—“What’s your position on mixing?”— Which question are you asking me? As a jurist of natural law? As a public intellectual practicing political economy seeking political solutions to optimum flourishing? Or as an anglo northern european man seeking the intersets of my people? Or as a man who loves his kinfolk first and foremost? As a jurist of natural law it is a question for a polity to choose mixing or not, since underclass mixing seems to be as beneficial as working, middle, and upper class race mixing is counter-productive. And as such the optimum conditions for all are to create many states, that produce commons that reflect the interests of the people who live in them. Nationalism is in the interests of all people. As a public intellectual it’s clearly superior politically and economically to create homogenous nation states. For my people as for all other peoples. As a northern european, I prefer others of my kin don’t mix, and I want my people and civilization to survive, and prosper. Just as I do for all other peoples. As an individual, am certain that I don’t choose to mix (and I have tried). But as such I won’t choose for all other peoples. DEMONSTRATED PREFERENCE But I dont just talk about it – I demonstrated that I prefer to live in a traditional, religious, homogenous country. Although, I would prefer to live in old new england, or old england, or old normandy, old netherlands, or maybe old denmark if I could – since those are the origins of my people. But due to conquest by french, cosmopolitans, and marxists, I cannot do so. RECIPROCITY But I will not force the choice for others. Only prevent others from making the choice for me and those that agree with me. Any man who will work to help me make a nation for me and mine, I will by reciprocity help to make a nation for he and his. Any man who seeks to stop me and mine from creating a nation that provides the optimum for our kin interests is an enemy and I will work against him at the cost of my life and his. NATURAL LAW ON INVOLUNTARY ASSOCIATION Under natural law, heterogeneity is not a choice that is open to restitution (repair) and therefore involuntary imposition is against the law of nature and of men, and as such must be prosecuted, and the only restitution for genocide is genocide – a consequence for which western politicians should tremble and fear. All men who fight for nationalism are our brothers in arms. All others are merely obstacles to be ended. Revolt. Separate. Prosper. Speciate. CRITICISM OF THE MAN IN THE MIRROR You have simple answers if you’re a simple person with simple responsibilities, particularly if you are only vaguely responsible for yourself. Those of us who are more sophisticated, more able, with wider affect, and broader responsibilities, who work to take responsibilities for tribe, nation, race, and mankind have more sophisticated answers. Don’t equate us other than in our interests. In my world I work for in the intersets of the common moral people, and against the interests of parasites and fools. ***Is that clear enough (you f-cking idiot). WN is trash because only fucking morons are stupid enough to take the short obvious, selfish, moron-route to political change.***
Theme: Ethnoculture
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status. MORON QUESTION OF THE DAY. —“What’s your po
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
MORON QUESTION OF THE DAY.
—“What’s your position on mixing?”—
Which question are you asking me? As a jurist of natural law? As a public intellectual practicing political economy seeking political solutions to optimum flourishing? Or as an anglo northern european man seeking the intersets of my people? Or as a man who loves his kinfolk first and foremost?
As a jurist of natural law it is a question for a polity to choose mixing or not, since underclass mixing seems to be as beneficial as working, middle, and upper class race mixing is counter-productive. And as such the optimum conditions for all are to create many states, that produce commons that reflect the interests of the people who live in them. Nationalism is in the interests of all people.
As a public intellectual it’s clearly superior politically and economically to create homogenous nation states. For my people as for all other peoples.
As a northern european, I prefer others of my kin don’t mix, and I want my people and civilization to survive, and prosper. Just as I do for all other peoples.
As an individual, am certain that I don’t choose to mix (and I have tried). But as such I won’t choose for all other peoples.
DEMONSTRATED PREFERENCE
But I dont just talk about it – I demonstrated that I prefer to live in a traditional, religious, homogenous country. Although, I would prefer to live in old new england, or old england, or old normandy, old netherlands, or maybe old denmark if I could – since those are the origins of my people. But due to conquest by french, cosmopolitans, and marxists, I cannot do so.
RECIPROCITY
But I will not force the choice for others. Only prevent others from making the choice for me and those that agree with me.
Any man who will work to help me make a nation for me and mine, I will by reciprocity help to make a nation for he and his.
Any man who seeks to stop me and mine from creating a nation that provides the optimum for our kin interests is an enemy and I will work against him at the cost of my life and his.
