Curt Doolittle

Theme: Governance

  • Can A Common Man With Average Intelligence Make A Significant Change In Society?

    An important and interesting question,  So I will do my best. Although you might not like the answer.

    1) Well, a common man certainly can make a positive impact on society merely by accumulating and making use of the Virtues. 

    2) Common many have made positive impact accidentally on the world by virtuous action at the right moment in time.  But that is not to say that they possessed a brilliant idea or persuasive character. It means only that as virtuous people they seized an opportunity when it came before them, even if they did not construct that opportunity themselves.

    3) The historical record suggests that most people who make a significant POSITIVE impact on society are not average. In fact, the record is almost absent of common individuals.  The people who do make a significant impact tend to be above average, largely from the middle or upper middle classes – in other words, not common. 

    4) The interesting question is whether the common man, correctly estimates that his reasons, opinions or imaginations, would produce what is a POSITIVE impact upon society.  If you imagine what a child sounds like to an adult; what a student sounds like to a professor; what a common citizen sounds like to a statesman or scholar – the result is always the same: that we are always unconscious of our incompetence. If we were aware of our incompetence we might lack the will to do anything at all. So we evolved confidence in the face of ignorance out of necessity. 

    So the question is really whether the common man has any significant value to add to society other than his assumption that he does.  On the other hand, there are many people who are not average who none the less are not omniscient, always looking for ideas to use in changing the world.

    And so, it is possible that an ordinary fellow might stumble across a good idea. But even if he did, is it possible for his idea to compete with the many many ideas, of all the individuals who are above average, and who are ALSO struggling to change the world?

    The market for ideas is no different from the market for products and services. If you cannot sell your idea, that is because no one is buying it. If no one buys it then that is evidence that it isn’t wanted. If it isn’t wanted, then by definition, it isn’t ‘good’.

    The greeks had it right you know: wisdom is found in increasing the knowledge of your own ignorance.

    https://www.quora.com/Can-a-common-man-with-average-intelligence-make-a-significant-change-in-society

  • Can A Common Man With Average Intelligence Make A Significant Change In Society?

    An important and interesting question,  So I will do my best. Although you might not like the answer.

    1) Well, a common man certainly can make a positive impact on society merely by accumulating and making use of the Virtues. 

    2) Common many have made positive impact accidentally on the world by virtuous action at the right moment in time.  But that is not to say that they possessed a brilliant idea or persuasive character. It means only that as virtuous people they seized an opportunity when it came before them, even if they did not construct that opportunity themselves.

    3) The historical record suggests that most people who make a significant POSITIVE impact on society are not average. In fact, the record is almost absent of common individuals.  The people who do make a significant impact tend to be above average, largely from the middle or upper middle classes – in other words, not common. 

    4) The interesting question is whether the common man, correctly estimates that his reasons, opinions or imaginations, would produce what is a POSITIVE impact upon society.  If you imagine what a child sounds like to an adult; what a student sounds like to a professor; what a common citizen sounds like to a statesman or scholar – the result is always the same: that we are always unconscious of our incompetence. If we were aware of our incompetence we might lack the will to do anything at all. So we evolved confidence in the face of ignorance out of necessity. 

    So the question is really whether the common man has any significant value to add to society other than his assumption that he does.  On the other hand, there are many people who are not average who none the less are not omniscient, always looking for ideas to use in changing the world.

    And so, it is possible that an ordinary fellow might stumble across a good idea. But even if he did, is it possible for his idea to compete with the many many ideas, of all the individuals who are above average, and who are ALSO struggling to change the world?

    The market for ideas is no different from the market for products and services. If you cannot sell your idea, that is because no one is buying it. If no one buys it then that is evidence that it isn’t wanted. If it isn’t wanted, then by definition, it isn’t ‘good’.

    The greeks had it right you know: wisdom is found in increasing the knowledge of your own ignorance.

    https://www.quora.com/Can-a-common-man-with-average-intelligence-make-a-significant-change-in-society

  • WE ARE NOT AFRAID OF A NATIONALIST RUSSIA – NATIONALISM IS A GOOD THING WE NEED

    http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/how-nationalism-came-to-dominate-russia-s-political-mainstream/504495.htmlNO WE ARE NOT AFRAID OF A NATIONALIST RUSSIA – NATIONALISM IS A GOOD THING WE NEED MORE OF

    We westerners are not terrified of a Nationalistic Russia. The Western right LOVES a nationalist Russia. We WANT a strong Russia. What the west doesn’t want, and the world doesn’t want, is a breakdown of the postwar consensus on fixed borders. And none of the eastern europeans want to be subjected to more Russian deceit, corruption, violence and murder. Russia is a corrupt country, with a corrupt government, and russians demonstrate low trust, and low regard for the commons. Europeans, even western europeans, desire a high trust western society, with high regard for the commons. Russians depend on resource wealth to compenate for their low trust and corrupt society. Eastern europeans cannot depend upon resource wealth – they must generate economies that participate with the rest of the world.

    All this moralizing and propaganda from Russia is just populist nonsense. We assumed Russia would mature into a modern democracy by slowly building an economy that integrated with the rest of the world.

