Curt Doolittle

Theme: Ethnoculture

  • MORALS ARE NOT RELATIVE, BUT REFLECT GENETIC DISTANCE We can and do certainly po

    MORALS ARE NOT RELATIVE, BUT REFLECT GENETIC DISTANCE

    We can and do certainly possess different moral biases, and we can and do certainly possess normative moral biases. This is true.

    But that does not mean that moral differences are not decidable in matters of conflict.

    We can use moral biases to seek allies. We can trade across moral biases when we have common interests. And we can decide moral between moral biases when we are in conflict.

    That means that there exist an objectively decidable morality, but that each of us requires reproductive moral allies, uses moral competitors when necessary, and resorts to objective morality in matters of conflict resolution.

    There is no such thing as moral relativism. We possess moral biases, both genetic, familial, and normative. We seek allies, trading partners, and judges for matters of conflict.

    It is entirely possible to judge within families, within norms, within trading partners, and within competitors, by objective, scientific, rational means: natural law of non-imposition.

    We may not like this. But then knowing that such decidability exists at the familial, normative, trade, and competitor ‘distances’ requires us only to understand the criteria at the familial, normative, trade, and competitor distances.

    We sacrifice for kin and competitors will not bear sacrifice. We need not benefit from kin but we must benefit from trading partners. And so on.

    The greater the genetic and moral distance the more objective the criteria of decidability.

    But those differences remain decidable.

    Why? Because the only by which we can escape retaliation and preserve cooperation is that of the non-imposition of costs upon one another.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-10-15 15:29:00 UTC

  • OUR OBJECTIVE IS FAMILY, TRIBE AND NATION. COOPERATION IS ONLY A TOOL TO ADVANCE

    OUR OBJECTIVE IS FAMILY, TRIBE AND NATION. COOPERATION IS ONLY A TOOL TO ADVANCE THEM.

    We cooperate across families only in so far as it advances each of our families. That is not the same as stating a universal human good. As soon as you breach the wall between family and corporatism, then you are removing my incentive to cooperate. My incentive once we no longer cooperate is to either prey upon you, or conquer you and restore the interests of my family.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2016-10-15 13:46:00 UTC

  • “I HAVE A DREAM” –“End the genocide. Fuck the house, the car and the TV. You ca

    “I HAVE A DREAM”

    –“End the genocide. Fuck the house, the car and the TV. You can have them. I want my people, our culture and a nation.”–

    Source date (UTC): 2016-10-14 11:42:00 UTC

  • “The Yamnaya are to Aryans what Abraham is to the Jews.”—Alexander Zavialov

    “The Yamnaya are to Aryans what Abraham is to the Jews.”—Alexander Zavialov

    Source date (UTC): 2016-10-11 07:49:00 UTC

  • “Modern Brits, whether they be Scots or Englishmen or Northern Irish, are all a

    —“Modern Brits, whether they be Scots or Englishmen or Northern Irish, are all a mix between Yamnaya, Western Hunter-Gatherers and Early European Farmers. They have been on the island for 6000 years (Bell Beakers). Before that, you had the pre-Indo-European inhabitants that Ulysses speaks of. Although they never really disappeared, they just mixed with the dominant Bell Beakers to form a single cohesive people.”—Alexander Zavialov

    Alexander Zavialov is amazing.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-10-11 07:02:00 UTC

  • We Have No Recourse But Civil War

    Democrats own responsibility for the 1965 immigration bill designed to flood the country with underclasses – reversing two centuries of the Puritan’s American eugenic experimentation. Why? Because socialism is undesirable to the productive people, and the people would not have it. The democrats are responsible for the destruction of the family. And the destruction of the family as the central object of policy: creating good strong productive, inter generational families.

