Curt Doolittle

Theme: Crisis

  • Consumer Capitalism? Or Is It Consumer Credit-Ism?


    [W]hy do we refer to our voluntary organization of production as Capitalism when that era ended at least half a century ago –  and call it Consumer Cedit-ism instead.

    Ukrainians are poor because they lack credit. Capitalism is a different social class problem altogether. And by historical standards we don’t really have any capitalists any longer – only people with enough trust to accumulate a lot if credit.  Our rich aren’t really rich enough to do much of anything other than try desperately to stay rich against all odds.

    In the 18th and 19th century, It was easy to amass a little capital and produce consumer goods.

    It was a lot harder to distribute consumer credit to all.  

    Consumer Credit-ism is how we operate our society – capitalism died with the end of the conversion of people from the farm.


  • ITS DONE: NOW THE ONLY SOVEREIGNTY IS NUCLEAR WEAPONS Well, it’s done. Putin has

    ITS DONE: NOW THE ONLY SOVEREIGNTY IS NUCLEAR WEAPONS

    Well, it’s done. Putin has managed the west and conquered eastern Ukraine, first by direct conquest of crimea, second by organizing insurrection, supplying it, holding an election and invading it. The matter appears done. What could have been accomplished by purchase was accomplished by destruction. He is, and has proven he is, one of the most powerful men in the world.

    (Western fools, eastern fools, a world of fools.)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-08 02:50:00 UTC

  • I have usually ignored Africa, because it hasn’t been a threat to deal with. But

    I have usually ignored Africa, because it hasn’t been a threat to deal with. But Ayelam has eradicated some of my ignorance, and now got me freaking’ pissed.

    I don’t care what continent you’re, or what gene’s you’re carrying. If you desire liberty I will fight for you to obtain it.

    That is what ‘egalitarian’ means when we say Aristocratic Egalitarian.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-07 09:13:00 UTC

  • MODERN WARFARE The military threat to states, and to societies, is no longer mec

    MODERN WARFARE

    The military threat to states, and to societies, is no longer mechanized weaponry invasion, but population invasion, insurrection invasion, and ideological invasion.

    Once we have nuclear weapons, military invasion is too costly.

    I’ve been studying this problem for quite a few years, and the muslims have demonstrated that they are applying the most advanced military strategy possible: population, insurrection, and ideology as ‘combined arms’.

    Its cheaper, more effective and economically difficult to resist.

    Russia has not conquered Ukraine with tanks, but with insurrection, propaganda, and population.

    This is the superior strategy for conquest in the post-nuclear era.

    The only solution is to re-nationalize liberalism.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-06 06:06:00 UTC

  • THE GREATEST TRAGEDY IN HUMAN HISTORY ? (revised- updated – expanded – reposted)

    THE GREATEST TRAGEDY IN HUMAN HISTORY ?

    (revised- updated – expanded – reposted) (worth reading: replacing the evil religion with what?)

    RE: Lawrence Krauss says Religion Could Be Gone In a Generation.

    WHICH RELIGION?

    That presupposes that Democratic Secular Pseudoscientific Humanism isn’t also a religion. Which is what he presupposes. And what all of the members of the Cathedral presuppose.

    But, all things considered, there is no comparison between Christianity’s unification of Europe, or even the Stoic Schools, and:

    1) The death and destruction of Marxism led by the Academy, and the battle against it – resisted by the Academy,

    2) Keynesianism (reformed marxism) – led by the academy, and fought by religious groups;

    3) The cognitive, social, and normative damage done by postmodernism – led by the academy, fought by traditionalist groups;

    4) Anthropological, biological, and social pseudoscience and psychologism – led by the academy and fought by religious and traditional groups;

    5) The destruction of the law of property and the common law – led by the academy and fought by religious and traditional groups.

    6) The current pseudoscientific justification of democracy – led by the academy, and fought by traditional groups.

    7) The destruction of the family – led by the academy and resisted by religious groups.

    So if we critically, empirically, rationally, and scientifically analyze the comparative differences, then all that we would find, is that eliminating mysticism and replacing it with general rules, has made more effective workers. But in every other respect, religion and tradition have been superior to rational and pseudoscientific and immoral advocacy by the academy.