    A nationalist Russia that is militarily strong is good for the west since it keeps Russia’s eastern conflict zone, and southern spheres of influence, with their 90 IQ societies, from being a problem for the rest of the world. The west needs a strong Russia. What the west doesn’t need is for Russia to spread the corruption, dishonesty, and low-trust of Russian society to countries that must participate in the world economy to obtain a western standard of living.

    It’s not complicated.

    ——

    LETTER TO RUSSIA FROM KIEV

    Dear Russia,

    We love you ok. You’re white. So we actually consider you part of the tribe. And yes, we westerners are kind of destroying Western civilization with abandon. And you’re right to reject that. And while we really don’t want to be in conflict with you, we do ask you to please keep your dysfunctional family, and dysfunctional political problems in your own house. We have problems but your problems are worse. Corruption, deception, pseudoscience, alcoholism, violence and mass murder are things russians are really good at. And we really don’t need you to export them to us. I mean, you killed enough of us already, haven’t you?

    And you kind of screwed up right? You could have let the USA continue withdrawing from Europe, softly guaranteed Europe’s safety militarily, and protect shipping on the high seas, and continued to spend the next 20 years integrating Russian resource dependence into the western economies. You could have imported western technology and law, behavior, and exported ‘resources, manliness, nationalism, and unity’ to the west. You could have accomplished the unification of the circumpolar peoples.

    But you screwed up. Yet again.

    Why is it that Russians, at every opportunity, make the wrong decision? It’s just amazing. It’s exasperating. Every time you can play the long run you screw it up.

    Please get your act together, and lead.

    Russia: why are you constantly the white people who fail?

    Thanks.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-04 02:12:00 UTC

  • GETING CLOSER : UNIVERSALISM AND HIGH TRUST Integration into a high trust polity

    GETING CLOSER : UNIVERSALISM AND HIGH TRUST

    Integration into a high trust polity, without damage (without parasitism or conquest), requires high trust, which in turn requires, truth telling, the nuclear family with prohibition on cousin marriage, legal enforcement of not only criminal but both ethical and moral prohibitions, codified as property rights, universal standing and loser-pays, use of the common language, eliminating of separatist dress, and celebration of the same holidays, and contributory production.

    Cultural heterogeneity in the sense, that we aggregate into neighborhoods and rely on different rituals and signals within our tribes, is only possible if we adopt all theses high trust constraints.

    The problem is that while we do that and people from every society can volunteer to do that, many people prefer to host in a high trust society as parasites. And for many groups, it is a necessary reproductive advantage. And advantage without which they would be absorbed into the polity at the loss of their identity.

    So in this sense, you can retain your signaling identity but not your reproductive and competitive strategies.

    I think that is enough to separate those who wish to integrate from those who wish to conduct parasitism.

    WE GET AROUND OUR CURSE OF ALTRUISM WITH TRUTH, CALCULABILITY, AND UNIVERSAL ENFORCEMENT BY UNIVERSAL STANDING.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-03 03:12:00 UTC

  • WHAT IS CURT DOING? DRIVING TOWARD FASCISM? (NO) Just a note to tame the people

    WHAT IS CURT DOING? DRIVING TOWARD FASCISM? (NO)

    Just a note to tame the people I might make nervous: Don’t get ahead of me. I have already solved the institutional problem of a heterogeneous system of cooperation over homogenous normative polities – the way we demonstrate that want to live. Shared cooperation but tribal homes. Insurance at scale. I solved that first. The problem has always been in explaining why it’s necessary, and why its the ONLY institutional solution to heterogeneous polity: calculability.

    We have to stop people from trying to steal. The history of the evolution of the suppression of free riding is that we must expand our definition of property with the expansion of what we use as property. The commons is property. That property can be polluted with lies, or constantly maintained by truthful debate.

    It’s not that complicated. We’ve been doing it mostly right for 4500 years.

    I work by constructing arguments out of necessary propositions constrained by a few assumptions: liberty, prosperity, and rates of innovation that improve our genetic competitiveness against others who are doing the same. Our western strength has been the degree with which we have maintained conceptual correspondence with reality while increasing the population we cooperate with. This turns out to produce the greatest rate of innovation of any civilization, allow us out here on the fringe to ‘come from behind’ repeatedly.

    The side effect is that we get to profit from selling these innovations to others, just as others previously benefitted from selling their innovations to us. But we have always been in small numbers. And we are returning to a people of small numbers. And we have lost our advantage.

    So when I work I run down ideas and test them via argument. some of them succeed and some of them fail. I reinforce the ones that succeed, and discard those that fail. Sometimes I have to abandon entire strains of thought. But when I have an idea, I take it to market and find people to criticize it. And I improve it more.

    Right now I am trying to find a solution to what I call ‘lying’ or ‘shipping fraudulent intellectual product’. And while I know the basis of it, I see something very interesting out on the horizon at least as interesting as the other ideas I’ve produced.

    And so I am constructing arguments that function as a bridge that extends in that direction.

