Curt Doolittle

Theme: Ethnoculture

  • That means BLM should write a book and stop saying the same shit over and over a

    That means BLM should write a book and stop saying the same shit over and over again? That black impulsivity, incivility, non integration, violence, criminality, resistance to and violence against police, is not responsible for forcing police to maximize force in self-defense?

    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-02 11:41:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267783443301220355

    Reply addressees: @Alitah_H @Tomularity @PapaDanny5 @DanishPastry11 @_ReaalAmerican_ @realDonaldTrump

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267777359522004993

  • That means BLM should write a book and stop saying the same shit over and over a

    That means BLM should write a book and stop saying the same shit over and over again? That black impulsivity, incivility, non integration, violence, criminality, resistance to and violence against police, is not responsible for forcing police to maximize force in self-defense?

    Reply addressees: @Alitah_H @Tomularity @PapaDanny5 @DanishPastry11 @_ReaalAmerican_ @realDonaldTrump

  • Black men at under 10% of the population produce ~50% of crime, are prone to imp

    Black men at under 10% of the population produce ~50% of crime, are prone to impulsivity, incivility, violence, crime, and disproportionately lack agency, basic skills, and manners necessary for employment. They run, resist, lie to, fight officers. So fix the black male problem.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-02 10:55:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267771740639375362

    Reply addressees: @pierregsy @DanishPastry11 @_ReaalAmerican_ @realDonaldTrump

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267769408056971270

  • Strategy for Engaging with Civic Nationalists

    Strategy for Engaging with Civic Nationalists https://propertarianism.com/2020/06/02/strategy-for-engaging-with-civic-nationalists/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-02 00:54:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267620551364947968

  • Strategy for Engaging with Civic Nationalists

    STRATEGY FOR ENGAGING WITH CIVIC NATIONALISTS Civic nationalists are instinctive conservatives who are “on our team” but due to ignorance of how racially tribal/ethnocentric nonwhites are (western whites are unique in our relative lack of ethnocentrism/racial tribalism), decades of “equality” propaganda and lies, coupled with sincere lack of ill-will toward nonwhites (niceness/generosity), advocate/support legal nonwhite immigration. We are running into interactions with these folks quite a bit obviously as our reach spreads. Some of them learn essentially instantly, some learn more slowly or get “turned off” by any talk of race. So how do we deal with “the civnat problem”? My take is that our initial goal is we must get the majority of the grassroots Right one step over the line from losing right to winning right – “no more nonwhite immigration, cuz nonwhites vote 70% Left”. (Not cuz “all nonwhites are bad” or “hate” or whatnot.) (Step 1 of redpill on race.) Then, getting past the inevitable “but maybe we can reach nonwhites” requires explaining why that won’t work (they are racially tribal like the whole world except western whites, and are very susceptible to the “our problems are whitey’s fault” narrative which trumps all other logical/factual voting considerations in their psychology), which is Step 2 of redpilling on race. If we avoid these 2 bare-minimum messages, we risk going thru a civil war only to set up civnat policies again afterwards. This would be utterly tragic and would mean our descendants would eventually have to fight the same battle again. On the other hand, the time will never be more ripe for us to teach civnats this essential lesson and collectively as the grassroots Right shed the lie of group equality, than right now and as TX turns purple then blue and we find ourselves electorally powerless due to immigration. The pain of losing electoral power combined with the visciousness and obvious ir-reciprocity of the anti-white narrative and the left’s other craziness shifting into hyperdrive and communism 2.0 (all of which is only a problem because nonwhite voting is empowering it, most whites vote right and consider it silly) – all of this creates the perfect storm for our people to learn this essential lesson. So there is no better time to preach and teach “race redpill steps 1 & 2” than now and the near future. And we propertarians are positioned perfectly to do it in a way that can achieve maximum effectiveness with minimum possible “turn off”/rejection, because a) we have powerful, interesting, truly innovative solutions that are attractive to any instinctive rightwinger (evidences to people that we are not “simple/dumb racists”), and b) we do not have a “hate” or “ill-will” or “mockery” vibe. We can’t pass up this oppurtunity. If we avoid steps 1 & 2 of race redpilling for broader reach, our broader reach will accomplish little in the long run. The grassroots Right has to learn. And now is the perfect time to teach them.