    THE ACADEMY AS IMMORAL PRIESTHOOD

    The academy functions as a religion because its central propositions – other than the nearly accidental success at disassembling the physical universe into general rules – are ALL FALSE.

    In fact, physical science used to justify all the other falsehoods of the Pseudoscientific democratic secular socialist humanitarian religion, despite the contrary evidence.

    THE ACADEMY PROFITS FROM SELLING IMMORALITY BECAUSE THE FILTERING OF A COLLEGE EDUCATION PROVIDES ACCESS TO JOBS.

    We don’t learn much in the university, other than how to cooperate with one another, and to work hard on complex tasks in the service of professors. This turns out to be fairly good training for white collar jobs, since these behavioral disciplines are what are necessary for survival in white collar work forces. However, that does not mean that subject matter we are taught is valuable – just the opposite. IN the work force, students use almost nothing that they learn from the subjects that they study in college, and they remember nothing of college afterwards.

    What they are taught does not serve society or industry – and arguable is in the disservice of the students. Because what they are taught does little but preserve the mythos of the Cathedral, the Academy and the State. It is an exceptional racket: to filter people by natural ability and teach them to work together, but teach them how to work together on immoral objectives.

    If instead of paying upfront for this defective product – a product consisting of a behavioral half truth, and a mythological suite of pseudoscientific lies – we instead paid for our educations from a percentage of our lifetime earned incomes. You would see the subject matter in the Academy change rapidly to suit the needs of the customer, rather than the fraud of the Academy and State.

    We have perhaps created the most perverse incentives in the world by sacrificing our parent’s retirements for an education that is harmful to our society, in every possible way, and has rendered our people incompetent to compete on the world stage, by the myth that a college education is the secret to wealth and prosperity, when in fact, your capability is the secret to your prosperity, the academy teaches you nothing, and is little more than a behavioral boot camp that tests your social, physical, and mental endurance at a very high price.

    How this state of affairs, where the academy sells parchments claiming you have knowledge, to pay for new buildings and more administrative personnel, is materially any different from the priesthood selling Indulgences claiming you are forgiven of sins, to pay for the construction of St Peters and an increase in the number of members of the priesthood hard to determine – primary because there is precisely no difference whatsoever. All that has happened by the rapid expansion of the costs of university education, is that teaching professors are both paid less, are less secure in their jobs, are deprived of tenure, and they have nearly disappeared from the academy, while bureaucrats have multiplied, endowments have multiplied, and the physical plant – the buildings – owned by the academy has expanded dramatically.

    Humans follow incentives no matter how perverse, and the academy, particularly once it could educate women, has done nothing but follow its perverse incentives. And it is impossible (I know) to argue otherwise.

    So the Cathedral: the academy and state religion, funded by the sale of modern indulgences in the form of a parchment – and constituting an organizational which persists by profiting both materially and in social status, from the sale of dysgenic reproduction, via the generation of hyper-consumption, and the consequential destruction of the family, is a religion.

    A religion wherein millions of horrid crimes against not only humanity, but western civilization, are justified by but one success – the success of physical science – over which the academy’s fallacies have no jurisdiction.

    The irony is suffocating.

    So. Yes. It would be wonderful if we could stamp out religion in one generation. Especially the religion of pseudoscientific democratic secular, socialist humanism. Which has finally succeeded in overcoming the christianization of Europe as the greatest tragedy in human history.

    ALTERNATIVES

    I have a wonderful suggestion. Why don’t we return to worshiping, as in, holding celebrations of remembrance for, our heroes in:

    1) Our Military generals and our statesmen.

    2) Our Philosophers, scientists and engineers.

    3) Our Saints, Caretakers, Healers, nurses, and mothers.

    4) Our Entrepreneurs, Capitalists, businessmen and laborers who struggle to raise us from poverty to prosperity.

    5) Our tribes and families which as kingdoms bear each other no offense, and every possible opportunity to learn.

    6) The planet that birthed, raised, loves and nurturers us, and upon which we depend.

    BUT WAIT!!!!

    Oh. Wait!!! That would mean returning us to our original european religion before the state imposed Christianity upon us by forcing closed the stoic schools and imposing the church upon us, in the same way that the academy and state have incrementally destroyed our churches, and imposed pseudoscientific, democratic secular socialist humanism upon us!!!!

