLIGARCHS AND NATIONHOOD.

    Nato + European integration means defeat of the Oligarchs.

    Defeat of the oligarchs allows Rule of law.

    Rule of law allows credit and risk.

    Credit allows risk via entrepreneurship.

    Entrepreneurship creates prosperity.

    Prosperity saves the Ukrainian people from:

    1) predation by the jews of old

    2) predation by the soviets of the 20th century.

    3) predation by the oligarchs of post soviets.

    And eliminates all value of a Russian conquest.

    PUTIN FAILED. HE COULD HAVE:

    0) Called the Nato leaders personally and told them his plan.(not asked permission)

    1) Burned Yanukovich on a stake for his crimes against the people.

    2) Provided discount gas to ukraine for a 99 year lease on the black sea coastal territories.

    3) Secured the Ukrainian banks that were not already under Russian ownership (few of them)

    4) Crushed the Ukrainian Oligarchs “at the request of the ukrainian people”

    5) Withdrawn back to russian.

    6) Restored the territory, population, trade routes, manufacturing base, and military bases necessary for continued russian restoration of orthodox empire.

    7) Caused russia to be forgiven of past sins under the soviets.

    AND AS A RESULT PUTIN COULD HAVE:

    8) been a fucking world hero, and perhaps the greatest leader of the 21st century.

    9) Removed all necessity for the preservation of NATO.

    10) Saved the world from any nearby chance of another world war.

    Yeah. So. It’s still possible.

    WHY ISN’T HE DOING IT?

    Stupid.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-11 09:35:00 UTC

  • “The rich can do what they want. We can cooperate, or, um… or do other things.

    —“The rich can do what they want. We can cooperate, or, um… or do other things. But if they choose other things, it goes both ways. I’m not entitled to anything. But neither are they. I’m not entitled to a living. They’re not entitled to live… I hope the money they save on the nanny and gardner also pays for enough foreign mercenaries. They’re going to need them.”— Eli Harman

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-10 12:20:00 UTC

  • PROPERTARIAN CLASS STRUCTURE: THREE METHODS OF COERCION (worth repeating)

    PROPERTARIAN CLASS STRUCTURE: THREE METHODS OF COERCION

    (worth repeating)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-10 08:36:00 UTC

  • THE ORIGINS OF CLASS STRATEGIES (worth repeating)

    THE ORIGINS OF CLASS STRATEGIES

    (worth repeating)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-10 08:31:00 UTC

  • YES OF COURSE THERE IS MORE SOCIAL MOBILITY IN EUROPE —“You do know that socia

    YES OF COURSE THERE IS MORE SOCIAL MOBILITY IN EUROPE

    —“You do know that social mobility in the USA is actually LOWER than in most of Europe right?”—

    That’s because europe is so much POORER that there are surplus movements available. (Really)

    For a variety of reasons, nearly everyone in america works in a capacity beyond his abilities, and peope who don’t can consume goods, services, and information beyond their productivity.

    Under those conditions, we should expect very little rotation.

    Europe is much poorer in every capacity, and as such, we should expect incomplete rotation.

    It’s not complicated.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-10 05:19:00 UTC

  • THE IMPOLITIC TRUTH: WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP SIGNAL ORGANIZATIONAL FAILURE (in respo

    THE IMPOLITIC TRUTH: WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP SIGNAL ORGANIZATIONAL FAILURE

    (in response to May, LePen, Clinton, Merkel)

    Women distribute wealth earned by the inventions and aggressions of men. Just as they do to children. They do not resolve conflicts. They do not invent solutions. They cannot lead. They cannot rule.

    Any organization with a woman at its helm, that is not in the business of redistributing wealth or servicing **signals of wealth redistribution** (health, beauty, fitness, fashion) is an indication of organizational failure, and the board’s inability to find a strategic solution to the condition: that the board and shareholders are merely preserving income streams as the organization declines.

    As far as I can tell, this rule is exceptionless. Entrepreneurial competition, economic competition, and political competition, are all warfare by the three means of coercion possible to man: remuneration(business), gossip(politics), and violence(war).

    And with few exceptions, women in charge of companies of any scale fit this rule. Women in politics fit this rule. and female defense ministers (in europe there are a lot of them) fit this rule.

    Women redistribute the wealth earned by the inventions and aggressions of men. If they are in a position to do that, it’s a luxury good. At some point we must understand that such luxury goods are merely *signal* goods that are the result of man-made goods, and not in fact – goods proper.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 07:55:00 UTC

  • INTERNATIONAL ETHICS: I’M A SCIENTIST: NOT A RACIST, I’M A CLASSIST, AND A NATIO

    INTERNATIONAL ETHICS: I’M A SCIENTIST: NOT A RACIST, I’M A CLASSIST, AND A NATIONALIST. HERE IS WHY….

    I just want to respond to this: I don’t do racism. The problem for all races, and subraces as far as I can tell, is that we have all specialized in some form of extreme. East in industriousness and Neoteny and West in creativity and Neoteny. Africa in hostile-environment resistance and sociability and deep maturity. South Asians in warm weather survival and sociability. Desert (semitic) and steppe (all others) people in masculine features (small brains) and aggression. And the ashkenazi – the strangest of all – reversing sexual dimorphism and transferring female verbal skills to males.

    So given our specializations, the people one standard deviation above the white mean are all fine with each other. The problem is that the more of your population that is below a mean of 112/115, the more burden it places on adaptation to modernity because the cost of education and training is too high, and the cost of developing high trust norms is either too high or impossible, given the *incentives available by commercial means*.

    Hence why lower trust lower IQ populations do not rely on commercial incentives, and instead rely on religious, social, and physical incentives. In other words the old problem of the tripartite aristocracy remains: the lower class must be culled consistently and the middle class maximized, because it is this single issue that determines rates of progress. All the rest is merely institutions that assist us in cooperation.

