Curt Doolittle

Theme: Ethnoculture

  • COMPULSORY INTEGRATION (including language and dress)

    https://www.rt.com/news/391753-austria-burqa-ban-integration/AUSTRIA: COMPULSORY INTEGRATION

    (including language and dress)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-10 19:26:00 UTC

  • SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT Geographical circumstances and ‘timing’ led to the choic

    SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT

    Geographical circumstances and ‘timing’ led to the choice of very counter-to-type cultural norms, which produced as a consequence institutional, cultural, and technological superiority which resulted (as in east asia) in more rapid selection for neoteny and more rapid culling of the underclasses (the “Evil 80s”).

    It will be very, very, hard to defeat this argument btw.

    It is possible that europeans had developed genetic tendencies prior to the adoption of horse (steppe), wheel(europe), and bronze(armenian anatolia).

    However, as far as I can tell, it is unnecessary to rely on genetic accident, given that all of western civilizations advantages are explained without reliance on such accident. And there is no evidence that any other people could not adopt those same cultural, institutional, and genetic abilities by similar reduction of the underclasses alone.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-10 10:37:00 UTC

  • CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN ADAPTATION (worth repeating)

    CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN ADAPTATION

    (worth repeating)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-10 08:39:00 UTC

  • IQ TESTOSTERONE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RACIAL ADMIXTURES (worth repeating)

    IQ TESTOSTERONE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RACIAL ADMIXTURES

    (worth repeating)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-10 08:35:00 UTC

  • ARE THERE ANY GOOD ARGUMENTS FOR WHITE SUPREMACY THAT AREN’T RACIST?”— (omfg..

    https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-good-arguments-for-white-supremacy-without-being-racist/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=66fd9a7a&srid=u4Qv–“CURT: ARE THERE ANY GOOD ARGUMENTS FOR WHITE SUPREMACY THAT AREN’T RACIST?”—

    (omfg… sigh)

    If somehow acknowledging racial differences is ‘racism’ then no because you can’t ask the question, and you cant answer it either

    If ‘racism’ refers to treating an individual by the average properties of his race then that is a legitimate criticism of an illogical behavior.

    If ‘racism’ refers to criticism of the reproductive, cultural, political strategies of a competing group, rather than criticism of one’s inability to defend against the harm caused you by that group, then that’s illogical also.

    If ‘racism’ refers to a preference for nationalism or separatism in order to reduce conflicts between groups and improve the conditions of either by creating norms and institutions more suitable for each group’s differing wants and needs, then criticizing that is not rational.

    White ‘supremacy’ in nearly every field is simply a fact – although the reason for white success (the high cost of truth even if it may disrupt the dominance hierarchy, and therefore resulting in reason, debate, argument, common law, science, medicine, engineering, technology etc.) is something we have only recently begun to understand.

    White genetic supremacy does not appear correct – at least regarding the Han/Korean/Japanese. All racial groups both evolved in different geographical conditions and in doing so produced different levels of neoteny. With east asians most, whites next, mixed colors next, and blacks last. The reason being that whites and asians have been in homogenous groups a long time, under agrarianism and have succeeded at selecting for neoteny. And secondly, because of the pressures of agrarianism and the winter seasons, the asians and western europeans have more successfully reduced the sizes of the ‘troublesome’ (underclass) population leaving almost the entire population descendent from the genetic middle class. Every other race and subrace has dominated warmer climates where the rate of maturity as a means of surviving a higher disease gradient requires earlier maturity and deeper maturity and therefore limited selection for neoteny.

    The superiority of europeans appears to be the result of a rather small set of noble families never exceeding a few hundred thousand in total population combined with a middle class majority population who expanded downward as the lower and underclasses were reduced through starvation, disease, plague, war, and aggressive use of hanging.

    So because europeans and asians lived in homogenous groups that were somewhat insulated from sun belt density of diverse and nomadic pastoral peoples, they were able to genetically select (not so much evolve) for superior populations.

    The differences between china and europe are largely that china started earlier. THe muslims were not able to cause a thousand year dark age in china like they were in Europe by collapsing the four major ancient civilizations and reducing them to sub 85IQ averages.

    But the west is faster than china in both the ancient and modern worlds because of its institutions of ‘truthfulness’ instead of ‘face-saving’, which allowed the west to advance more quickly in both ancient and modern eras.

    I hope this helps.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-10 06:12:00 UTC

  • Are There Any Good Arguments For White Supremacy Without Being Racist?

    If somehow acknowledging racial differences is ‘racism’ then no because you can’t even ask the question, and so you cant answer it either

    If ‘racism’ refers to treating an individual by the average properties of his race then that is a legitimate criticism of an illogical behavior.

    If ‘racism’ refers to criticism of the reproductive, cultural, political strategies of a competing group, rather than criticism of one’s inability to defend against the harm caused you by that group, then that’s illogical also.

    If ‘racism’ refers to a preference for nationalism or separatism in order to reduce conflicts between groups and improve the conditions of either by creating norms and institutions more suitable for each group’s differing wants and needs, then criticizing that is not rational.

