Curt Doolittle

Theme: Cooperation

  • If the ‘Un-Insured’ nuclear family is the majority of society, or at least, grea

    If the ‘Un-Insured’ nuclear family is the majority of society, or at least, greater than the Pareto minimum of 20%, and the polity is homogenous, it’s likely that signaling will take care of containing the dysgenic families. But in a diverse polity I dont see how the signal economy can function, either as an advocate of the nuclear family, or a constraint on free riding.

    The ‘insurance company” traditional family encourages redistribution and at least limited free riding.

    The “corporate insurance company” (The STATE) forcibly redistributes between moral and reproductive structures, but what this means in practice is the conquest of aristocratic uninsured non-free riders, by communal insured, or state corporate insured, free riders and rent seekers.

    America’s miracle, I think, was a combination of two factors: (a) giving away a conquered continent to immigrants, and (b) indoctrination into the combination of nuclear family and property rights. And the extraction of those people from the high-insurance, high free-riding, traditional family of Europe.

    But it couldn’t survive.

    As the germans and anglos, who were the majority until the 20th century, were outbred by less eugenic (catholic) families, the black family was destroyed through progressive good-intentions, and finally dysgenic traditional family (hispanics) and inbred family (muslims), and our legal traditions did not survive jewish intellectual attacks on our institutions.

    If they had be UNDERSTOOD as economic institutions, and social institutions, and WRITTEN DOWN, it’s possible, but but they weren’t. So there has been a scramble for the past century and a half or more, to contain the non-ANF families from expressing their reproductive strategy in politics.

    Aristocracy wants eugenic development and the rest want dysgenic reproduction. The concentration of calories (eugenic aristocracy) the distribution of calories (dysgenic communalism). This is what we should expect from people – who are not equal.

    1) Physical abilities

    2) Structure Of Production

    3) Reproductive Strategy

    4) Family Structure

    5) Moral Code (Property Rights Allocations)

    6) Property Rights (abandonment of free riding)

    7) Homogeneity (pervasive abandonment of free riding)

    8) Trust (lack of necessity to protect against free riding)

    9) Political preferences

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-06 08:10:00 UTC

  • IS IT THAT SIMPLE? I THINK IT IS: USE INSTITUTIONS TO PUSH FREE RIDING INTO THE

    IS IT THAT SIMPLE? I THINK IT IS: USE INSTITUTIONS TO PUSH FREE RIDING INTO THE MARKET.

    The market suppresses free riding. The market and the ABSOLUTE NUCLEAR FAMILY, extinguish all opportunities for free riding. Everywhere. you can’t even free-ride on your family.

    The ANF was an unnatural development in human history. Private property was the outcome of it. I had always thought that the

    But marginal indifferences between individual production were low and now they are not. Our physical differences may be minor. But our abilities to use symbols, logic, instruments, and machines, are not. These technologies and tools multiply our abilities, and our differences are compounded by that multiplication.

    The ANF then will survive only as an aristocratic family structure. It is for wealthy people who can accumulate capital. For those people it is both eugenic, and highly competitive.

    That means liberty will be reduced to jewish-liberty, rather than aryan-liberty. It means the high trust society can and will end in america. The ANF is a genetically influenced relation. Its a north-sea thing. Otherwise forget it.

    (Dammit.)

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-06 06:38:00 UTC

  • DIVERSITY IS A BAD THING. I KNOW. WE ALL KNOW NOW. PUTNAM IS RIGHT. But I can’t

    http://www.theatlanticcities.com/neighborhoods/2013/11/paradox-diverse-communities/7614/YES, DIVERSITY IS A BAD THING. I KNOW. WE ALL KNOW NOW. PUTNAM IS RIGHT.

    But I can’t tell what happens under monarchy, where there isn’t any access to political power, and everyone has to compete in the market rather than rent seek via politics.

    As far as I can tell, diversity of neighborhoods might not be problematic if there isn’t any ability to influence the state.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-01 23:31:00 UTC

  • NOVEL EXPERIENCE: RESPECT Interesting. This is what it feels like to respect the

    NOVEL EXPERIENCE: RESPECT

    Interesting.

    This is what it feels like to respect the people you live in society with.

    I don’t think I’ve felt like this before.

    It’s beautiful.

    I love Ukraine.

    #ukraine #euromaidan #kiev

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-01 13:17:00 UTC

  • UKRAINIAN VETERANS OF AFGHANISTAN SHOW UP TO STOP THE VIOLENCE! They are standin

    UKRAINIAN VETERANS OF AFGHANISTAN SHOW UP TO STOP THE VIOLENCE!