NATURAL LAW ON INVOLUNTARY ASSOCIATION
Under natural law, heterogeneity is not a choice that is open to restitution (repair) and therefore involuntary imposition is against the law of nature and of men, and as such must be prosecuted, and the only restitution for genocide is genocide – a consequence for which western politicians should tremble and fear.
All men who fight for nationalism are our brothers in arms. All others are merely obstacles to be ended.
Revolt. Separate. Prosper. Speciate.
CRITICISM OF THE MAN IN THE MIRROR
You have simple answers if you’re a simple person with simple responsibilities, particularly if you are only vaguely responsible for yourself.
Those of us who are more sophisticated, more able, with wider affect, and broader responsibilities, who work to take responsibilities for tribe, nation, race, and mankind have more sophisticated answers.
Don’t equate us other than in our interests. In my world I work for in the intersets of the common moral people, and against the interests of parasites and fools.
***Is that clear enough (you f-cking idiot). WN is trash because only fucking morons are stupid enough to take the short obvious, selfish, moron-route to political change.***
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-21 18:56:56 UTC
-
MORON QUESTION OF THE DAY. —“What’s your position on mixing?”— Which questio
MORON QUESTION OF THE DAY.
—“What’s your position on mixing?”—
Which question are you asking me? As a jurist of natural law? As a public intellectual practicing political economy seeking political solutions to optimum flourishing? Or as an anglo northern european man seeking the intersets of my people? Or as a man who loves his kinfolk first and foremost?
As a jurist of natural law it is a question for a polity to choose mixing or not, since underclass mixing seems to be as beneficial as working, middle, and upper class race mixing is counter-productive. And as such the optimum conditions for all are to create many states, that produce commons that reflect the interests of the people who live in them. Nationalism is in the interests of all people.
As a public intellectual it’s clearly superior politically and economically to create homogenous nation states. For my people as for all other peoples.
As a northern european, I prefer others of my kin don’t mix, and I want my people and civilization to survive, and prosper. Just as I do for all other peoples.
As an individual, am certain that I don’t choose to mix (and I have tried). But as such I won’t choose for all other peoples.
DEMONSTRATED PREFERENCE
But I dont just talk about it – I demonstrated that I prefer to live in a traditional, religious, homogenous country. Although, I would prefer to live in old new england, or old england, or old normandy, old netherlands, or maybe old denmark if I could – since those are the origins of my people. But due to conquest by french, cosmopolitans, and marxists, I cannot do so.
RECIPROCITY
But I will not force the choice for others. Only prevent others from making the choice for me and those that agree with me.
Any man who will work to help me make a nation for me and mine, I will by reciprocity help to make a nation for he and his.
Any man who seeks to stop me and mine from creating a nation that provides the optimum for our kin interests is an enemy and I will work against him at the cost of my life and his.
NATURAL LAW ON INVOLUNTARY ASSOCIATION
Under natural law, heterogeneity is not a choice that is open to restitution (repair) and therefore involuntary imposition is against the law of nature and of men, and as such must be prosecuted, and the only restitution for genocide is genocide – a consequence for which western politicians should tremble and fear.
All men who fight for nationalism are our brothers in arms. All others are merely obstacles to be ended.
Revolt. Separate. Prosper. Speciate.
CRITICISM OF THE MAN IN THE MIRROR
You have simple answers if you’re a simple person with simple responsibilities, particularly if you are only vaguely responsible for yourself.
Those of us who are more sophisticated, more able, with wider affect, and broader responsibilities, who work to take responsibilities for tribe, nation, race, and mankind have more sophisticated answers.
Don’t equate us other than in our interests. In my world I work for in the intersets of the common moral people, and against the interests of parasites and fools.
***Is that clear enough (you f-cking idiot). WN is trash because only fucking morons are stupid enough to take the short obvious, selfish, moron-route to political change.***
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-21 14:56:00 UTC
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status. —“Genetic deviation between groups is small
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
—“Genetic deviation between groups is smaller than between individuals in the group.”—
That is a meaningless truism that easily fools the innumerate.
– ethnocentrism is the optimum group political strategy.
– markets the optimum economic strategy.
– eugenics the optimum group competitive strategy.
– neoteny the optimum genetic strategy.
Very minor variations in group genes produce very profound group outcomes.
It appears that a relatively small number of genes (in the thousands) produces 100% of the competitive variation between groups (symmetry, neoteny, dimorphism).
