Curt Doolittle

Theme: Ethnoculture

  • What Races Are The Most Racist?

    We actually have quite a bit of data. The data I have seen is cross compiled from a number of surveys and has something just under 100K samples – which is about what you need for something of this size. (No studies of less than 1000 are meaningful, and at 10,000 we begin to see some value

    The top ten most racist and bigoted countries, in descending order, are the following:

    1. India,
    2. Lebanon,
    3. Bahrain,
    4. Libya,
    5. Egypt,
    6. Philippines,
    7. Kuwait,
    8. Palestine,
    9. South Africa, and
    10. South Korea.

    In american, the most racist people are

    1. Blacks
    2. Jews
    3. Hispanics
    4. Asians
    5. Whites

    White people are the most tolerant and accepting – in the world.

    White people are just the most likely to be INVADED because they produce the best *Commons* in the world, and therefore the best life experience.

    So whites experience the PROBLEM of racial conflict more often. So the question arises more frequently.

    Anyway. It’s the opposite of what you’d think.

    https://www.quora.com/What-races-are-the-most-racist

  • Are Australians More Or Less Cultured Than Americans?

    Australians are better MANNERED than americans, by far. Largely because they have not had the problems with immigration that the USA has had during the 20th century.

    As for cultured, i think they’re about the same.

    https://www.quora.com/Are-Australians-more-or-less-cultured-than-Americans

  • Are You White?

    Yes, and very proud of it.

    https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Are-you-white

  • Can The Usa Become A Third World Country?

    GOOD QUESTION, AND THE ANSWER IS “EASILY”.

    Quite easily. Statistically it is very close to a certainty. Why? Becuase (uncomfortable truth) the difference between first world and third world countries is the size of the underclass. First world countries, during the medieval period, were successful in reducing the underclasses through aggressive use of law, war, malthusian crop yields, and disease.

    Today’s third world countries cannot produce goods and services of sufficient value to compete on the world’s markets. Ergo there is no means of organizing a voluntary organization of production (consumer capitalist economy).

    In painful terms, the reality is that as a nation’ s IQ drops below 100, the ability to compete on the world stage is increasinlly difficult, and as far as I am able to determine, that number will only increase over time.

    If you add to that problem, a regressive religion, or a familial low trust culture, or a tendency for corruption, or the ‘resource curse’, then the problem is impossible to overcome.

    As far as I know, south africa and brazil are the most likely futures available to the western world.

    Americans have imported vast numbers of third world underclasses who are breeding at rates far above those with superior genetic markers. So as far as I can see, there is no way of fixing this problem now.

    The only prudent peoples on the planet today are the swiss and the japanese.

    https://www.quora.com/Can-the-USA-become-a-third-world-country

  • Are You White?

    Yes, and very proud of it.

    https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Are-you-white

  • Can The Usa Become A Third World Country?

    GOOD QUESTION, AND THE ANSWER IS “EASILY”.

    Quite easily. Statistically it is very close to a certainty. Why? Becuase (uncomfortable truth) the difference between first world and third world countries is the size of the underclass. First world countries, during the medieval period, were successful in reducing the underclasses through aggressive use of law, war, malthusian crop yields, and disease.

    Today’s third world countries cannot produce goods and services of sufficient value to compete on the world’s markets. Ergo there is no means of organizing a voluntary organization of production (consumer capitalist economy).

    In painful terms, the reality is that as a nation’ s IQ drops below 100, the ability to compete on the world stage is increasinlly difficult, and as far as I am able to determine, that number will only increase over time.

    If you add to that problem, a regressive religion, or a familial low trust culture, or a tendency for corruption, or the ‘resource curse’, then the problem is impossible to overcome.

    As far as I know, south africa and brazil are the most likely futures available to the western world.

    Americans have imported vast numbers of third world underclasses who are breeding at rates far above those with superior genetic markers. So as far as I can see, there is no way of fixing this problem now.

    The only prudent peoples on the planet today are the swiss and the japanese.

    https://www.quora.com/Can-the-USA-become-a-third-world-country

  • “My perspective is that all cultures specifically European have a capacity for l

    —“My perspective is that all cultures specifically European have a capacity for language-centricity and would have been attracted over time to aesthetic variants of Judaism”—Kashif Vikaas —“Have a feeling language-centricity entered into culture from the low-context side.”—Kashif Vikaas

  • “My perspective is that all cultures specifically European have a capacity for l

    —“My perspective is that all cultures specifically European have a capacity for language-centricity and would have been attracted over time to aesthetic variants of Judaism”—Kashif Vikaas —“Have a feeling language-centricity entered into culture from the low-context side.”—Kashif Vikaas

  • “My perspective is that all cultures specifically European have a capacity for l

    —“My perspective is that all cultures specifically European have a capacity for language-centricity and would have been attracted over time to aesthetic variants of Judaism”—Kashif Vikaas

    —“Have a feeling language-centricity entered into culture from the low-context side.”—Kashif Vikaas

    Source date (UTC): 2017-12-14 14:52:00 UTC

  • via Michael Churchill Ken Wilber: Multiculturalism is highly evolved … but won

    via Michael Churchill Ken Wilber: Multiculturalism is highly evolved … but won’t admit it. Wilber has a fabulous breakdown of the ethical knots the left gets into by embracing multiculturalism as an end in itself. In Wilber’s model of human development, elite democrats are at a higher stage of evolution than garden-variety republicans. Generally speaking, the elite left sees that there are multiple valid perspectives, whereas the middle-brow right tends to focus on the Truth of just one perspective. The former is more evolved … BUT there is a huge caveat to this. Wilber makes his case eloquently on pages 171-173 of A Brief History of Everything: 1) ACHIEVING the multiculturalist worldview (i.e grasping the validity of diverse viewpoints and cultures) is a very rare, difficult and elite accomplishment. 2) While you yourself may have evolved from egocentric to ethnocentric to worldcentric, and see that everyone deserves equal opportunity, few of the people you treat with your universalist consideration SHARE your universalism. They are not as evolved as you are — they are still egocentric or ethnocentric. You are extending universalist courtesy to people who absolutely won’t extend the same courtesy to you. This creates multiple contradictions for the multiculturalist: * The multiculturalist claims to be non-elite, but the mere capacity for worldcentric pluralism is a rare, elite accomplishment. (Only 10% of Americans have achieved it.) “So multiculturalism is a very elite stance that then claims it is not elitest.” * The multiculturalist confuses his highly evolved stance with the fact that getting to that high stance is a very rare and difficult accomplishment. * The multiculturalist claims we must treat all individuals and movements the same (no hierarchies) … and thus has no language to argue why some movements can or should be shunned. [In theory this leaves the multiculturalist in a position where he has to accept the KKK and Nazis as valid positions, but in reality he gets around this by claiming that only white supremacy is bad. Thus the ethnocentric movements of other races get a free pass.] At the core, the multiculturalist cannot allow for superior and inferior stances because he denies distinctions between stances altogether. Because the multiculturalist cannot defend the contradiction in this position, he is forced to become completely intolerant of anyone who disagrees. The result is censorship of dissenting opinions. “And so off we go with vicious intolerance in the name of tolerance, censorship in the name of compassion, with we-know-best thought police and mindless political correctness — with a bunch of elitists trying to outlaw everybody else’s elitisms … They have an elite stance that denies its own elitism — and they are lying about their actual identity. They have a false self system. And that is an identity crisis.” “The American universities have been hijacked by it. All that is doing is contributing to the retribalization of America.”