Curt Doolittle

Theme: Deception

  • DEAR PATRIARCHY I hope it’s OK to ask to work through this with you. We have bee

    DEAR PATRIARCHY

    I hope it’s OK to ask to work through this with you.

    We have been conquered by lies (pseudoscience mostly) distributed to our women and underclasses just as the greeks and roman were conquered by lies (christian authoritarian mysticism) distributed to our women and underclasses. We have lost control of our media, academy, and school due to the perverse incentive of hyper-consumption.

    The best political religion I know of is Roman law. The best common religion is nature and hero worship. The best personal religion is stoicism. And our competitive advantage in the ancient and modern worlds has been truth, trust, commons, technology and war. While in the middle period we were terribly weakened by Christianity. So weak that without the conquest of the viking pagans we would not have survived the ongoing muslim conquest.

    I understand the importance of pulpit and doctrine. But I can find nothing of value in Christianity other than its continuation of natural law, and its institutional emphasis on the family as the unit of production, reproduction, and government.

    Yes, the church introduced (for selfish purposes): The forcible prohibition on inbreeding. The forcible extension of property (legal) rights to women. The persuasive educational introduction of chivalry as a means of absorbing males into the commons. B

    But the creation of northern Europe was the result of manorialism -small business that limited the reproduction of the lower classes and redistributed wealth and reproduction to the middle and upper classes. Combined with the aggressive use of hanging to gradually domesticate the recalcitrant lower classes. The wars and plagues, winters and famines that kept their numbers under control. The rise of the Hansa society and it’s extension of middle class wealth. Our rediscovery of greek and roman thought that brought us advanced science and technology. And the printing press that gave us an advantage over the rest of the world in using this knowledge.

    If anything those countries last to be converted survived far better than those countries first to be converted to christianity. The earlier that they were converted the worse they are today.

    The church like the present state claimed responsibility for virtues while distributing harms. But there is little evidence that the church contributed rather than held back our civilization.

    Today’s pulpit is academy and press. This is a profoundly destructive combination since they distribute hyperconsumption largely to women and the underclasses instead of suppressing the underclasses. In effect, we are **re-wilding** the world, and reversing thousands of years of our ancestor’s domestication of man.

    So when we say ‘return to tradition’, I see the importance of a return to the suppression of the underclasses, a continuation of domestication of the world, a return to the family rather than the individual as the central unit of production and reproduction. An end to the downward redistribution of productivity. An ongoing suppression of impulsivity in the commons. We must render the commons sacred once again and therefore prohibit it from consumption by the hordes.

    The church provided the underclass population with love, care, and insurance. And a modicum of useful information. It was always a tool of the aristocracy in the north. But where the church gained power in the south, the catholic countries, all was worse, and remains so.

    Even venice was just an outpost for the byzantines, and provided their navy. Christianity was just a way of controlling the underclasses. It was decoration not substance.

    The most important institution that developed in Europe was the finance system of the templars, yet the church killed them off in order to relieve its debt. The revolutions against the monarchy were more so against the church ownership of land, and its parasitism than it was against the emergent private state.

    What upset the order was the rifle as much as the industrial revolution. What destroyed our order was grant of equal status to women in the government. It took women 100 years to make use of the work of jewish thinkers once again to destroy our order once again, and bring about another ‘christian’ dark age. Yet this was the result of christian incentives not aristocratic or paternal incentives.

    All religions bind. The value in binding is universal. That is separate from the content and result of teachings. The good in christianity comes from the ritual and the shared teaching that binds us together as a society under an authoritarian, domesticating, paternal order of the family, rather than an egalitarian, dysgenic, feminine order of hyper consumption of all that we have accumulated over the centuries since our ancestors first combined horse, wheel, and bronze into chariot and created the Aristocratic, Paternal Order and began domesticating man.

    So why must we restore that which by the evidence, if not by our Intuition, is part and parcel of our conquest?

    Why not use the church, and alter the experience to teach that which must be learned, to continue our traditional domestication of man? Why not return to the unstated religion of raising man to the transcendent gods we imagine in our myths and legends?

    Why reintroduce the babylonian mysticism that has been so detrimental and that we have worked so hard to escape?

    The germans have at least twice tried to overcome christianity and failed. And it is our anglo CHRISTIANITY that caused them to fail.

    We have been wrong in the english speaking world many times.

    And each time we have been wrong it has been our christianity driving us. And each time we have hurt western civilization it has been in an attempt to constrain our reemergent indo-european pagan intuitions.

    Christianity and Judaism are the reasons we suffer not our salvation. There has been one secret to the success of the west in the ancient and modern worlds, and that is truth, reason, science, a love of nature, and our desire to transcend into the gods we worship.

