Curt Doolittle

Theme: Cooperation

  • Man – Mind

    Man – Mind

    Action

    “Man Must Act” (dark forces of  need, time, and ignorance) 

    |BEHAVIOR| property(acquisition/defense) > prey drive > gender drive >
 cooperation drive > personality > intuition > reason > calculation >
 computation > markets > symmetries.

    Minds

    ( … )

    Brain

    HUMAN FACULTIES 1. sense (neurons-nerves) 2. disambiguation (constant relations – cortex), 3. perception(integration-prediction – cortex), 4. intuition (auto-association-prediction) (hippocampus-cortex + valuation(emotion)) 5. attention (attention-prediction) (thalamus-hippoampus-cortex), 6. will (recursion-prediction) (prefrontal, thalamus, hippocampus, cortex) 7. and release of actions;

    Consciousness

    THE RULES OF CONSCIOUSNESS WHEREAS 1. Our attention rotates in a competition between sensation(observation and construction by prediction and reward identification), imagination (possibility by association), holding attention on a goal (possibility by continuous opportunity seizure), and releasing predicted actions (in pursuit of the goal). WHEREAS 2. We rotate between sensation (observation and construction by prediction), anticipating (goal prediction), and storing (remembering by stimulating and rehearsing), on a 1/10th of a second rotation (Theta) creating competition and choice. AND WHEREAS 3. There is no observer, other than the memory of an observation. 4. There are no observations other than sequences. 5. There is no comparison of observations other than to previous sequences. 6. There is no order in sequences other than that created by sequences. 7. There are no sequences other than those of sensations. 8. There is no existence sensed, other than those changes in time. 9. Without change we cannot sense time. THEREFORE Existence is a verb Experience is a verb Imagination is a verb Consciousness is a verb. Because Acting is a verb – and we can only act in time. AND THEREFORE Without action, we produce no existence, no experience, no sequence, no memory, no consciousness. AND THEREFORE There is no observer other than the observations (hierarchy of increasing of sequences of memories in time. AND THEREFORE We see what the camera sees. We do not record images, but sequences of related stimuli. “I AM, MEANING, I EXIST AS, THE HIERARCHY OF MY MEMORY IN MOTION”

    Arousal is not Consciousness

    Confusing Arousal with Consciousness is like confusing the light switch with the light. Just ’cause we can turn off the switch doesn’t tell us how the light is created. We can interfere with any number of parts (Colostrum) and shut down experience. That doesn’t tell us anything. The question is, how does that mushy wetware synthesize past memory present experience, and future prediction, from millions of nerves (measurements) into our rather amazing conflated experiences of past, present, and future? (cortical hierarchy, parahippocampal, perirhinal, entorhinal cortices, and subiculum.) How do we shift between narrow focus, near perception, environmental perception, self-perception, and deep introspection and imagination? (thalamus) Why is it we can react so quickly that we can hit a curveball with a bat? (basal ganglia, cerebellum, and cortical prediction) How do we Assemble memories and experience them? (Hippocampus) What is that feeling of me? (mostly, hippocampus) Why can’t we pin it down. “Cause it’s a verb not a noun”. The continuous change in state in a hierarchy of ever smaller cycles of time….

    Attention

    Neural Economy

    ( … ) Hayek’s knowledge, tradition, habits…. limiting burden of reason.

    The Will To Act

    (necessary  … preservation of the will to act … dunning kruger confidence )

  • 4) But Adversarialism(competition) is the only way for systems to continuously e

    4) But Adversarialism(competition) is the only way for systems to continuously evolve without requiring a priori knowledge. As such our brains evolve consciousness through competitive trial and error with consistency of sets of neural predictions between states as the ‘reward’.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-13 14:46:46 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1260582260559970304

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1260582259570216961

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    3) The competition between hemispheres and consolidation of competition for attention, and producing two competitors for attention. The result is a loss of introspection into causation. We don’t think of the brain as a market competition (adversarialism) rather than calculation.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1260582259570216961

  • Rights Aren’t Cheap – the Plan

    —“I’m gunna be a d__k for a moment. Wouldn’t a reduction in furthering this movement due to you having to take care of your mother be considered “not bearing the cost”? its not bearing the cost of “losing mother” in order “to fight”. Not meaning to make this personal – only pointing at the bullshit of these types of “do it for the cause” virtue/purity signals. … its really just a subtle “no true scotsman” and a kick in the teeth when done in the absence of acknowledging the costs already born by those that support your vision.”—Wayne Righton