Meanwhile we have no idea how much of the genome is used (functional), which expressed (conditional), which unused (reserve) or noise (dead).
As such, “deviation between groups vs individuals” is in itself true but by implication a profound deception (fraud).
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-21 00:11:54 UTC
-
Is Leftism a Disease? It’s Because We Are Speciating
(dividing into species) —“Curt do you think that leftism is simply a mental illness or is there an actual reason why people adopt such an unreasonable belief system?”— I think it’s a pre-cognitive genetic (evolutionary) strategy that some people have evolved just as conservatism is a genetic (evolutionary) strategy that others have evolved. And I think the difference is caused by the female reproductive strategy that favors women and the lower classes, and male reproductive strategy that favors males and the middle/upper classes. And this is confirmed pretty simply by the reproductive attractiveness of conservatives and liberals. Conservatives tend to be more reproductively desirable, and have greater agency. These are genetic markers. My view is that we WERE speciating regionally by race when we discovered metalworking. My view is that we are wealthy enough to speciate by need for commons – and that’s what we are in the process of doing. And that the mistake is to think that our interests are better served by the production of COMPROMISE commons versus SPECIALIZED COMMONS that suit our reproductive strategies. All peoples are better served by the production of SPECIALIZED COMMONS. And we can (finally) afford to produce them. And that is what we see across the world. WE NEED TO SPECIATE. WOLVES(conservatives) Packs, and SHEEP(liberals) Herd. Revolt, Separate, Prosper, Speciate. -
“Deviation Between Groups vs Individuals” Is in Itself True but By Implication a Profound Deception (fraud).
—“Genetic deviation between groups is smaller than between individuals in the group.”— That is a meaningless truism that easily fools the innumerate. – ethnocentrism is the optimum group political strategy. – markets the optimum economic strategy. – eugenics the optimum group competitive strategy. – neoteny the optimum genetic strategy. Very minor variations in group genes produce very profound group outcomes. It appears that a relatively small number of genes (in the thousands) produces 100% of the competitive variation between groups (symmetry, neoteny, dimorphism). Meanwhile we have no idea how much of the genome is used (functional), which expressed (conditional), which unused (reserve) or noise (dead). As such, “deviation between groups vs individuals” is in itself true but by implication a profound deception (fraud). -
“Deviation Between Groups vs Individuals” Is in Itself True but By Implication a Profound Deception (fraud).
—“Genetic deviation between groups is smaller than between individuals in the group.”— That is a meaningless truism that easily fools the innumerate. – ethnocentrism is the optimum group political strategy. – markets the optimum economic strategy. – eugenics the optimum group competitive strategy. – neoteny the optimum genetic strategy. Very minor variations in group genes produce very profound group outcomes. It appears that a relatively small number of genes (in the thousands) produces 100% of the competitive variation between groups (symmetry, neoteny, dimorphism). Meanwhile we have no idea how much of the genome is used (functional), which expressed (conditional), which unused (reserve) or noise (dead). As such, “deviation between groups vs individuals” is in itself true but by implication a profound deception (fraud). -
“Genetic deviation between groups is smaller than between individuals in the gro
—“Genetic deviation between groups is smaller than between individuals in the group.”—
That is a meaningless truism that easily fools the innumerate.
– ethnocentrism is the optimum group political strategy.
– markets the optimum economic strategy.
– eugenics the optimum group competitive strategy.
– neoteny the optimum genetic strategy.
Very minor variations in group genes produce very profound group outcomes.
It appears that a relatively small number of genes (in the thousands) produces 100% of the competitive variation between groups (symmetry, neoteny, dimorphism).
Meanwhile we have no idea how much of the genome is used (functional), which expressed (conditional), which unused (reserve) or noise (dead).
As such, “deviation between groups vs individuals” is in itself true but by implication a profound deception (fraud).
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-20 20:11:00 UTC
-
WHITE NATIONALISM IS RIDICULOUS. NATIONALISM ISN’T When say that you are a White
WHITE NATIONALISM IS RIDICULOUS. NATIONALISM ISN’T
When say that you are a White Nationalist your not solving the problem: building a worldwide movement, exiting leftists (defectors) from the gene pool, and saving another 5000 years of costly eugenics. We know we’ve spent 3500 years or more on eugenic evolution by cultural design, and it’s possible much more than that by accident. There is no need for a monopoly and to dominate. It’s not helpful. So voluntary separation is all that is necessary. And race is an insufficient criteria.