    We require pulpit, church and canon. But not the destructive one of the byzantines, babylonians, Egyptians and Jews. We have our own gods, heroes, history, and our accomplishments with our own outshine those of all others combined.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute,

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-12 07:52:00 UTC

  • Eliminate the ability of man to engage in parasitism and you leave him only the

    Eliminate the ability of man to engage in parasitism and you leave him only the ability to engage in productivity.

    Eliminate the ability of man to engage in error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, and deception and you leave him only the ability to speak the truth.

    Eliminate the ability to pool and launder taxes and eliminate discretion.

    Eliminate discretion and you eliminate the eliminate the ability of man to engage in politics.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-10 22:24:00 UTC

  • CURRENT ERA REQUIRES KNOWLEDGEABLE EDITORS. SOURCES NO LONGER HOLD MEANING. JUST

    http://194.44.123.114/THE CURRENT ERA REQUIRES KNOWLEDGEABLE EDITORS. SOURCES NO LONGER HOLD MEANING. JUST THE OPPOSITE.

    Wikipedia:

    Comment on Sourcing.

    There is a significant intellectual problem that Wikipedia is contributing to by seeking traditional (mainstream) sources that supply editorial filtering of content, when the ascent and increasing dominance of political discourse is conducted outside of those traditional circles precisely because those traditional editorial filters have demonstrated consistent bias.

    We see today’s political movements as extremely reactionary, on all three points of the political compass. The contemporary version of Paris in the 20’s is taking place on the internet, and instead of pamphlets that compete against newspapers, we are producing internet content against television, radio, magizine and newspaper. Precisely to overthrow the previous generation of thinkers and the political strategies that they advocate on both sides.

    I’m probably the most influential alt-right philosopher, and my generation of thinkers does not even bother with traditional publications. We work entirely on the net. Because we reach the audience without editorial interference from the status quo. A status quo which both right and left are demonstrably rejecting in the current election.

    – Curt Doolittle, The Propertarian Institute, Kiev, Ukraine.

    I think you know that are articles are meant to be based on quality sources and not the opinion of editors. – Doug.

    Circular. The question is whether or not you are in fact relying upon quality sources, or making excuses with which to intentionally bias the content. When you use the term ‘quality’, what you mean is ‘sources requiring physical capital to produce’. This is in fact the criteria. The quality of the material is not in fact a criteria. The truth content is not in fact a criteria. Only that it cost someone something to produce it. That is your criteria. In any event. I have better things to do. But falsehood is still falsehood. And in the current era, capital is not relevant. Author and survival of theory from criticism is. Any imbecile can rank capital. It takes specialized knowledge to construct criticism. And capital is no longer a sufficient criteria for determining anything whatsoever. -Curt.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-10 13:39:00 UTC

  • #libertarian #conservative #altright #NRx #propertarianism To testify (speak) wi

    #libertarian #conservative #altright #NRx #propertarianism To testify (speak) without due diligence is to engage in fraud. Argument=promise.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-10 07:24:00 UTC

  • this Molyneux. 🙂 Great little piece. I do not understand Stefan’s critics. He’s

    http://vidmax.com/video/136252-Stefan-Molyneux-smashes-the-notion-of-white-guilt-and-privilege-and-collective-judgement#.Vt_vWp7LeGU.facebookLove this Molyneux. 🙂 Great little piece.

    I do not understand Stefan’s critics. He’s awesome at what he does and he gets better every year. He has found the perfect niche and he’s a fantastic educator and analyst. No, I don’t take his attempt at constructing philosophy very seriously, but you have to respect him for trying. Philosophizing is necessary, but contributing philosophical innovation is really freaking hard.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-09 04:42:00 UTC

  • It will cost us to we raise the cost of lying. But our destruction has been achi

    It will cost us to we raise the cost of lying. But our destruction has been achieved by the discounted cost of lying using the media of print, radio, television, film and the internet. Every cost we bear to suppress lying produces returns. Every failure to suppress lying produces ever expanding costs.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-09 03:44:00 UTC

  • “What benefit is there, in protecting liars from retaliation, if they can be sho

    —“What benefit is there, in protecting liars from retaliation, if they can be shown to be liars? Why do you want to protect liars, unless you should be one yourself?”— Eli Harman

    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-09 03:41:00 UTC

  • Edward Fürst 1 – Excellent demonstration of Pilpul. 2 – Excellent use of straw m

    Edward Fürst

    1 – Excellent demonstration of Pilpul.

    2 – Excellent use of straw man.