    Democrats are responsible for moving the black family from the farm to the ghetto and destroying their families. The reason? To concentrate votes in cities in order to politically take their possession. Democrats are responsible for ongoing racial hatred be forced bussing and urban planning. Traditions, norms, and habits in any subculture are grown through adaptation over generations. There is no shortcut. Forced integration we’d the catastrophe that took the black man from potential working class to permanent underclass by interfering with the necessary natural adaptation to western high trust low impulse civic society. Democrats are responsible for the competitive decline of education, and blocking all attempts at reform. Why? Control of education using unskilled labor (most teachers ) is useful in indoctrinating generations into socialist submission. Furthermore, it allows women the false hope that their children are by and large mediocre and that the only control they have over the success of their offspring is the quality of man they choose to reproduce with. Democrats are responsible for the disintegration of rule of law. By intentionally designed suits that create law though activist judges. Democrats are responsible for all our ills. They set out with the help of early socialists to steal a continent by importing votes, creating single mothers, and constructing permanent underclasses. We have no recourse but civil war. Welcome to the revolution.

  • We Have No Recourse But Civil War

    Democrats own responsibility for the 1965 immigration bill designed to flood the country with underclasses – reversing two centuries of the Puritan’s American eugenic experimentation. Why? Because socialism is undesirable to the productive people, and the people would not have it. The democrats are responsible for the destruction of the family. And the destruction of the family as the central object of policy: creating good strong productive, inter generational families.

    Democrats are responsible for moving the black family from the farm to the ghetto and destroying their families. The reason? To concentrate votes in cities in order to politically take their possession. Democrats are responsible for ongoing racial hatred be forced bussing and urban planning. Traditions, norms, and habits in any subculture are grown through adaptation over generations. There is no shortcut. Forced integration we’d the catastrophe that took the black man from potential working class to permanent underclass by interfering with the necessary natural adaptation to western high trust low impulse civic society. Democrats are responsible for the competitive decline of education, and blocking all attempts at reform. Why? Control of education using unskilled labor (most teachers ) is useful in indoctrinating generations into socialist submission. Furthermore, it allows women the false hope that their children are by and large mediocre and that the only control they have over the success of their offspring is the quality of man they choose to reproduce with. Democrats are responsible for the disintegration of rule of law. By intentionally designed suits that create law though activist judges. Democrats are responsible for all our ills. They set out with the help of early socialists to steal a continent by importing votes, creating single mothers, and constructing permanent underclasses. We have no recourse but civil war. Welcome to the revolution.

  • Spanish Rule?

    Q&A: —“I’ve been interested in the case of Spain for some time, as my ancestors are primarily Spanish. And I wanted to understand the reasons for the rise of the Spanish and if they had any philosophical contributions to the western World. If you saw no reason to comment on the Spanish, I don’t wish to take your attention away from something which could be more useful. But, if there is anything to say about the Spanish, I would certainly be willing to read what you have.”— David David, The Spanish question is interesting because Spanish philosophers were central to the Scholastic movement, the Spanish empire was so powerful, and so successful but rapidly evaporated under industrialization. So that the Spanish had lost their position by the time of the enlightenment’s transfer of power from the landed to the merchant classes, and the vast inte The argument for why this happened is well understood: 1) The Spanish were a hardworking people, and meaningful commercial leaders as trade spread from the Mediterranean to the atlantic.. 2) The peak in spanish contirbution to philosophy occurred in Catalan where the Translators of Toledo first translated greek texts from arabic into latin, then to catalan. This set of translations created what we know as the modern spanish language. And is probably the basis for what we call today ‘spain’. And it was the latin translations that reintroduced europe to science and philosophy. 3) The discovery of the new world created an enormous influx of gold (currency).Spain spent its wealth on wars, notably against the low countries (Netherlands). 4) As we see with Americans, unearned wealth tends to make a people lazy, and they seek status signals not productivity. And decline after wealth is very difficult for a people to work through. 5) With the people ‘ruined’ from this process of expansion, wealth, war, and failure to convert to industrialization, they did not produce an enlightenment on the scale of england, france, germany, or ashkenazi-dom (eastern europe and russia). And spain devolved into a relatively poor country despite being second only to the UK in the territorial expansion of spanish language and genetics. 6) Spanish cultural, military, and economic excellence was was the product of Austrian not Spanish rule. Just as eastern european excellence was the product of german and Austrian rule. (see Kennedy’s bookhttps://en.wikipedia.org/…/The_Rise_and_Fall_of_the_Great_P…) And when the Hapsburgs declined, so did aristocratic influence in spain. So, Spain went into decline, and she was unable to maintain her colonies when the Americans and British chose to deny her access to first the caribbean, and then south america. Read anything basic you can find on the rise and fall of Hapsburg Spain. But I will say something uncomfortable: That Spain ascended under Roman, Muslim, and Austrian rule, but could not maintain that ascent under her own rule. SO WHY IS THAT? Something we must ponder. But most of us probably attribute this to geographic location, and mediterranean (hot weather) culture, catholicism, and the failure of Spainish culture to join the Hanjal Line and develop the absolute nuclear family, and low corruption we see in protestant countries that still practice ‘the oath’. Curt Doolittle