    Good and honest question. I have no problem making that hard choice, and no problem dying for the cause. The truth is it’s strategically optimum to live in country, to maintain an out of country residence, have no assets in-country, to have no ‘entanglements’ and to be able to go fully mobile on a moment’s notice from within country. Otherwise I would have brought a certain ukrainian woman here, or returned to ukraine – because i’d be a lot happier doing biz and living a normal life, than working on this revolution and house-sitting the elderly from a backwater. At present I have a pretty concrete plan. We need enough gov’t employees back at work. (they are) We want some men still out of work (they will be). We want the president fearful of losing the election (he will be). We want stress from that anxiety to spread (it will) I need a ‘dramatic’ way of issuing the ‘proposal’ of settlement, but will seize any opportunity I can (three options). And I need enough people to show up so that the first phase works, and escalates to the second phase (that’s your problem). Aside from that: What evidence do you have that I don’t think things thru? 😉 Nothing is perfect. Nothing is fail safe. But we can make sure many people know the ‘offer’ ahead of time, then we’re fine. We don’t want to go early. We want to go at the last possible minute seizing the greatest opportunity for stress prior to the election. The optimum arrangement would be that we get enough traction to get a few players in the conservative media on board with the plan so that they voluntarily or out of necessity explain our ‘just’ position. What’s the worst that will happen? First try won’t be successful but will have been the most successful publicity action since Boston’s fight with the Redcoats. What’s the best that will happen? it will work and the entire world will shake, and the chaos that results will bring everyone to the table. What’s better than that? The conservatives adopt the platform. Now flip it around: I’m paying a huge cost (and so are my investors by the way.) If you’re dumb enough to both be in a vulnerable position AND use your real name so that you can pay some external loss then that’s your choice. Plenty of people don’t. If you think I’m writing another ideology, then you’re wasting your time and mine. If you want emotional, moral, and intellectual sedation by some narrative that makes you feel justified then you’re wasting your time and mine. I switched from intellectual to revolutionary when I was divorced raped, then procedurally nearly put out of business by manipulation of the court, then when the state sold my company’s bank but guaranteed the loans, so that the bank was incentivized to put us out of business, then Obama made it clear he was out to unify the left against my people, and then my own government tried to criminalize having made and honest living, by shutting down overseas banking, and then when for a simple error on a tax form where the state owed me hundreds of thousands, they nearly killed my business. I’m tired of lack of juridical defense. I’m tired of a genocide against my people. I’m tired of the second destruction of western civilization by the same means. And I’m tired of an enemy among us reveling in our naivety and tolerance. So man the F-k up. Shut the f-k up. Show the F-k up. And if you’re not here for the revolution, don’t waste the time of the men who are. Restoration of our rights as ‘Englishmen’. The rights made and rights we have fought to maintain for centuries. And if you don’t man up, shut up, and show up, then you don’t deserve those rights.

  • Rights Aren’t Cheap – the Plan

    —“I’m gunna be a d__k for a moment. Wouldn’t a reduction in furthering this movement due to you having to take care of your mother be considered “not bearing the cost”? its not bearing the cost of “losing mother” in order “to fight”. Not meaning to make this personal – only pointing at the bullshit of these types of “do it for the cause” virtue/purity signals. … its really just a subtle “no true scotsman” and a kick in the teeth when done in the absence of acknowledging the costs already born by those that support your vision.”—Wayne Righton

    Good and honest question. I have no problem making that hard choice, and no problem dying for the cause. The truth is it’s strategically optimum to live in country, to maintain an out of country residence, have no assets in-country, to have no ‘entanglements’ and to be able to go fully mobile on a moment’s notice from within country. Otherwise I would have brought a certain ukrainian woman here, or returned to ukraine – because i’d be a lot happier doing biz and living a normal life, than working on this revolution and house-sitting the elderly from a backwater. At present I have a pretty concrete plan. We need enough gov’t employees back at work. (they are) We want some men still out of work (they will be). We want the president fearful of losing the election (he will be). We want stress from that anxiety to spread (it will) I need a ‘dramatic’ way of issuing the ‘proposal’ of settlement, but will seize any opportunity I can (three options). And I need enough people to show up so that the first phase works, and escalates to the second phase (that’s your problem). Aside from that: What evidence do you have that I don’t think things thru? 😉 Nothing is perfect. Nothing is fail safe. But we can make sure many people know the ‘offer’ ahead of time, then we’re fine. We don’t want to go early. We want to go at the last possible minute seizing the greatest opportunity for stress prior to the election. The optimum arrangement would be that we get enough traction to get a few players in the conservative media on board with the plan so that they voluntarily or out of necessity explain our ‘just’ position. What’s the worst that will happen? First try won’t be successful but will have been the most successful publicity action since Boston’s fight with the Redcoats. What’s the best that will happen? it will work and the entire world will shake, and the chaos that results will bring everyone to the table. What’s better than that? The conservatives adopt the platform. Now flip it around: I’m paying a huge cost (and so are my investors by the way.) If you’re dumb enough to both be in a vulnerable position AND use your real name so that you can pay some external loss then that’s your choice. Plenty of people don’t. If you think I’m writing another ideology, then you’re wasting your time and mine. If you want emotional, moral, and intellectual sedation by some narrative that makes you feel justified then you’re wasting your time and mine. I switched from intellectual to revolutionary when I was divorced raped, then procedurally nearly put out of business by manipulation of the court, then when the state sold my company’s bank but guaranteed the loans, so that the bank was incentivized to put us out of business, then Obama made it clear he was out to unify the left against my people, and then my own government tried to criminalize having made and honest living, by shutting down overseas banking, and then when for a simple error on a tax form where the state owed me hundreds of thousands, they nearly killed my business. I’m tired of lack of juridical defense. I’m tired of a genocide against my people. I’m tired of the second destruction of western civilization by the same means. And I’m tired of an enemy among us reveling in our naivety and tolerance. So man the F-k up. Shut the f-k up. Show the F-k up. And if you’re not here for the revolution, don’t waste the time of the men who are. Restoration of our rights as ‘Englishmen’. The rights made and rights we have fought to maintain for centuries. And if you don’t man up, shut up, and show up, then you don’t deserve those rights.