    HISTORY

    History is the only thing worth celebrating. Our heroes the gods to speak to – meaning pray to. Because if we understand the lives of those heroes well enough, we will find that the answers to our prayers to them are already within us waiting to be heard.

    SCIENCE IS THE PRESTIGE – A DISTRACTING GESTURE BY WHICH THE LIARS JUSTIFY THEIR LIES

    Science is a ruse to distract us from history. The false dichotomy the liars have created is between the church and science, when it is between history, pseudoscience, and mysticism.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-05 07:15:00 UTC

  • PUTIN CHANGES TACK – BACK ON TRACK AGAINST THE CATHEDRAL Now, as I said, he play

    PUTIN CHANGES TACK – BACK ON TRACK AGAINST THE CATHEDRAL

    Now, as I said, he played it poorly. He could have easily acquired the east and not put Russian economy in a tailspin.

    But as of yesterday he is back on the ‘western ideas have failed’ and the european ‘new world order’ is a failure. All that happens is that the USA creates worse circumstances again and again.

    This message has been selling to most of the world.

    If he had purchased eastern Ukraine with oil and gas (as I recommended), the locals would have loved the idea, and he would have had an IDEAL client-state, as is Germany: wealthy but dependent. Instead, he restarted the cold war. And he clearly doesn’t understand American Morality of altruistic punishment: WE WILL NEVER, EVER, STOP – EVER, against a moral violation by our own (white people). So the american strategy will be to cause enough pain that Putin becomes internally weak.

    Because in a corrupt mafia state, held together by money and power, not morality and rule of law, there is easily another sitting behind you waiting to take it from you.

    I turned on Putin entirely because of his abuse of Ukraine. But in no small part because I AGREE WITH HIS CRITICISMS OF THE WEST. I disagree that Russia provides the world with any value, and that the world can learn anything from Russia. But I do not disagree with his criticism of the Cathedral.

    Because I am also a critic of the Cathedral.

    The difference is that I would use rule of law and truth telling and he would use bribery and violence and corruption as an alternative to the Cathedral’s New World Order (of cosmopolitan construction)

    AND I AM RIGHT AND HE IS WRONG. PERIOD.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-04 05:32:00 UTC

  • WHY DO WE SEE POLAR OPPOSITION TODAY? APOLOGIES IN ADVANCE I’m sorry to intrude

    WHY DO WE SEE POLAR OPPOSITION TODAY?

    APOLOGIES IN ADVANCE

    I’m sorry to intrude on your poetic speech with my painful, oft turgid, analytic, alternative, but I thought this might provide you and others with another way of looking at the issue as if there are two sides.

    EXPLANATION

    In all multi polar systems, just as in all majority democracies, we see a major party (dominant alliance of interests) and a contesting party (resistance to the dominant alliance of interests) and all other parties(alliances) are statistically irrelevant.

    There is nowhere in life that this is not true. (I think there is a term for this effect, but it escapes me at the moment.)

    In most of history the military (aristocracy) as been the primary influence, and various religious organizations constitute the opposing force.

    But once we developed industry the economic power of business, industry and finance produced greater influence than the church and state could muster.

    Once the church was eliminated by Darwin, Science, The Academy, long subservient to the church, took over the church’s role as myth-maker. (Unfortunately just as the cosmopolitans and women were freed from cultural constraints under universal suffrage, ).

    The craftsmen (labor) attempted to ally with the Academy and State but Industry rebelled taking jobs away. But for some time the academy controlled the state via labor.

    The socialists and feminists were successful in forming an alliance with the academy to take over the government and push the military aristocracy from power. They were able to do this mostly because of the combination of media and postwar consumption, combined with the geographic expansion of the united states western territories as nearly free land. Plus the cost of fighting communism gave the academy and their desire as a vehicle for expansion of their power.

    In all these organizations oligarchies do form. But there always will exist four organizations: craft (without power), priesthood/academy(gossip as a moral weapon of power – especially in the west where altruism is the high chivalric virtue), the organization of production (remunerative incentives), and the martial aristocracy.

    What we see is a conflict between the four powers to control institutions.