    For these reasons I’m pro nationalism because the only moral means by which an underclass can be minimized is by its own kin, who do so in the interest of kin’s transcendence.

    That last sentence constitutes my standing on global political morality: domesticate your kin, and do not force others do domesticate your kin. If others are domesticating your kin, they are just in doing so, because your failure to domesticate your kin is the reason, and only reason, we are in conflict.

    Do not export your failures to others.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 07:43:00 UTC

  • Well, it’s just another version of Marxism, right? Central control of resources

    Well, it’s just another version of Marxism, right? Central control of resources by some self selected elite in order to pursue some end chosen by those elites?

    So instead of pursuing a worker revolution. Instead of pursuing equality under the law. Instead of pursuing equality of opportunity. Instead of pursuing equality of condition. Instead of pursuing equality of outcome. Instead of pursuing the end of class oppression, of economic oppression, of racial oppression, of gender oppression, and now of identity oppression, the left wants once again to control resources and opportunities they cannot demonstrate the ability to conceive, organize, and produce, they want that control *without* demonstrating merit?

    What record do democratic governments have of good choices? Any? What do good any governments that are in the lead do? Nothing. Government can drive change if the change is produced elsewhere and the people need to ‘catch up’. But they cannot know what hypothetical goods to pursue.

    And for that matter, who is of the opinion that we are already not enduring change faster than our minds, norms, cultures, philosophies, laws, and institutions can adapt to on empirical evidence? We can’t.

    We cannot know ‘the good’ other than by discovering something that works and determining what is good. The via positiva fallacy is that we can know what is good, other than what is bad.

    We can know what is bad. We can act via negativa to eliminate the bad, and devote resources only to the potential goods.

    We know the central ‘bad’: overpopulation by a vast world underclass.

    The central problem we face is the REDUCTION OF THE SCALE OF THE UNDER CLASSES.

    The rest of the opportunities are rapidly exploited by the private sector as fast as we can manage them. And the only ones they private sector can’t do is space exploration.

    No. So no. All this wisfhul thinking is nonsense. FInd something we are behind on that is already proven and government can do that. Find soething that the market CAN’T do that is basic reserach, and maybe that is ok.

    Otherwise, governement does one thing: pilfer as much as it can to distribute to cronies.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-08 20:04:00 UTC

  • WHAT DID MARX GET RIGHT? (NOTHING) He articulated class as a conflict rather tha

    WHAT DID MARX GET RIGHT? (NOTHING)

    He articulated class as a conflict rather than as genetic differences in ability that the aristocracies since the dawn of western civilization had correctly observed. Hence human animal > slave > serf > freeman > burgher > church(nobility) > aristocracy (peerage).

    It’s not that his observation was new, its that his observation was wrong. The east and the west succeeded in no small party by the continuous reduction of the size of the underclass by upward redistribution of reproduction.

    Today we know that each person in the underclass is six times as costly as any individual in the middle class can produce in surplus of his consumption.

    There is a reason Marx is taught as fantasy literature of historical curiosity only: he was wrong about almost everything.

    The problem is quite different: the middle class seizure of the state under capitalism under the rubric of equality and democracy is incompatible with the evidence: at every standard deviation in ability, humans are demonstrably superior in every way. So much so that at two standard deviations, the ability to communicate on other than trivialities disappears.

    Marx created a fantasy, as did Boaz and Freud. Why? the same reason that Maxwell, Menger, Darwin, Spencer, Nietzsche, were right: the middle class seizure of power DID upset the natural order. The natural order being a hierarchy of the classes with the aristocracy organizing the suppression of parasitism driving everyone into the market to survive; the middle class experimenting, inventing, financing, entrepreneurship, planning, organizing, and collecting the resources of which labor is merely one input.

    What marx got mostly wrong, is that all the value is created by the middle and upper class, and the working class is the chief beneficiary of organizing them to produce consumer goods that they can now afford to purchase because they lack the ability to perform the middle class and upper class functions otherwise.

    That’s the science of it.

    The people who benefit from consumer capitalism are the working class. My ancestors were far happier with their higher status in previous generations than the relative equality with the lower classes under consumer capitalism. And imagine how the aristocracy feels.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-08 19:47:00 UTC

  • WHY CHINA IS RIGHT. (important)(revise your values) China will dominate the futu

    WHY CHINA IS RIGHT.

    (important)(revise your values)

    China will dominate the future for the simple reasons that they have succeeded at juvenilization, succeeded at culling the lower classes, have succeeded at building an intolerant, militial ‘national’ (kinship) army, have succeeded at both building a wall AND not venturing outside of it, and succeeded at prohibiting incursion by any variation of Abrahamism, and succeeded at adopting aristotelianism, and consumer capitalism – all of that despite being UNABLE to adopt western truth, high trust, and rule of law, because it is contrary to the confucian teaching that one must preserve harmony rather than disrupt the dominance hierarchy through truthful speech.

    Conversely the west COULD dominate the future by replicating the chinese strategy of:

    (a) preserving our juvenilization,

    (b) preserving (and expanding) our culling of the underclasses

    (c) restoring our militial (kinship) National army.

    (d) building a wall between the european and non european peoples.

    (e) withdrawing from adventurism outside the wall.

    (f) suppressing, and eliminating all versions of abrahamism, and all forms of supernaturalism.

    (g) preserving our truth, high trust, and rule of law.

    In Addition

    (g) protecting our intellectual property from distribution.

    Otherwise we will, for purely genetic reasons, experience another dark age, and there exist no remaining isolated white peoples to rescue us from it.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-08 07:57:00 UTC