    White ‘supremacy’ in nearly every field is simply a fact – although the reason for white success (the high cost of truth even if it may disrupt the dominance hierarchy, and therefore resulting in reason, debate, argument, common law, science, medicine, engineering, technology etc.

    White genetic supremacy does not appear correct. all racial groups both evolved in different geographical conditions and in doing so produced different levels of neoteny. With asians most, whites next, mixed colors next, and blacks last. The reason being that whites and asians have been in homogenous groups a long time, under agrarianism and have succeeded at selecting for neoteny. And secondly, because of the pressures of agrarianism and the winter seasons, the asians and western europeans have more successfully reduced the sizes of the ‘troublesome’ (underclass) population leaving almost the entire population descendent from the genetic middle class. Every other race and subrace has dominated warmer climates where the rate of maturity as a means of surviving a higher disease gradient requires earlier maturity and deeper maturity and therefore limited selection for neoteny.

    The superiority of europeans appears to be the result of a rather small set of noble families never exceeding a few hundred thousand in total population combined with a middle class majority population who expanded downward.

    So because europeans and asians lived in homogenous groups that were somewhat insulated from sun belt density of diverse and nomadic pastoral peoples, they were able to genetically select (not so much evolve) for superior populations. The differences between china and europe are largely that china started earlier. THe muslims were not able to cause a thousand year dark age in china like they were in Europe by collapsing the four major ancient civilizations and reducing them to sub 85IQ averages. But the west is faster than china in both teh ancient and modern worlds because of its institutions of ‘truthfulness’ instead of ‘face-saving’, which allowed the west to advance more quickly in both ancient and modern eras.

    https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-good-arguments-for-white-supremacy-without-being-racist

  • Are There Any Good Arguments For White Supremacy Without Being Racist?

    If somehow acknowledging racial differences is ‘racism’ then no because you can’t even ask the question, and so you cant answer it either

    If ‘racism’ refers to treating an individual by the average properties of his race then that is a legitimate criticism of an illogical behavior.

    If ‘racism’ refers to criticism of the reproductive, cultural, political strategies of a competing group, rather than criticism of one’s inability to defend against the harm caused you by that group, then that’s illogical also.

    If ‘racism’ refers to a preference for nationalism or separatism in order to reduce conflicts between groups and improve the conditions of either by creating norms and institutions more suitable for each group’s differing wants and needs, then criticizing that is not rational.

    White ‘supremacy’ in nearly every field is simply a fact – although the reason for white success (the high cost of truth even if it may disrupt the dominance hierarchy, and therefore resulting in reason, debate, argument, common law, science, medicine, engineering, technology etc.

    White genetic supremacy does not appear correct. all racial groups both evolved in different geographical conditions and in doing so produced different levels of neoteny. With asians most, whites next, mixed colors next, and blacks last. The reason being that whites and asians have been in homogenous groups a long time, under agrarianism and have succeeded at selecting for neoteny. And secondly, because of the pressures of agrarianism and the winter seasons, the asians and western europeans have more successfully reduced the sizes of the ‘troublesome’ (underclass) population leaving almost the entire population descendent from the genetic middle class. Every other race and subrace has dominated warmer climates where the rate of maturity as a means of surviving a higher disease gradient requires earlier maturity and deeper maturity and therefore limited selection for neoteny.

    The superiority of europeans appears to be the result of a rather small set of noble families never exceeding a few hundred thousand in total population combined with a middle class majority population who expanded downward.

    So because europeans and asians lived in homogenous groups that were somewhat insulated from sun belt density of diverse and nomadic pastoral peoples, they were able to genetically select (not so much evolve) for superior populations. The differences between china and europe are largely that china started earlier. THe muslims were not able to cause a thousand year dark age in china like they were in Europe by collapsing the four major ancient civilizations and reducing them to sub 85IQ averages. But the west is faster than china in both teh ancient and modern worlds because of its institutions of ‘truthfulness’ instead of ‘face-saving’, which allowed the west to advance more quickly in both ancient and modern eras.

    https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-good-arguments-for-white-supremacy-without-being-racist

  • I DON’T HATE ON PEOPLE. SORRY. IN THAT SENSE I AM A CHRISTIAN. My point is, don’

    I DON’T HATE ON PEOPLE. SORRY. IN THAT SENSE I AM A CHRISTIAN.

    My point is, don’t criticize or counter-signal me because I don’t climb on the racist bandwagon; because I counter-signal demands that I join the racist bandwagon. And i counter-signal the use of my work for the purpose of advocating racism.

    I don’t hate on people. I hate on ideas. I may hate on some genes. I may hate a bit on nature once in awhile. But I don’t hate on people because of their race. Their strategy, their government, their culture, their beliefs, and their actions.

    I am a christian to the extent that I have understood and adopted the teaching of christianity: 1) the eradication of hatred from the human heart. 2) the extension of kinship love to non-kin. 3) the extension of exhaustive tit-for-tat before going to war. And 4) I retain the Aryan conviction that once we go to war, we do so with *joy*, and without mercy, without constraint, without remorse – defeat an enemy completely such that no other dares a condition of your enemy.