  • To Produce Unity – We Have to Talk to Each Political Faction on Their Terms

    Apr 29, 2020, 1:33 PM I want to be able to respect different people with different intuitions, beliefs, and understandings. P-law and Nationalism and markets for polities for everyone is in everyone’s interest. Monopoly political orders are impossible and contrary to the natural right of self determination. We are separating the african, muslim, christian, wn/natsoc, and mainstream ‘libertarian” discussions into individual groups because we lost most of the (silent) military people due to natsoc activity. We must reach people on their own terms and build unity for DIFFERENT political orders under P-law: Let A Thousand Nations Bloom. And mixing muslim, christian, wn/natsoc, world government, antifa-marxist groups versus constitutionalist, civnat, social democratic, and traditional democratic groups prohibit outreach to one another. Until enough people understand P in each faction, comprehension, cross conversation, and collective cooperation against our united enemy of the (((financial, media, entertainment, academy))) that seeks to destroy our civilizations cannot be achieved. Our mission is to reach everyone so that ‘separation’ is possible at the expense of the (((financial, media, entertainment, academy))) and state bureaucracy, and if separation is not possible then escalation to conflict is necessary. But stifling the conversation before people understand their options is counter-productive. And so the only valuable arguments or ideas are those that are in fact arguments so to speak. And all you do when you cross paradigmatic boundaries is cloud the conversation – when P-law is UNIFYING across ALL PEOPLE who wish to live their lives as they do without imposing costs upon the way of life of others by doing so. So understand your audience. The main feeds are mainstream (rule of law, monarchic, republican, democratic mixed economy,. Post Monopoly paradigms: Christian, Muslim, WN, NATSOC, Globalist, Antifa-Marxist content to those audiences and mainstream P-content to the mainstream audiences. Thanks. GROUPS Female Propertarians: Christian Propertarians: Muslim/Secular Muslim and Propertarians Continental African Propertarianism. Mainstream Propertarians (rule of law) Socialist and Left Propertarians WN/NATSOC and Propertarians

  • To Produce Unity – We Have to Talk to Each Political Faction on Their Terms

    Apr 29, 2020, 1:33 PM I want to be able to respect different people with different intuitions, beliefs, and understandings. P-law and Nationalism and markets for polities for everyone is in everyone’s interest. Monopoly political orders are impossible and contrary to the natural right of self determination. We are separating the african, muslim, christian, wn/natsoc, and mainstream ‘libertarian” discussions into individual groups because we lost most of the (silent) military people due to natsoc activity. We must reach people on their own terms and build unity for DIFFERENT political orders under P-law: Let A Thousand Nations Bloom. And mixing muslim, christian, wn/natsoc, world government, antifa-marxist groups versus constitutionalist, civnat, social democratic, and traditional democratic groups prohibit outreach to one another. Until enough people understand P in each faction, comprehension, cross conversation, and collective cooperation against our united enemy of the (((financial, media, entertainment, academy))) that seeks to destroy our civilizations cannot be achieved. Our mission is to reach everyone so that ‘separation’ is possible at the expense of the (((financial, media, entertainment, academy))) and state bureaucracy, and if separation is not possible then escalation to conflict is necessary. But stifling the conversation before people understand their options is counter-productive. And so the only valuable arguments or ideas are those that are in fact arguments so to speak. And all you do when you cross paradigmatic boundaries is cloud the conversation – when P-law is UNIFYING across ALL PEOPLE who wish to live their lives as they do without imposing costs upon the way of life of others by doing so. So understand your audience. The main feeds are mainstream (rule of law, monarchic, republican, democratic mixed economy,. Post Monopoly paradigms: Christian, Muslim, WN, NATSOC, Globalist, Antifa-Marxist content to those audiences and mainstream P-content to the mainstream audiences. Thanks. GROUPS Female Propertarians: Christian Propertarians: Muslim/Secular Muslim and Propertarians Continental African Propertarianism. Mainstream Propertarians (rule of law) Socialist and Left Propertarians WN/NATSOC and Propertarians