    We live in a malevolent theocracy of academy and state reliant mostly on numerological pseudoscience to justify selling off consumption of the commons, in exchange for dysgenic expansion that increases their supporters.

    Theocracies, like corporations do not care about families, they are about power.

    Aristocracy is a family business.

    Families matter.

    SO WHAT?

    So there are always four dominant forces (alliances) reflecting the four possible means of coercion (none, gossip, trade, and force), and these forces battle over whatever institutions exist in any civilization in order to expand their power. But as always, because each follows the best use of power, the end result is always a dominant and resistance group, with the reset nearly invisible because they are immaterial.

    I think what I try to bring to the table is the fact that these four strategies (if the first ‘none’ can be considered a strategy), reflect reproductive strategies, and that the masculine (tribal) feminine (universal) and the commercial (selfish or neutral), battle for control of institutions that give preference to their methods and biases, and therefore their genetic preferences.

    So Red has evolved into the aristocratic meritocratic, slowly reproducing, high investment, nuclear and absolute nuclear family of the northern europeans that reflects the male reproductive strategy where insurance is denied in order to force productivity: a eugenic tribe. And Blue has evolved into the equalitarian, rapid reproduction, low investment, traditional and single parent family, where insurance is provided by the state, in order to ensure as many offspring survive as possible. And each has collected the allies available to pursue it’s ends. This is why women dtermine elections: they are the only gruop that is not balanced. women and minorities vote for dysgenia, and men and married women vote for eugenia (keeping their own production.) And really there isn’t more to it than that.

    Democracy failed the moment it changed from one FAMILY ONE VOTE to one INDIVIDUAL one vote. Because the familiy – particular the nuclar family – is by virtue of mate selection under monogamy, a compromise of reproductive strategies within which the majorty of us are relatively equal. But by converting to an individualist society rather than familial, we removed our compromise between competing reproductive strategies from the family, and elevated it into the state, where it is just a competition between the male eugenic and the female dysgenic and nothing else. There is no reason to be had since the only possible compromise can be constructed outside of government.

    I could write volumes more on this but it’s enough to get the point across:L

    1) Judicial Law must apply to individuals because individuals act.

    2) Governmental “Law” (contracts for the production of commons) must represent families or insufficient common interests exists for any such institution to choose solutions that satisfy a common interest.

    For these reasons universal democracy must always end in socialist tyranny where women can bear their offspring and place the burden of their upkeep on the state (men). This has to do with simple numbers, and simple genetic interests. A minority of males and a majority of females are better off constructing the greatest rents possible to feed dysgenic reproduction and the minority of productive people who they (and evolution) would prefer to choose eugenic (meritocratic) reproduction are merely farmed by the unproductive.

    Uncomfortable truth but truth none the less.

    (Note: I don’t mean that ALL our behavior is entirely in our genes as much as our class (reproductive value) is evidenced by in our genes and we gravitate to the strategies that suit our genes. )

    Curt Doolittle

    http://www.popehat.com/2014/10/21/gamer-gate-three-stages-to-obit/#comment-1283725

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-03 10:05:00 UTC

  • ON THE SINGLE ENGINE (ANGLO) WORLD ECONOMY I’ve followed Roubini for many years

    http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/us-growth-and-weakening-global-economy-by-nouriel-roubini-2014-10#qijbgttUhPYimsC2.99″—ROUBINI ON THE SINGLE ENGINE (ANGLO) WORLD ECONOMY

    I’ve followed Roubini for many years now, mostly because I think using the same frames of reference (incentives rather than statistics), and so I understand him more clearly than I do most other (correlative) economists. I am never interested in up-sides. That is the job of people with specialized knowledge of sectors, and instead I’m interested in politics and entrepreneurship. And Roubini’s ideas emphasize political and entrepreneurial risk, rather than financial opportunity.

    This is a short but accurate article on the state of the world economy., I tend to follow Roubini Global Economics and George Friedman (See The Next 100 Years George Friedman) and advise those who are likewise interested in the political and entrepreneurial cycle (rather than financial opportunity) to do likewise.