    I understand all people must follow our reproductive incentives. We have no other rational means of choice. But I try to solve the underlying problem. The underlying problem is DC/NY imperialism, a demographic government, abrahamism/marxism/postmodernism, and most of all, the lack of rule of law by the natural law of reciprocity, and the perpetual militia necessary to preserve it.

    I want EVERYONE to be free to form nations that produce the commons they NEED for their state of genetic development, and their distribution of abilities.

    And I want everyone to be accountable for the domestication of their own people rather than offloading that cost onto others (especially us).

    And if I don’t join on the “LET’S FAIL AGAIN PLEASE” bandwagon of promoting fictionalism in order to compensate for the remaining inferiority of the distribution of my own ‘white’ kin, then, understand, that’s OK with me. I’m not after the attention of the common man. I’m after creating an answer to the Frankfurt School – this time via truth, that prevents all further abrahamic deceptions. And then using small numbers to start a revolution that will spiral – not from understanding of my arguments, but from opportunity to obtain what they desire. And I hope most of all to use the very threat and possibility of it, to cause serious conversation about the restoration of natural law and markets in everything through the restoration of reciprocity and truthful speech.

    If you want to “FAIL AGAIN PLEASE” then you’re welcome to. Some of us favor voluntary religion (fictionalism) and some of us favor involuntary law (truth). We all pursue those actions within our realm of comprehension and ability. The common man is not my audience or my objective. A few angry men that need an organization to assist them is.

    I know that I can produce weapons that few can make use of. Others can adopt for their use. And others adopt from those adoptions. I have said all along that this is my strategy. It has been since I went public.

    I’m going to end abrahamism forever. And that means ending fictionalism forever. And that means ONLY THE SMART AND THE STRONG WILL RULE.

    And that is what I’m aiming for.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 11:28:00 UTC

  • EDUCATION IS CRUEL TO BOYS AND MEN It’s F—KING CRUEL to put black kids in the

    EDUCATION IS CRUEL TO BOYS AND MEN

    It’s F—KING CRUEL to put black kids in the same classrooms and taught the same way as whites and asians.

    Hell, it’s cruel to whites to put them in the same classroom with asians. I mean, asian kids are amazing right out out of the womb. My son (very scandianvian, bigger, stronger, more aggressive) nearly got kicked out of school. Not because he exercises dominance. But because he won’t tolerate dominance of him – and will do something about some annoying kid who dominates him in noisiness, word, or action.

    The more rapid the maturity and the deeper the maturity the higher the ratio of physical exercise to classroom teaching is necessary to NOT produce brain damage in boys.

    The more experiential the girls, the more team sports are necessary so that girls are socialized so that they can learn to manage their emotions.

    I mean think of all the damage this postmodernism in education does to our people!!!!

    There was a point I wanted to open an inner city school for black men just so I could prove that the problem is entirely solvable by teaching everything physically instead of in-situ.

    ALmost all boys benefit from Military school with a lot of sports.

    Almost all girls benefit from any individual or team sport.

    Civilization consists of the suppression of animal impulse and the direction of dominance to the war and market rather than each other.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 10:09:00 UTC

  • INTERNATIONAL ETHICS: I’M A SCIENTIST: NOT A RACIST, I’M A CLASSIST, AND A NATIO

    INTERNATIONAL ETHICS: I’M A SCIENTIST: NOT A RACIST, I’M A CLASSIST, AND A NATIONALIST. HERE IS WHY….

    I just want to respond to this: I don’t do racism. The problem for all races, and subraces as far as I can tell, is that we have all specialized in some form of extreme. East in industriousness and Neoteny and West in creativity and Neoteny. Africa in hostile-environment resistance and sociability and deep maturity. South Asians in warm weather survival and sociability. Desert (semitic) and steppe (all others) people in masculine features (small brains) and aggression. And the ashkenazi – the strangest of all – reversing sexual dimorphism and transferring female verbal skills to males.

    So given our specializations, the people one standard deviation above the white mean are all fine with each other. The problem is that the more of your population that is below a mean of 112/115, the more burden it places on adaptation to modernity because the cost of education and training is too high, and the cost of developing high trust norms is either too high or impossible, given the *incentives available by commercial means*.

    Hence why lower trust lower IQ populations do not rely on commercial incentives, and instead rely on religious, social, and physical incentives. In other words the old problem of the tripartite aristocracy remains: the lower class must be culled consistently and the middle class maximized, because it is this single issue that determines rates of progress. All the rest is merely institutions that assist us in cooperation.

    For these reasons I’m pro nationalism because the only moral means by which an underclass can be minimized is by its own kin, who do so in the interest of kin’s transcendence.

    That last sentence constitutes my standing on global political morality: domesticate your kin, and do not force others do domesticate your kin. If others are domesticating your kin, they are just in doing so, because your failure to domesticate your kin is the reason, and only reason, we are in conflict.

    Do not export your failures to others.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 07:43:00 UTC