Theme: Grammar

CAN YOU FIND THE LANGUAGE YOU NEED?

At number of people that I am close to, and who understand propertarianism well enough, have intuited, suggested, complained, or passionately argued, that a negative philosophy is not sufficient for them, because they intuit, want, and need ‘more’ than via-negativa on the one hand, and transcendence on the other. These people feel the need for a narrative that they can use to visualize, empathize with, some intuition or ideal.

I’ve seen others attempt to appropriate propertarianism to justify their priors only to realize that it helps explain but does not justify, and may ultimately falsify good portions of those priors. (Libertarians).

I’ve seen others who understand that natural law gives license for us to use violence to overthrow the current order, and restore our aristocratic order – whether or not the understand the epistemology, ethics, or anything else I’ve written.

I’ve seen others with religious conviction thrilled at the possibility of restoring our ancient order, only to be horrified that in restoring the church I would eradicate all semitic fictionalism (lying), and return to hero worship, of not only saints (submissives-reactors), but innovators (thinkers), and Warriors and Statesmen (dominants-actors). In other words, I would complete the reformation of christianity into a restoration of our native religion (Aryanism) that the Germans had tried to make.

A very small number of us just wish to understand, and to take power, and if necessary, to rule. I have produced what I want: a method of reforming the government. I

I’ve tried for the past two years, mostly at Josh’s insistence to solve this problem. And I have remained fairly constant in my intuition that we must supply narratives in multiple languages on top of natural law. And I think this is the challenge for those who understand but must either compose or select which narratives do that for them.

I believe that the only monopoly is the laws: the laws of nature, the laws of the limits of man, the laws of cooperation, and the law of testimony (truth). And that the only form of social order compatible with those laws is sovereignty, natural law, and markets in everything, as I have stated many times before.

I believe that we require a division of narrative as much as we have a division of comprehension. I believe that our ancestors were correct and it was their failure to discover natural law that made them vulnerable to the great lies.

I believe I can suggest a method of reforming the church both financially, institutionally, in doctrine, and in narratives.

I believe the restoration of that church will require the return to poly-heroism instead of a monopoly on submissiveness by the prophets and saints.

I believe it is necessary to restore poly-‘literature’ rather than monotheism, or any kind of theism. Although I can understand the need for theistic (supernatural) fiction, just as I myself understand and appreciate moral supernatural fiction (horror stories, scary legends, and myths).

I believe it is possible (although not by me alone) to select readings that advance narrative solutions that are, aside from their fiction, or fictionalism, compatible with natural law.

And I believe the simple need authoritarian supernatural, the ordinary need moral narrative, the average need philosophical narrative, and those of us above average need scientific narratives provided by the laws.

And I believe that these narratives are compatible if compatible by natural law.

And I believe that I cannot select those narratives by myself. I believe I cannot write them. I believe that in our history others have written all that need be written.

And I believe it is those who seek those narratives and who understand natural law sufficiently to judge those narratives moral or not, ‘coherently true’ or not, and not false by natural law, that must provide those readings.

Because I cannot possibly cover those literatures. In no small part because they fall on deaf ears, deaf empathy, deaf joys, and deaf fears. I have none of them

I will have done my duty to my people by writing the laws in the language that I need and understand. I will have done my duty to my class in providing the rules and method of rule. But I am not able to do serve my people in the survey of occult, supernatural, supernormal, heroic, martial, political, historic, poetic, verse – although I can, and in my age, assuming I live – manage the artistic.

The literature of our restoration exists. I have made the law. If you want to restore your civilization, and you want to provide those like you with a narrative, a via-positiva, then perhaps it is your duty, and your service, to your ambitions and your people, that you provide those parables.

Curt Doolittle

The Philosophy of Aristocracy