The only thing that matters is voluntary association and disassociation. The markets for polities will solve everything for us just as all markets solve all other issues for us.
Why? We can afford to produce commons that suit the genetic interests of different groups. So rather than fight an impossible fight, lets just serve one another’s interests.
Serve EVERYONE’s political interests.
Revolt, Separate, Prosper, Speciate.
====== UPDATE ======
Funny that some people understand propaganda and some don’t. I have this suspicion that what makes our people fragile, is that we have been performing truth to power for so many thousands of years that it’s in our genes, and that is why we are both susceptible to propaganda and bad at making it.
WN is Bad Prop. Nationalism and commons preferred by each group is GOOD prop. Good prop makes allies. Bad prop creates resistance.
The simple and direct route is the one that is predictable. Great generals maneuver: they let the opponent take the direct route and take the indirect route to defeat them.
The psychological drive for directness is male aggression. This is why some people fight physically, others legally, others politically, and others informationally.
WN is bad Prop. Universal Nationalism to foster group flourishing is Good Prop.
Help everyone to help ourselves.
The bigger ambition provides the shortest distance and duration.
===== UPDATE ====
NATIONALISM
– ethnocentrism is the optimum group political strategy.
– markets the optimum economic strategy.
– eugenics the optimum group competitive strategy.
– neoteny the optimum genetic strategy.
===== UPDATE ====
THE DEAD END RIGHT: WN
W.N. is a dead end. Nationalism is not.
National Socialism is a dead end. Redistribution is not.
Religion is Dead End. Institutional models are not.
Takeover is a dead end. Separatism is not.
Demonstrations are a dead end. Direct action is not.
Solving your problem is a dead end. Solving everyone’s is not.
Ideology is a dead end. Economics Incentives Are Not.
THE SOLUTIONS MOVEMENTS NEED
All revolutions occur because of a convergence between:
(a) the state’s inability to modify it’s behavior to serve the diverging interests of the public.
(b) a common knowledge of an alternative condition (order) that would be preferable,
(c) a surplus of males that are agitated by this condition,
(d) an economic or political event that provides opportunity for collective action that can ‘spiral’ (increase in momentum).
REALITIES OF MOVEMENTS
The early adopters seek the fringe. The population seeks an Overton Window. As movements age, they upgrade members from the fringe to the Overton Window: Fringe personalities perform research for talented personalities that perform research for mainstream personalities.
We have better followers this year than last.
We had better followers last year than the year before.
We had better followers the year before last, than the year before … and so on.
I don’t want to associate with the fringe that hinders capture of the Overton Window. They are a dead end. All that matters is the people who will fight, resist, advocate, or not get in the way. And those people will be captured by economic and cultural incentives – not ideology.
REVOLUTION
A moral License.
A set of Demands.
A plan of Transition.
A means of raising the cost of the status quo.
Thanks.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-20 18:58:00 UTC
-
IS LEFTISM A DISEASE? WE ARE SPECIATING (dividing into species) —“Curt do you
IS LEFTISM A DISEASE? WE ARE SPECIATING
(dividing into species)
—“Curt do you think that leftism is simply a mental illness or is there an actual reason why people adopt such an unreasonable belief system?”—
I think it’s a pre-cognitive genetic (evolutionary) strategy that some people have evolved just as conservatism is a genetic (evolutionary) strategy that others have evolved.
And I think the difference is caused by the female reproductive strategy that favors women and the lower classes, and male reproductive strategy that favors males and the middle/upper classes.
And this is confirmed pretty simply by the reproductive attractiveness of conservatives and liberals. Conservatives tend to be more reproductively desirable, and have greater agency. These are genetic markers.
My view is that we WERE speciating regionally by race when we discovered metalworking.
My view is that we are wealthy enough to speciate by need for commons – and that’s what we are in the process of doing.
And that the mistake is to think that our interests are better served by the production of COMPROMISE commons versus SPECIALIZED COMMONS that suit our reproductive strategies.
All peoples are better served by the production of SPECIALIZED COMMONS. And we can (finally) afford to produce them.
And that is what we see across the world.
WE NEED TO SPECIATE.
WOLVES(conservatives) Packs, and SHEEP(liberals) Herd.
Revolt, Separate, Prosper, Speciate.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-20 18:13:00 UTC