Curt Doolittle

Theme: Class

  • THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD OF ARISTOCRACY Aristocracy loves tests. Test of culture Te

    THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD OF ARISTOCRACY

    Aristocracy loves tests.

    Test of culture

    Test of intelligence

    Test of fitness

    Test of combat

    Test of commerce

    Aristocracy seeks to test itself.

    Each experiment is a test of one’s excellences.

    And only through constant testing do we improve.

    An only through constant testing do we know anything about the world.

    The more tests one survives, the more honor he collects.

    Aristocracy is a scientific political system.

    Why do you think aristocrats invented science?

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-14 06:55:00 UTC

  • CORRECTNESS AS A POSITIONAL GOOD (you should read this) A few more people get on

    http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/187733/POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AS A POSITIONAL GOOD

    (you should read this)

    A few more people get on board with the argument that PC is just cheap status seeking. This post and the one it references demonstrate the problem of creeping progressivism: once you create a new taboo, you must keep creating new taboos.

    Progressivism is a cancer.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-13 04:33:00 UTC

  • NOTHING TO LOSE AND NOTHING TO FEAR —“There is no one so careful about what th

    NOTHING TO LOSE AND NOTHING TO FEAR

    —“There is no one so careful about what they post on Facebook as University Professors.”— Anonymous

    Well some of us work outside of the Cathedral. The rules are different. We have nothing to lose. And nothing to fear.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-12 07:08:00 UTC

  • Why Does The Belief Exist That The Usa Is A Conservative Country?

    Asking who wins versus the vote distribution is confusing you. Our votes are polarized between right and left, and must be since these two views are in direct competition.

    If american had a european mulit-party parliamentary system rather than just two choices our government would be very different, and it is likely that compromises would be achieved. However, the american system favors extremes because the party in power has really, too much power.

    Europeans invented hard right politics. And had a war over it.  European progressivism comes from (a) multiple homogenous local nations that act like extended families, (b) the collapse of european self-confidence during the wars (the second time since the 30 years war) (c) because europe is not required to pay for, or perform it’s own defense.

    Americans have always been somewhat heterogeneous, a virtual island (like britain and australia), have had confidence, and are self-defending.  On top of that (a) we follow the anglo absolute nuclear family model, (b) the culture is pure commercialism at its core, and (c) we are very heterogeneous.

    Both european and american models are collapsing right now due to a century of postwar bad judgement, but the seriousness of that collapse is only now becoming visible. Which is why the academics have abandoned the taboo and started writing about it.

    https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-belief-exist-that-the-USA-is-a-conservative-country

  • THE VALUE OF DIFFERENT COLLEGE DEGREES THE BEST 1% DEGREES (most likely to assis

    THE VALUE OF DIFFERENT COLLEGE DEGREES

    THE BEST 1% DEGREES

    (most likely to assist in becoming wealthy)

    1. Engineering / Computer Science

    2. Economics / Commerce / MBA / (Bachelor’s) Business Administration (BBA)

    3. Law / Politics

    4. Finance / Accounting

    THE BEST-RIGHT OUT OF COLLEGE DEGREES

    (you can’t go wrong if you want to always have earning potential)

    1. Engineering: $80-90,000 (of any kind at all, and there are LOTS of kinds)

    2. Computer Science/ Mathematics: $100,000 (engineering where you don’t get your hands dirty)

    3. Pharmacy Pharmaceutical Sciences and Administration: $105,000

    THE BEST GUARANTEED INCOMES (INSULATED OVER THE LONG TERM)

    1. Universal Demand: Doctor / Medical Specialist / Nurse

    2. Protected Class: Teachers and Professors and other Bureaucrats.

    USELESS DEGREES

    1. Liberal Arts. (You know who you are.)

    THE WORST DEGREES – DEGREES THE HARM YOUR LIFE’S TRAJECTORY

    (you will be poor unless you are a statistical anomaly. These degrees mean you will earn 30K or less per year. When the median income is 48K. This means you are barely better off than working minimum wage.)

    (Institutionalized Motherhood – Stay home and have kids instead.)

    Human Services and Community Organization

    Social Work

    Counseling Psychology

    Early Childhood Education

    (institutionalized childhood – save your money and don’t go to college – just volunteer or go to training schools)

    Drama and Theater Arts

    Studio Arts

    Visual and Performing Arts

    (Institutionalized introspection – you don’t need education.)

    Theology and Religious Vocations

    (fields flooded with applications and which do not require skills)

    Communication Disorders Sciences and Service

    Health and Medical Preparatory Programs

    CLOSING COMMENT

    IMHO, you are better off taking the lightest possible load, at one of the least expensive and least difficult colleges, in one of the top four fields than you are taking any load in any other degree. You MUST learn to use abstractions at some point. Your intuitions and perceptions are limited to what any other animal can make use of. Only through using abstractions – the mental equivalent of tools – will other humans pay you for your time. Everything else is a useless commodity by comparison.

    (I studied fine art. But god gave me gifts. I could tolerate self-enlightenment.)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-07 00:59:00 UTC

  • THE FAR RIGHT? Technically speaking while a libertarian, like Hoppe, I’m also a

    THE FAR RIGHT?

