Curt Doolittle

Theme: Institution

  • Well, given that the entire history between Rome ad100 and the germanic restorat

    Well, given that the entire history between Rome ad100 and the germanic restoration of western civilization via manorialism, the Hansa, literacy, and the ousting of Rome while the church imposed superstition upon people, kept them illiterate, and made 1/2 europe’s capital dead.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-14 14:49:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1029379487241265152

    Reply addressees: @Simonow_ @Hispanogoyim

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1029370461988241410

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1029370461988241410

  • Pervert, Perversion – These Are Moral Terms, Not Scientific. But….

    These terms – “pervert and perversion” – are moral terms (shaming) used (evolved) in the pre-scientific eras, to inarticulately describe the normative, traditional, institutional and genetic costs of loss-inducing behavior and genetics. Those costs exist. The question is only whether or not we can afford them (temporally), and if we can afford them, what are the unseen costs of affording them(inter-temporally)? Diversity (normative, cultural, and religious) is disastrously costly over the long term. Tolerance turns out to be a terrible idea. The most intolerant group always wins. So the question isn’t the use of these moral terms (perversion, tolerance, diversity) it’s the scientific (economic) fully accounted costs that replace those moral (imprecise) terms with scientific (precise) terms. As far as I know the principle difference between the standards of living of people is cultural, and the reason for cultural differences is genetic, and the reason for genetic differences is in the scale of the underclasses. And the scale of the underclasses force the norms, traditions, culture, and institutions of the group by dragging them down to the median. It may be true that in the period of transition from subsistence farming to market economies in the industrial era, that we can afford many luxuries of tolerance, but it is increasingly obvious that once technological differences are equilibrated, that the standard of every group of people is determined by the size of their underclass in relation to their middle and upper classes. And worse, it’s increasingly apparent that this trend will continue and keep pace with the gains in reasoning ability that we obtained from the institution of aristotelianism (scientific thought). Meaning that the current employment concerns that can be solved by credit expansion will end shortly, and the only competitive advantage and therefore standard of living of any group will be determined by their genetic distribution relative to other genetic distributions, and the normative, traditional, cultural, and institutional means by which those different groups cooperate. Ergo, pretentious virtue signaling talk alluded to in the original post is nothing more than failing to account for costs both seen, unseen, temporal and intertemporal. There are no free rides. Only temporary gains and losses, the accumulation of which must in the end limit itself to that balance sheet we call the universe.

  • Pervert, Perversion – These Are Moral Terms, Not Scientific. But….

    These terms – “pervert and perversion” – are moral terms (shaming) used (evolved) in the pre-scientific eras, to inarticulately describe the normative, traditional, institutional and genetic costs of loss-inducing behavior and genetics. Those costs exist. The question is only whether or not we can afford them (temporally), and if we can afford them, what are the unseen costs of affording them(inter-temporally)? Diversity (normative, cultural, and religious) is disastrously costly over the long term. Tolerance turns out to be a terrible idea. The most intolerant group always wins. So the question isn’t the use of these moral terms (perversion, tolerance, diversity) it’s the scientific (economic) fully accounted costs that replace those moral (imprecise) terms with scientific (precise) terms. As far as I know the principle difference between the standards of living of people is cultural, and the reason for cultural differences is genetic, and the reason for genetic differences is in the scale of the underclasses. And the scale of the underclasses force the norms, traditions, culture, and institutions of the group by dragging them down to the median. It may be true that in the period of transition from subsistence farming to market economies in the industrial era, that we can afford many luxuries of tolerance, but it is increasingly obvious that once technological differences are equilibrated, that the standard of every group of people is determined by the size of their underclass in relation to their middle and upper classes. And worse, it’s increasingly apparent that this trend will continue and keep pace with the gains in reasoning ability that we obtained from the institution of aristotelianism (scientific thought). Meaning that the current employment concerns that can be solved by credit expansion will end shortly, and the only competitive advantage and therefore standard of living of any group will be determined by their genetic distribution relative to other genetic distributions, and the normative, traditional, cultural, and institutional means by which those different groups cooperate. Ergo, pretentious virtue signaling talk alluded to in the original post is nothing more than failing to account for costs both seen, unseen, temporal and intertemporal. There are no free rides. Only temporary gains and losses, the accumulation of which must in the end limit itself to that balance sheet we call the universe.

  • —“What are Culture, Society, and Politics?”—

    (updated) …1. Culture: Traditions (myths, rituals, festivals, group strategy) …2. Society: Norms (behaviors, manners, ethics, morals) …3. Politics: Laws (rules, institutions, commons) Yes, it’s really that simple. And: …4. Religion: Indoctrination, ritual, traditions, myth – The Undecidable and intuitionistic. …5. Education: Forms of Calculation – Reading, Writing, Arithmetic, Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Sentience, Reason – The Decidable and rational. …6. Training: Practice of Crafts – The Actionable and possible. Yes. Once we deconflate these things they’re obvious.