  • Spanish Rule?

    Q&A: —“I’ve been interested in the case of Spain for some time, as my ancestors are primarily Spanish. And I wanted to understand the reasons for the rise of the Spanish and if they had any philosophical contributions to the western World. If you saw no reason to comment on the Spanish, I don’t wish to take your attention away from something which could be more useful. But, if there is anything to say about the Spanish, I would certainly be willing to read what you have.”— David David, The Spanish question is interesting because Spanish philosophers were central to the Scholastic movement, the Spanish empire was so powerful, and so successful but rapidly evaporated under industrialization. So that the Spanish had lost their position by the time of the enlightenment’s transfer of power from the landed to the merchant classes, and the vast inte The argument for why this happened is well understood: 1) The Spanish were a hardworking people, and meaningful commercial leaders as trade spread from the Mediterranean to the atlantic.. 2) The peak in spanish contirbution to philosophy occurred in Catalan where the Translators of Toledo first translated greek texts from arabic into latin, then to catalan. This set of translations created what we know as the modern spanish language. And is probably the basis for what we call today ‘spain’. And it was the latin translations that reintroduced europe to science and philosophy. 3) The discovery of the new world created an enormous influx of gold (currency).Spain spent its wealth on wars, notably against the low countries (Netherlands). 4) As we see with Americans, unearned wealth tends to make a people lazy, and they seek status signals not productivity. And decline after wealth is very difficult for a people to work through. 5) With the people ‘ruined’ from this process of expansion, wealth, war, and failure to convert to industrialization, they did not produce an enlightenment on the scale of england, france, germany, or ashkenazi-dom (eastern europe and russia). And spain devolved into a relatively poor country despite being second only to the UK in the territorial expansion of spanish language and genetics. 6) Spanish cultural, military, and economic excellence was was the product of Austrian not Spanish rule. Just as eastern european excellence was the product of german and Austrian rule. (see Kennedy’s bookhttps://en.wikipedia.org/…/The_Rise_and_Fall_of_the_Great_P…) And when the Hapsburgs declined, so did aristocratic influence in spain. So, Spain went into decline, and she was unable to maintain her colonies when the Americans and British chose to deny her access to first the caribbean, and then south america. Read anything basic you can find on the rise and fall of Hapsburg Spain. But I will say something uncomfortable: That Spain ascended under Roman, Muslim, and Austrian rule, but could not maintain that ascent under her own rule. SO WHY IS THAT? Something we must ponder. But most of us probably attribute this to geographic location, and mediterranean (hot weather) culture, catholicism, and the failure of Spainish culture to join the Hanjal Line and develop the absolute nuclear family, and low corruption we see in protestant countries that still practice ‘the oath’. Curt Doolittle

  • More On Spain

    I have learned this mostly from my friends in south america. And we now have the genetic data, testing data, and economic data to confirm it. But the problem facing south america is that there are just toooooo many people at the bottom for the people at the top to provide sufficient incentives to the middle class, who in turn will provide sufficient incenties to the lower class, so that it’s possible to productively organize society. It’s not as bad as islamic countrires, where people are highly illiterate and where Islam teaches people that they can be emotionally expressive and emotionally impulsive. At least south american s are still christian. But it’s just almost impossible to create a window within which the people can be organized, and a sufficient middle class developed, to raise the population out of poverty.