    Technically speaking while a libertarian, like Hoppe, I’m also a member of the ‘far right’. I have no problem with the ‘Far Right’ and it’s emphasis on excellence, tradition, family, exclusion, ostracization, nationalism, and all that good tribal stuff that we lost and are dearly paying for. I understand that the working-class far-right wants elites to fight for their privileges – even if that privilege is only status signals. And the working-class, and increasingly the middle class, feels that their elites have sold them out. Because they have been sold out. And they are losing their privilege, earned for them by their elites in generations past, and now abandoned and consumed by them in generations present.

    But that doesn’t override my moral preference for either liberty for myself, and my people, or my moral preference for self determination. If some other people do not want a far right world, and if they can have it without parasitism upon those of us who seek liberty, status, or tradition, then I”m in support of it.

    I’m all in favor of many small countries with many differences. And let the market sort it out. And if you’re not, then by definition you’re an immoral person. A predator and parasite.

    Heterogeneity is a luxury good. Under threat, people return to tribal roots. Ad we are now under a permanent, unalterable, threat that we have not seen in over a thousand years.

    Russia is working with this knowledge. But I cannot tolerate being under ‘the only white people who failed’. Their pervasive nihilism and corruption. Their persistent failures. Their low trust society.

    So if Russia will not restore both tribalism and liberty, then its up to *US* to restore tribalism and liberty. Because liberty is only possible within a MORALLY homogenous polity.

    —

    BTW: Do you know what’s going to happen? Ghettos. The scale of which we have not seen before. Why? Because it’s been done before. It works. And we are going to flood the intellectual market with papers on how to do it.

    Yeah. I’m talking to you. You who want something to do? To contribute? We need papers on how we have constructed ghettos in the past, and how to construct ghettos today.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-05 09:26:00 UTC

  • LEFTISM —“Leftism — An ideology that seeks to tear down meritocracy, exception

    LEFTISM

    —“Leftism — An ideology that seeks to tear down meritocracy, exceptionalism and traditional structures so that the lowest common denominator can satiate their feelings of envy and status seeking via pathological altruism using other people’s wealth. (Leftism is an attempt to obtain status without contribution.) A capitalist, leftist society primarily legitimizes accomplishment in only a couple domains — money and hedonism — at the expense of all higher values, including long-term social stability.”—

    —“Instead of encouraging individual accomplishment, Leftism is driven by a “leveling dynamic” summarized by the pithy slogan “everyone gets a trophy”. Social “progress” is defined in terms of maximizing short-term individual hedonism at the expense of general social health. Promoting an “anything goes” values, the end result is a cloud of largely indistinguishable, atomized individuals, rather than anything resembling social coherence or strength. “Culture” is seen as a fluid construct, to be thrown out casually and replaced with a new alternative at the slightest whim. Moral and cultural relativism reigns. No system can be seen as better than any other, lest the proponents of the inferior system take offense.”— by Michael Anissimov

    Source date (UTC): 2014-05-05 04:19:00 UTC

  • Juan Sebastian Ortiz —“Yet thanks to the division of labor and capital accumul

    Juan Sebastian Ortiz

    —“Yet thanks to the division of labor and capital accumulation even those who leech on producers, the welfare, food stamp, state pension and state income dependent can live an extremely wealthy life in the most Smithian of senses despite not producing any value. “—

    This brings up an interesting point. The assumption in libertarian thought, is that adherence to moral codes (NAP) gain one access to the market – access to opportunity created by participating in the market. This assumes, as was true in ancient and medieval (pre-industrial) eras, that we all had labor to contribute. Further, that we gained right to hold property by fighting for the property rights of all members of the polity. These were entry costs, if not also entry-cost-rituals.

    Adherence to norms is costly. Respect for rituals is costly. Observance of private property rights is costly. Production is costly in effort. These are very high costs that the individual must bear whether or not he obtains rewards from the market, by paying those costs he makes possible the reduction of transaction costs, that makes the voluntary organization of production (capitalism) possible.

    Thought experiment: What happens if only 10% of the population is capable of engaging in production, but their production was sufficient to both keep say 80% of that production, and leave 20% of it for the remaining 80% of the population? The 80% have no means of engaging in production. And adherence to norms, including the norm of property rights, is of no value to them. Yet we could either exterminate them, or pay them to police the social order and make possible the low transaction costs, so that for the minority 10%, the voluntary organization of production remains possible.

    So, if ordinary people, engaged in production or not, respect AND enforce property rights necessary for the voluntary organization of production, they are in fact doing labor. If we do not pay them for their efforts, I think that this is free riding. And they are right not to respect property. Or other norms for that matter. And they have no money to function as consumers unless we do so anyway.

    So, rather than treat moral rules and private property as natural laws – spurious as that magical term is – I prefer to hold myself to the constant rule of voluntary exchange. If we want people to adhere to and enforce rules so that we can engage in the voluntary organization of production, then we can pay them to. I don’t think they have a ‘right’ to compensation. But then, I don’t think we can hold them to adhering to property rights, which is a very high cost, if we don’t pay them for it.

    By applying property rights CONSISTENTLY I end up with this logic. And with that logic, and that consistency, all the fallacies of moral argument disappear. Every human action at all times in favor of cooperation is an exchange.

    How does one price payment for adherence to norms? I’m still working on that but it actually looks pretty simple.

    Maybe too many jumps there. Think it should be easy for you. Happy to clarify otherwise.

    Curt

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