  • —“What are Culture, Society, and Politics?”—

    (updated) …1. Culture: Traditions (myths, rituals, festivals, group strategy) …2. Society: Norms (behaviors, manners, ethics, morals) …3. Politics: Laws (rules, institutions, commons) Yes, it’s really that simple. And: …4. Religion: Indoctrination, ritual, traditions, myth – The Undecidable and intuitionistic. …5. Education: Forms of Calculation – Reading, Writing, Arithmetic, Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Sentience, Reason – The Decidable and rational. …6. Training: Practice of Crafts – The Actionable and possible. Yes. Once we deconflate these things they’re obvious.

  • “WHAT ARE CULTURE, SOCIETY, AND POLITICS?”— (updated) …1. Culture: Tradition

    —“WHAT ARE CULTURE, SOCIETY, AND POLITICS?”—

    (updated)

    …1. Culture: Traditions (myths, rituals, festivals, group strategy)

    …2. Society: Norms (behaviors, manners, ethics, morals)

    …3. Politics: Laws (rules, institutions, commons)

    Yes, it’s really that simple. And:

    …4. Religion: Indoctrination, ritual, traditions, myth – The Undecidable and intuitionistic.

    …5. Education: Forms of Calculation – Reading, Writing, Arithmetic, Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Sentience, Reason – The Decidable and rational.

    …6. Training: Practice of Crafts – The Actionable and possible.

    Yes. Once we deconflate these things they’re obvious.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-12 13:55:00 UTC

  • PRIORITIES IN POLITICAL ORDERS by Brendan Hegarty Racism(Falangelism): …….ki

    PRIORITIES IN POLITICAL ORDERS

    by Brendan Hegarty

    Racism(Falangelism): …….kin, cult, corporation.

    Facism(Prussianism): …….kin, corporation, cult.

    Integralism: ………………….cult, kin, corporation

    Classical Liberalism: ……..corporation, kin, cult.

    Amerikwa: ……………………cult, corporation, kin.

    Liberalism: …………………..corporation, cult, kin.

    Various permutations of 3 orders: Kin, Cult, Corporation

    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-11 10:33:00 UTC

  • Revolution: If They Win It Is Your Fault and Mine.

      Our predecessors were optimistically tolerant of the leftist agenda to destroy western civilization, its history, its institutions of natural law, its meritocracy, its aristocracy, its norms, traditions, unique family structure, and unique values of truth, science, and law. The only reason this is possible is because our grandparents, parents, and we, ourselves, have not, until 2001, ended our tolerance of the war against our people and our civilization. There is only one solution – we pay the high price of correction now, versus the low price of continuous correction in the past. Revolt, Separate, Prosper, Speciate.

  • Revolution: If They Win It Is Your Fault and Mine.

      Our predecessors were optimistically tolerant of the leftist agenda to destroy western civilization, its history, its institutions of natural law, its meritocracy, its aristocracy, its norms, traditions, unique family structure, and unique values of truth, science, and law. The only reason this is possible is because our grandparents, parents, and we, ourselves, have not, until 2001, ended our tolerance of the war against our people and our civilization. There is only one solution – we pay the high price of correction now, versus the low price of continuous correction in the past. Revolt, Separate, Prosper, Speciate.

  • English had maintained Anglo Saxon (germanic < Corded Ware < Yamna(Kurgan)) Law

    Sorry, that’s not quite right. English had maintained Anglo Saxon (germanic < Corded Ware < Yamna(Kurgan)) law that evolved significantly during manorialism, such that the relation between the ruler (sovereign), and the freeman (sovereign) was purely contractual – and that his “rights as an Englishman” (his sovereignty) as they were later expressed, were consistent regardless of territory. This is how all militial cultures must operate, whether agrarian (militia), pastoral (raiders), or seafaring (pirates). It’s not a choice. Unlike the agrarian river valleys, where production is concentrated, returns are high, armies are affordable, the europeans could not produce other than mlitial armies until trade had evolved sufficient for state formation – approximately the time of Napoleon – meaning it took from the late roman period to the Napoleonic period to restore the economy of europe. The english extended their practice of common (traditional germanic) law to their broader understanding of the world, and in doing so produced empiricism, and the anglo empirical revolution. The REST OF THE ENLIGHTENMENT was a counter-revolution AGAINST this empirical, legal, contractual, individualism, while at the same time, the middle class (thanks to the Viking trade first, the Hansa trade second, then the atlantic trade third) attempted to sought to take power from the landed aristocracy now that trade was as important or more so than agrarian production – and given that international relations were now nearly as important as internal relations. Once this was possible, both the upper (aristocratic, landed, military) class and the emergent middle class (burghers so to speak), attempted successfully to liberate the 50% of dead capital in europe that was in the hands of the church. So no. The english had it right, and the rest of the world has been fighting against the empirical model, being dragged into science, markets, and technology one war at a time. One must choose between rule of law, and rule by discretion. We make this false claim that the argument is between capitalism and socialism both of which are alien ideas to european civilization, which has always been one of markets – precisely because individualism in the west is 3500 years old. We invented the combination of militia, contract, truth, duty, sovereignty. And it is the very and only reason for our more rapid rates of evolution in the ancient world and in the modern world.