    They are standing in the middle between the police and the protesters.

    –THAT IS WHAT NOBLE MEN DO–

    (American’s are noble. They’re self-righteous. It’s pure status signaling. Not sacrifice.)

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-01 10:36:00 UTC

  • CULTURAL OBSERVATIONS : COMPLIMENTS You know, in the States, if you’re meeting s

    CULTURAL OBSERVATIONS : COMPLIMENTS

    You know, in the States, if you’re meeting some couple for dinner, it’s pretty much conventional to say “you look beautiful” or make some other compliment about the woman’s appearance or dress. At least, that’s how I was raised in New England. My sisters and mother beat into me the idea that you say something nice about a woman whenever possible.

    So last night I say to a woman here in Kiev, “You look beautiful”. To which she replies “I always look beautiful.” As if I was implying that tonight was a rarity.

    Now, Veronika has tried to explain this to me as a Ukrainian thing – its not just her. But I think most women I talk to here are just polite to me. I’m a crazy american after all. And I have that reputation here.

    Strangely, almost anything you say to a Ukrainian woman in complimentary form will not be just accepted as nicety, but often turned around into a perceived insult. I understand it’s just a means of preserving independence. And the women here are amazingly independent: they have to be.

    They also are pretty much aware that they’re the most amazing and beautiful women in the world, and so they hear a compliment differently. It’s like saying the sky is blue or something obvious of that nature.

    I don’t have a lot of insight to provide on this topic. Or, I don’t feel like getting all analytical over it. But it’s just one of those cultural things that’s fascinating: metaphysical value judgements that create the judgmental context for all communications.

    Humans are fascinating. 🙂

    🙂

    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-30 04:59:00 UTC

  • THEORISTS, PROFESSORS, PUBLISHERS, ADVOCATES, ACOLYTES, FOLLOWERS A movement nee

    THEORISTS, PROFESSORS, PUBLISHERS, ADVOCATES, ACOLYTES, FOLLOWERS

    A movement needs all of them.

    Don’t discriminate.

    Utilize.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-27 06:04:00 UTC

  • BUT IS IT GENETIC?

      Yes, conservatives are INNATELY more critical of free-riders: “North Eurasian and Circumpolar hunter-gatherers (Hutterites and Amish, Puritans) will be more prone to altruistic punishment than those from Middle Old World culture area (Jews, Gypsies, Chinese)” “…. *** Puritan groups seem particularly prone to bouts of moralistic outrage directed at those of their own people seen as free riders and morally blameworthy.***” -Kevin MacDonald AND SO: Whether it is cultural or genetic or both doesn’t matter so much, although I’m in the 60/40 camp in favor of genetic on this topic. And the pareto rule would suggest that as long as you’re in a 90/10 proposition or less, diversity isn’t a problem. But two things are certain: a) people don’t actually assimilate outside of their gene pool, and b) our tribal differences – our tribal DIVERSITY is something very precious for everyone. Probably the ‘cuircumpolar’ in particular. Because that individualism is economically superior to group-ishness.

  • BUT IS IT GENETIC?

      Yes, conservatives are INNATELY more critical of free-riders: “North Eurasian and Circumpolar hunter-gatherers (Hutterites and Amish, Puritans) will be more prone to altruistic punishment than those from Middle Old World culture area (Jews, Gypsies, Chinese)” “…. *** Puritan groups seem particularly prone to bouts of moralistic outrage directed at those of their own people seen as free riders and morally blameworthy.***” -Kevin MacDonald AND SO: Whether it is cultural or genetic or both doesn’t matter so much, although I’m in the 60/40 camp in favor of genetic on this topic. And the pareto rule would suggest that as long as you’re in a 90/10 proposition or less, diversity isn’t a problem. But two things are certain: a) people don’t actually assimilate outside of their gene pool, and b) our tribal differences – our tribal DIVERSITY is something very precious for everyone. Probably the ‘cuircumpolar’ in particular. Because that individualism is economically superior to group-ishness.

  • Love your tribe. It doesn’t matter what tribe it is. If you don’t love your trib

    Love your tribe. It doesn’t matter what tribe it is. If you don’t love your tribe then how can anyone trust you, inside or tribe or out?

    Any tribe that doesn’t love itself first, always has been and always will be, conquered by tribes that do. It’s just math.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-22 07:57:00 UTC