    Curt

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-01 07:45:00 UTC

  • RESTATING MACDONALD: THE FULL POLITICAL SPECTRUM OF ADVOCACY OK, so extending on

    RESTATING MACDONALD: THE FULL POLITICAL SPECTRUM OF ADVOCACY

    OK, so extending on Macdonald, Critique is a method of attacking western civilization by all possible political ideologies, from every class at once:

    ARISTOCRATIC CLASS: Straussian Neoconservatism: International critique: extension of altruistic punishment, and justification of punishment, to the rest of the world. Complaint by the Aristocratic (military) class.

    UPPER MIDDLE: Misesian Pseudoscience: Critique of the state financial system as a tool of the genetically homogenous polity. Complaint by the upper middle (financial) class.

    MIDDLE: Rothbardian libertarianism: critique of the polity as a legally, culturally, and genetically, homogenous entity for the advancement of that genetically homogenous polity. Complaint by the middle (merchant and professional) class.

    LOWER: Marxism, Pseudoscientific Socialism, Irrationalist Postmodernism: Critique of industry as a tool of the genetically homogenous polity. Complaint by lower (the working and craftsman), priestly, public intellectual, and academic classes.

    The systematic conversion of an heroic homogenous outbred polity into a guilt driven polity by exacerbating their sense of altruism and altruistic punishment – and in doing so bribing the intellectual classes to obtain populist power under democracy by justifying the altruistic punishment of, and self destruction of, the homogenous polity, to the advantage of the insurgent polity.

    IT ONLY SEEMS LIKE A LEFTIST CONSPIRACY

    It isn’t. It’s a united front against our people and our civilization from every class.

    ANTI-CONSPIRACY NOTE

    Note that I don’t see this as an intentional conspiracy, but the following of genetic and cultural incentives to exploit all available opportunities for expansion.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-01 07:39:00 UTC

  • ABBREVIATED GLOSSARY LIST (list of some key terms) ARISTOCRATIC EGALITARIANISM A

    ABBREVIATED GLOSSARY LIST

    (list of some key terms)

    ARISTOCRATIC EGALITARIANISM

    Aristocracy. Aristocratic Egalitarianism (open entry). Enfranchisement(voluntary). Reciprocal Insurance. Truth-Telling. Homogeneity. Militia and Regiment.

    -negatives-

    Liberty vs License or Permission.

    KEY TERMS FOR PROPERTARIAN ETHICS AND POLITICS

    Trust. High Trust. Transaction Costs. Common Law. Moral spectrum: Criminal,Ethical,Moral,Conspiratorial. Property Mirrors Morality. Competing Insurance Organizations. Calculability, Rationally Calculable. Formal (procedural) and Informal(normative) Institutions. Fully Informed, Warrantied, Voluntary Exchange Free Of Externality.

    -negatives-

    Pooling and Laundering (numbers). Obfuscation, Obscurantism, Verbalism (words). Overloading, Framing and Loading (content). Golden Rule(authoritarian) vs Silver Rule(egalitarian). Pathological Altruism. Monopoly Insurer vs Polycentric Insurance.

    -tangents-

    The Pack Response. Power vs Weakness.

    KEY TERMS FOR TESTIMONIAL PHILOSOPHY

    Realism. Scientific Realism. Performative Truth. Testimonial Truth vs Platonic Truth. Testimony. Witness. Empiricism for observation. Operationalism for existence. Instrumentalism for reducing imperceptible and incomparable to perceptible and comparable.

    Calculable vs Computable, Axiomatic and Internally consistent vs Descriptive and externally correspondent. Existence Proof. “Logics” as instruments. Information vs Imagination. Decidability.

    TERMS OF CRITICISM OF ROTHBARDIAN AND MISESIAN IDEAS

    Libertinism not libertarianism. NAP under IVP. Ghetto Ethics, Crusoe Ethics. Fallacy of aggression. Low trust. High Transaction Costs. Insufficient For Formation Of A Voluntary Polity. Jews and Gypsies.

    (Must go to work now….)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-01 05:57:00 UTC

  • LIBERTARIANISM AS A FALSE FLAG OPERATION? (Interesting. I just think Rothbardian

    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2014/07/the-false-flag-of-libertarianism/ROTHBARDIAN LIBERTARIANISM AS A FALSE FLAG OPERATION?

    (Interesting. I just think Rothbardianism is another immoral pseudoscience fabricated by people who don’t know any better. But casting it as a false flag is pretty interesting propaganda.)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-31 14:58:00 UTC

  • IF DEMOCRACY AND UNIVERSALISM ARE GODS THAT FAILED, HOW DO WE SLAY THEM? And mor

    IF DEMOCRACY AND UNIVERSALISM ARE GODS THAT FAILED, HOW DO WE SLAY THEM?

    And more importantly, what are we eating and drinking afterward?

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-29 11:28:00 UTC

  • PERMANENT END TO TYRANNY The Civic Society. Men will be men again. Not slaves. A

    PERMANENT END TO TYRANNY

    The Civic Society. Men will be men again. Not slaves.

    Aristocratic Egalitarianism & Propertarianism & Testimonial Truth

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-29 09:36:00 UTC