    3 – Excellent use of argument from ignorance.

    4 – Excellent user of black or white fallacy

    5 – Excellent use of shaming.

    6 – Excellent use of using all of the above to construct overloading.

    7 – Excellent use of creating a high cost of defense.

    In other words, an excellent use of Pilpul. Which is your usual argumentative technique: to raise the cost of refutation not to seek understanding, and not to refute but to make truthful discourse impossible. To demonstrate that you are in fact one of the liars we seek to prevent from lying.

    Now that we have established the method by which you conduct your intuitionistic attempt to pollute the commons, we can address your deceit point by point.

    ON DEFINITIONS OF IMPULSIVITY

    The article you site does not test impulsivity but aggression. Aggression may be the result of impulsiveness or reason, but the willingness to bear costs and risks in order to obtain returns does exist in a spectrum with men taking greater risks and women fewer risks. Hence why men are more expendable and why we are born in slightly greater numbers.

    So the question is instead why we would not prosecute the authors for conflating impulse with aggression since while aggression may be impulsive, men and women are equally impulsive but unequally aggressive.

    In fact, women have a much harder time managing their impulsive emotions. And they need to. Because the cost of caring for offspring is non-rational. SO women must be incentivized by nature non-rationally. They risk less but work more. We work less but risk more. We generally describe the differences as women play the role of gatherer-tortoise and men the role of hunter-hare. But this is just a necessary division of labor.

    ON LEGALITY OF TRUTH

    1) the scientific method consists not of a method but a set of criteria for eliminating falsehood.

    2) science requires operational language, parsimony, limits and full accounting. It does not require objective morality. Law does (mostly) require it. Science is extremely good at policing itself. (science proper does not take social science seriously).

    3) the law already includes many tests of sufficiency. If we can provide tests of sufficiency the law can treat them as any other list of sufficiency – particularly in moral matters (involuntary transfer). We must give the law tests of sufficiency. Which is what I have done with truth: warranties of sufficiency of due diligence in various dimensions.

    4) If one communicates poorly that is very different from one advocating theft directly or indirectly. If one errs one can recant, and issue correction. If one cannot issue correction one can pay compensation. But in any case, in order to end up in court, one must provide another with the incentive to bring him to court, and the likelihood that such a person would prevail before a jury of one’s peers.

    5) If we can teach reading, arithmetic, mathematics, and various other skills. And if we can have taught Grammar(organizing), Logic(processing) and Rhetoric(outputting), and if we can teach formal logic then we can certainly teach truthfulness. If we can write software we can write strictly constructed law.

    6) It is a cost. The increase in the degree of suppression of parasitism is always a cost. But what was the cost of the failure of the last century to suppress the jewish art of lying in all fields (Pseudoscience) as a successor to the jewish art of lying in all fields in the ancient era (monotheistic scripturalism). And the cost of suppressing german philosophical discourse, or american postmodernism, or the innumeracy of keynesian economics? All costs are opportunity costs.

    7) Juries are exceptionally successful at stepping into the shoes of criminals. The evidence is (and there is a lot of it) that juries are exceptionally good at their job except in the most abstract of cases. Lying is not so difficult a problem to overcome.

    8) Courts already seek to identify a deception. Law is only a question if no deceptions can be found. Very few cases go to court because this is determined prior to jury.

    9) The mild randomness of the jury is an incentive to reconcile disputes prior to court.

    10) that judges do not specialize is the first problem. That lawyers cannot be prosecuted for falsehoods is the second. That we insufficiently select juries from peers is the third

    11) Producers of all goods and services must provide warranties of sufficiency and show due diligence against the externalization of harm (costs). Where political speech can produce the greatest harm of all, there is no reason not to require it be truthfully constructed.

    12) Legislation and law can be strictly constructed by the same criteria as tests of truth and this prohibits the ‘interpretation’ of the law and restores the constitution that would force the courts to return decisions to the legislature if the questions are not in fact questions of truth or law. This was the original intent of the framers, who in retrospect we can see were trying to construct a formal logic but were still to christian to do so.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-09 03:31:00 UTC

  • If they cannot lie, they cannot defeat us

    If they cannot lie, they cannot defeat us.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-08 20:47:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/707306715012796416

    Reply addressees: @retroch @soapjackal

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/707305908678860800

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/707305908678860800

  • It is non-trivial. If you understand we have been deceived and it is possible to

    It is non-trivial. If you understand we have been deceived and it is possible to stop deception using the law…

    Source date (UTC): 2016-03-08 20:46:38 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/707306554299707393

    Reply addressees: @retroch @soapjackal

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/707305908678860800

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/707305908678860800