  • Strategy for Engaging with Civic Nationalists

    STRATEGY FOR ENGAGING WITH CIVIC NATIONALISTS Civic nationalists are instinctive conservatives who are “on our team” but due to ignorance of how racially tribal/ethnocentric nonwhites are (western whites are unique in our relative lack of ethnocentrism/racial tribalism), decades of “equality” propaganda and lies, coupled with sincere lack of ill-will toward nonwhites (niceness/generosity), advocate/support legal nonwhite immigration. We are running into interactions with these folks quite a bit obviously as our reach spreads. Some of them learn essentially instantly, some learn more slowly or get “turned off” by any talk of race. So how do we deal with “the civnat problem”? My take is that our initial goal is we must get the majority of the grassroots Right one step over the line from losing right to winning right – “no more nonwhite immigration, cuz nonwhites vote 70% Left”. (Not cuz “all nonwhites are bad” or “hate” or whatnot.) (Step 1 of redpill on race.) Then, getting past the inevitable “but maybe we can reach nonwhites” requires explaining why that won’t work (they are racially tribal like the whole world except western whites, and are very susceptible to the “our problems are whitey’s fault” narrative which trumps all other logical/factual voting considerations in their psychology), which is Step 2 of redpilling on race. If we avoid these 2 bare-minimum messages, we risk going thru a civil war only to set up civnat policies again afterwards. This would be utterly tragic and would mean our descendants would eventually have to fight the same battle again. On the other hand, the time will never be more ripe for us to teach civnats this essential lesson and collectively as the grassroots Right shed the lie of group equality, than right now and as TX turns purple then blue and we find ourselves electorally powerless due to immigration. The pain of losing electoral power combined with the visciousness and obvious ir-reciprocity of the anti-white narrative and the left’s other craziness shifting into hyperdrive and communism 2.0 (all of which is only a problem because nonwhite voting is empowering it, most whites vote right and consider it silly) – all of this creates the perfect storm for our people to learn this essential lesson. So there is no better time to preach and teach “race redpill steps 1 & 2” than now and the near future. And we propertarians are positioned perfectly to do it in a way that can achieve maximum effectiveness with minimum possible “turn off”/rejection, because a) we have powerful, interesting, truly innovative solutions that are attractive to any instinctive rightwinger (evidences to people that we are not “simple/dumb racists”), and b) we do not have a “hate” or “ill-will” or “mockery” vibe. We can’t pass up this oppurtunity. If we avoid steps 1 & 2 of race redpilling for broader reach, our broader reach will accomplish little in the long run. The grassroots Right has to learn. And now is the perfect time to teach them.

  • Do We Need to Be United Around Via-Positivas (“Should Do”)? and Should It Be “al

    Do We Need to Be United Around Via-Positivas (“Should Do”)? and Should It Be “all About Race?” https://propertarianism.com/2020/06/02/do-we-need-to-be-united-around-via-positivas-should-do-and-should-it-be-all-about-race/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-02 00:53:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267620406443356166

  • Do We Need to Be United Around Via-Positivas (“Should Do”)? and Should It Be “al

    Do We Need to Be United Around Via-Positivas (“Should Do”)? and Should It Be “all About Race?” https://t.co/o0ahwSVmU9

  • Do We Need to Be United Around Via-Positivas (“Should Do”)? and Should It Be “all About Race?”

    DO WE NEED TO BE UNITED AROUND VIA-POSITIVAS (“SHOULD DO”)? AND SHOULD IT BE “ALL ABOUT RACE?” (Answer to a couple of good questions.) Reciprocity is a via-negativa law (“you can’t do xyz”), not a via-positiva (“we must/should do abc”) though it can be expressed as a via-positiva (“we need to enforce reciprocity”). On the grassroots Right we all can agree on enforcing reciprocity. And yes the 10 commandments are expressions of property rights/reciprocity & again they’re mostly via-negativa (“don’t do”). And yes the brainwashing of our people is a factor for sure, but the simple concept of reciprocity cuts through a lot of that too. The via-positiva is where factions come in (e.g. Christians want to say “everyone should be a Christian” while nonchristians say “no I don’t believe that”). The different via positivas are not a problem as long as we all agree on reciprocity. E.g. the Christians can go to church on Sunday & the nonchristians can stay home, or a leader could be a Christian or not a Christian, and everything’s fine as long as nobody’s violating reciprocity. Agreeing on and enforcing reciprocity stops the via-positivas from hurting each other. On race, reciprocity also cuts through and clarifies that issue. It’s not “all about” race but at the same time race is a big factor in what is happening in the West. The simple fact is, 70% of nonwhites (men, women, all demographics of nonwhites) in America vote left (ir-reciprocity) and buy into the anti-white, anti-West narrative. Also, 30-40% of whites (largely single childless women) vote Left (ir-reciprocity). The only demographic that votes majority Right is white men and their wives. So the policy conclusions that we must implement out of practicality (not ill-will or “hate”) are (we have no choice): 1. Stop all nonwhite immigration (because there is no way to vet them – “Are you a right-winger?” – they’ll just lie. And other problems – violations of reciprocity – that arise. Lower avg IQ, higher crime rate per capita, etc.) 2. Limit the vote, no more full-franchise democracy. Women either don’t get to vote (cuz voting is proxy for violence & they don’t do violence), or only women with children get to vote, or women have a house of govt that must negotiate (not dictate), and is limited along with the other houses of govt, to reciprocity, by the judiciary. (Some men could be limited from voting too. There are different ways to effectively limit the vote to non-parasitic instinct groups.) This along with self-sorting after a separation would leave about 80% white & 20% nonwhite (mostly right-wing nonwhites) in red areas, which may be workable as long as there is no more nonwhite immigration. And the law/political system in red areas would be very robust with the combination of these demographic changes (masses of leftist nonwhites & leftist whites in big blue coastal cities no longer affecting our politics), limits on voting, and Propertarianism’s other law/policy/system recommendations. So race is a big issue statistically (in terms of group avg characteristics, attitudes, instincts & voting patterns), but at the same time it’s not “all about race”. We have to talk about race accurately and statistically and scientifically because this is part of the brainwashing the grassroots Right must abandon (the leftist lie that all people groups/races are or can be identical interchangeable widgets – as groups). And we Propertarians are in a great “sweet spot” to do that because we present a “let’s be accurate” and slightly academic vibe and we do not present an “ill-will/hate” vibe (while still being “muscular” – “we’re going to do what it takes to enforce reciprocity”).