  • Restoration of our group strategy: Maneuver

    May 1, 2020, 8:55 AM Decentralization, Separatism, Nationalism, definancialization, depoliticization, voluntary disassociation, restoration of our high trust polity, and all done by simply creating a market for profiting from the prosecution of falsehood and reciprocity in courts. Continuous superiority, … by continuous velocity, … … by continuous agency, … … … by the combination of … … … … sovereignty and reciprocity, … … … … truth and duty, … … … … law and jury, … … … … and markets in … … … … association, cooperation, production, reproduction, commons, and polities. Restoration of our group evolutionary strategy: maneuver.

  • Restoration of our group strategy: Maneuver

    May 1, 2020, 8:55 AM Decentralization, Separatism, Nationalism, definancialization, depoliticization, voluntary disassociation, restoration of our high trust polity, and all done by simply creating a market for profiting from the prosecution of falsehood and reciprocity in courts. Continuous superiority, … by continuous velocity, … … by continuous agency, … … … by the combination of … … … … sovereignty and reciprocity, … … … … truth and duty, … … … … law and jury, … … … … and markets in … … … … association, cooperation, production, reproduction, commons, and polities. Restoration of our group evolutionary strategy: maneuver.

  • When We Perceive Something Wrong – We’re Right

    May 2, 2020, 11:07 AM (The Economics of Communication) To profit we must exchange. To trade (communication) requires we discover a medium of exchange. To exchange we must discover coincidences of wants using the available medium of exchange. All language consists of measurements. Measurements within paradigms. Paradigms that serve interests. Interests that are achievable with abilities. And values that measure the degree of interests. So we are trying to achieve commensurability so that we can measure the value of the exchange. When we are frustrated it means we are seeking cooperation (exchange, trade, returns) where the transaction costs are higher than the rewards. When we are not frustrated it means we have divided the labor of discovering coincidences of wants, commensurable mediums of exchanges, given abilities, values, and paradigms. Are we frustrated that they don’t think like us or that the cost of thinking like them, or reducing our thoughts to their level of precision is too costly? Are we frustrated by those cost or are we frustrated that that we no longer function in an aristocratic hierarchy because under democracy our words despite our differences in ability are mispriced? If we were still ruled by Nindsors, Nevilles, Fitzroys, Marlboroughs, Curzons rather than the parliament of fools would we have this problem? If the anglo-dutch aristocracy and the german labor majority were not undermined by underclass immigration? If our society was organized multi dimensionally so that the martial hierarchy, the commercial hierarchy, and the informational hierarchy were mediated by the law preventing ‘putting fingers on the scale’, would this be the case? So my view is the over-commercialization of society, and the over-politicization of society that were the result of the windfalls of the industrial revolution, and the (((world wars))) we tolerated by not nationalizing banking, and redistributing the windfalls of interests on state credit, as we all sought to seek commercial success where the balance of military-aristocratic, comercial-noble, and intellectual-arts and knowledge, and priestly-service could compete on their own terms rather than universal commercialization (privatization). We are at the end of the windfall. And we must learn, that like the athenian discovery of the silver mine, the roman conquest of the celts, the spanish conquest of the mezzo americas, that the industrial revolution created the ability to devote our energies increasingly away from food production to innovation. And that we followed the folly of the athenians, romans, the spanish, into the false promise of endless growth and the abandonment of aristocratic martial discipline, in favor of commercial overconsumption. If something is’t computing without substantial friction than the computation system is ‘programmed’ with the incorrect incentives and resulting division of labor.

  • The Social Utility of Sh-t Talking and Sh-T Testing

    May 3, 2020, 9:18 AM TRUTH: Sh-t talking provides mindfulness. It provides safe competitive dominance play while showing respect at the same time. It requires self regulation. It requires cunning. It allows public accusation and admission of truths. It is desensitizing. It builds trust. I can’t say enough good about it. Whereas GSRRM does the opposite. The techniques of GSRRM and Sh-t_Testing as the via-negativa undermining vs Sh-t Talking and Bragging as the via-positiva advocating explain the social utility of each.