    Here are a few comments from others:

    IT”S TRUE, NOT MORAL, NOT PREFERABLE, BUT TRUE

    —“Roubini is a realist and he is using the basic operating assumptions of the world economy in his analysis. These assumptions include two crucial monetary facts, namely, 1. the status of the US Treasury bill as an unrivaled store of value (a status unaffected by the 2008 crash and all its consequences), and 2. the centrality of the City of London in global currency markets. The US stores value, produces liquidity (through QE and ultra-low policy rates), and consumes other countries’ manufactures with the money. The UK creams off huge profits from the froth of exchange (and their central bank has also produced a good bit of liquidity to keep the financial markets rolling, I might add). Both these functions are systemically necessary to the current pattern of the global economy, and they have have persisted since the mid-1970s with only incremental changes owing mostly to the rise of China and the consequent relativizaton of the importance of Japan. We may find these two crucial operating conditions aberrant from the viewpoint of neoclassical economics, or just plain unjust from the viewpoint of equality between nations, but they exist, they function and so far, they have only been perturbed, not altered, by the tremendous crisis of the last six years.”—

    THE PROBLEM

    My problem with this is that it creates very bad behavior in the world, and that is why the empire must fall.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-03 01:58:00 UTC

  • AN ANALYSIS OF THE STATE OF ECONOMICS (reposted from economics group) (possibly

    AN ANALYSIS OF THE STATE OF ECONOMICS

    (reposted from economics group) (possibly profound for students of economics)

    Why Stiglitz? He is a critique of BOTH Friedman AND the neo-Keynesians. So why is he important in my view? Even if he hasn’t solve ‘the big problem’? Because there isn’t a problem to be found, or a solution in where they’re searching for one.

    THE BROADER PICTURE

    But the take away from all of the recent economic debate, is that we have not solved the Austrian question of the business cycle (does government make it worse), or the Western Conservative question of the relationship between genetics and norms, and whether **any and all economic propositions** that do not account for genetic and normative differences are false. (And dysgenic for that matter.)

    The progressive moral sentiments (female reproductive strategy – survival of offspring regardless of merit) and the conservative sentiments (male reproductive strategy – competitive families and tribes) are currently at war in politics, because by the introduction of women into the polity, the government no longer represents families with homogenous if paternal interests, but government has become a venue for the competition between not only races and classes, but also between male/meritocratic and female/dysgenic reproductive strategies.

    This is the reason for the failure of democracy: while law must be practiced with individuals, the state must be practiced with families. The introduction of women into the government rather than into their own house of government, was as destructive as the dissolution of the differences between the monarchy, landed nobility, middle class businessmen (the commons), and our failure to add a house of proletarians (dependents).

    With these two acts under the fallacy of equality of interest and ability we eliminated the possibility of government to function as a market between families with dissimilar economic interests, and instead, made it a venue for the conduct of oppression by one group of interests over another.

    There are no adequate compromises, because as structured, current economics and politics produce undecidable propositions that we mistakenly assume are a problem which further analysis will solve by providing us with pareto optimums.

    But this is an equivalent to the search for the philosopher’s stone, or the alchemical conversion of lead into gold. It is merely an exercise in collecting more data, of greater precision without adding insight.

    The fact of the matter is that the enlightenment project has been a scientific success and a political failure – we cannot improve upon the family, the market, and houses of government that conduct exchanges of commons’ between classes of different material ability and interests.

    We need not search for non-existent (platonic) Pareto Optimums. We must merely conduct exchanges needed to produce Nash equilibria that are calculable by individuals of their own volition. This will restore some eugenics to the society ad the expense of the lower classes. But that is to the benefit of all mankind even if it is not something everyone wants to hear, because it deprives them of the cheap status signal of looking down upon others and feeling higher by the mere existence of the inferior and unfortunate, rather than having to take risks and actions necessary to produce something by their own ability and hands.

    There is nothing for economists to discover except this principle.

    (I’ll be here waiting having tea with Hegel, when they do.)

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    RANKINGS OF ECONOMISTS

    Ranking of economists by citation.

    https://ideas.repec.org/top/top.person.nbcites.html

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-01 06:17:00 UTC

  • Johannes Meixner: –“Men without access to sex always and everywhere cause revol

    Johannes Meixner: –“Men without access to sex always and everywhere cause revolutions. … [the primary] reason for monogamy-based societies being more stable.”–

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-26 11:17:00 UTC