  • Do We Need to Be United Around Via-Positivas (“Should Do”)? and Should It Be “all About Race?”

    DO WE NEED TO BE UNITED AROUND VIA-POSITIVAS (“SHOULD DO”)? AND SHOULD IT BE “ALL ABOUT RACE?” (Answer to a couple of good questions.) Reciprocity is a via-negativa law (“you can’t do xyz”), not a via-positiva (“we must/should do abc”) though it can be expressed as a via-positiva (“we need to enforce reciprocity”). On the grassroots Right we all can agree on enforcing reciprocity. And yes the 10 commandments are expressions of property rights/reciprocity & again they’re mostly via-negativa (“don’t do”). And yes the brainwashing of our people is a factor for sure, but the simple concept of reciprocity cuts through a lot of that too. The via-positiva is where factions come in (e.g. Christians want to say “everyone should be a Christian” while nonchristians say “no I don’t believe that”). The different via positivas are not a problem as long as we all agree on reciprocity. E.g. the Christians can go to church on Sunday & the nonchristians can stay home, or a leader could be a Christian or not a Christian, and everything’s fine as long as nobody’s violating reciprocity. Agreeing on and enforcing reciprocity stops the via-positivas from hurting each other. On race, reciprocity also cuts through and clarifies that issue. It’s not “all about” race but at the same time race is a big factor in what is happening in the West. The simple fact is, 70% of nonwhites (men, women, all demographics of nonwhites) in America vote left (ir-reciprocity) and buy into the anti-white, anti-West narrative. Also, 30-40% of whites (largely single childless women) vote Left (ir-reciprocity). The only demographic that votes majority Right is white men and their wives. So the policy conclusions that we must implement out of practicality (not ill-will or “hate”) are (we have no choice): 1. Stop all nonwhite immigration (because there is no way to vet them – “Are you a right-winger?” – they’ll just lie. And other problems – violations of reciprocity – that arise. Lower avg IQ, higher crime rate per capita, etc.) 2. Limit the vote, no more full-franchise democracy. Women either don’t get to vote (cuz voting is proxy for violence & they don’t do violence), or only women with children get to vote, or women have a house of govt that must negotiate (not dictate), and is limited along with the other houses of govt, to reciprocity, by the judiciary. (Some men could be limited from voting too. There are different ways to effectively limit the vote to non-parasitic instinct groups.) This along with self-sorting after a separation would leave about 80% white & 20% nonwhite (mostly right-wing nonwhites) in red areas, which may be workable as long as there is no more nonwhite immigration. And the law/political system in red areas would be very robust with the combination of these demographic changes (masses of leftist nonwhites & leftist whites in big blue coastal cities no longer affecting our politics), limits on voting, and Propertarianism’s other law/policy/system recommendations. So race is a big issue statistically (in terms of group avg characteristics, attitudes, instincts & voting patterns), but at the same time it’s not “all about race”. We have to talk about race accurately and statistically and scientifically because this is part of the brainwashing the grassroots Right must abandon (the leftist lie that all people groups/races are or can be identical interchangeable widgets – as groups). And we Propertarians are in a great “sweet spot” to do that because we present a “let’s be accurate” and slightly academic vibe and we do not present an “ill-will/hate” vibe (while still being “muscular” – “we’re going to do what it takes to enforce reciprocity”).