Curt Doolittle

Theme: Predation

  • September 22nd, 2018 10:33 AM Not only is ethnocentrism the optimum group evolut

    September 22nd, 2018 10:33 AM

    Not only is ethnocentrism the optimum group evolutionary strategy, but duplicity (parasitism) is the optimum outgroup strategy, since it avoids the cost of conquest and replacement.

  • September 22nd, 2018 10:33 AM Not only is ethnocentrism the optimum group evolut

    September 22nd, 2018 10:33 AM

    Not only is ethnocentrism the optimum group evolutionary strategy, but duplicity (parasitism) is the optimum outgroup strategy, since it avoids the cost of conquest and replacement.

  • September 21st, 2018 1:26 PM THE THIRD QUESTION OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY [T]he qu

    September 21st, 2018 1:26 PM THE THIRD QUESTION OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY [T]he question isn’t how we get along, it’s Genghis Khan’s question: “Why should the strong refrain from decimation, enslavement, enserfment, or rule for maximum profit?” The only incentive for the strong is whether cooperation is preferable to conquest. It is only preferable for conquest if it is sufficiently preferable to conquest to refrain from conquest. So, as the Great Khan said: “Given that cooperation is not preferable or possible, and serfdom and slavery are costly, that leaves decimation, or rule for the maximization of profit.” “We might prefer the former or the latter. However the enemy would undoubtedly prefer separation to decimation or rule under out maximization of profit. And this is the wise choice. Since we can still cooperate indirectly by trade while having no influence over one another within the same polity.” The problem the Khan faced is that he lacked the ability to produce institutions capable of sustained rule, just as expansionary aryans lacked the ability to produce institutions of sustained rule for maximum profit. The Indo-Aryans succeeded only under decimation and replacement in europe, not by any other means. So the Khan was wrong. Decimation was actually the right answer.

  • September 21st, 2018 1:26 PM THE THIRD QUESTION OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY [T]he qu

    September 21st, 2018 1:26 PM THE THIRD QUESTION OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY [T]he question isn’t how we get along, it’s Genghis Khan’s question: “Why should the strong refrain from decimation, enslavement, enserfment, or rule for maximum profit?” The only incentive for the strong is whether cooperation is preferable to conquest. It is only preferable for conquest if it is sufficiently preferable to conquest to refrain from conquest. So, as the Great Khan said: “Given that cooperation is not preferable or possible, and serfdom and slavery are costly, that leaves decimation, or rule for the maximization of profit.” “We might prefer the former or the latter. However the enemy would undoubtedly prefer separation to decimation or rule under out maximization of profit. And this is the wise choice. Since we can still cooperate indirectly by trade while having no influence over one another within the same polity.” The problem the Khan faced is that he lacked the ability to produce institutions capable of sustained rule, just as expansionary aryans lacked the ability to produce institutions of sustained rule for maximum profit. The Indo-Aryans succeeded only under decimation and replacement in europe, not by any other means. So the Khan was wrong. Decimation was actually the right answer.

  • Summers on The Cancer of Runaway R-Expression

    —“Society is yet another biome – an ecosystem. Even vultures have an important role to play. It’s when the /r tries to replace (or successfully overruns) the apex /K that we get system imbalance and social cancer.”—Anne Summers

    [I] hadn’t thought of that analogy but yes, cancer is uncontrolled hyper consumption growth that breaks the balance between cells and the host. So yes, r overringing K is simply the sociological expression of cancer by behavioral information rather than genetic information.

  • IS THERE A PLACE FOR THE LEFT? —“Under your natural law, Is there a place for

    IS THERE A PLACE FOR THE LEFT?

    —“Under your natural law, Is there a place for the left?”—

    There is a place for EXCHANGE between anyone, but predation and parasitism by no one.

    It’s not true that left wingers invent more than right. It’s true that leftists and rightists innovate in different areas: left consumption and release of normative constraint vs right order and release of existential constraints. I mean, I have absurd orderliness, and I still was voted most likely to succeed as a practicing artist by the faculty two years in a row. creativity occurs across the spectrum, but it’s creativity in WHAT?

    There is a place for everyone, there is just no place for parasitism and the left innovates means of parasitism and consumption to obtain its freedom from the right, and the right innovations suppression of parasitism and consumption in order to obtain its freedom from the left.

    The left and the feminine mind it evolved from cannot compete so it engages in rents, parasitism and predation to obtain what they see as proportionality independent of merit, and what we see as proportionality by merit.

    They have lower agency. They are not fully human. And this is why we must separate if possible, so that we can continue to speciate by proportionality: whether equalitarian and irreciprocal, or meritocratic and reciprocal.

    REVOLT, SEPARATE, PROSPER, SPECIATE.

    They will devolve and we will evolve and leave them behind.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-18 12:18:00 UTC

  • SUMMERS ON THE CANCER OF RUNAWAY R-EXPRESSION —“Society is yet another biome –

    SUMMERS ON THE CANCER OF RUNAWAY R-EXPRESSION

    —“Society is yet another biome – an ecosystem. Even vultures have an important role to play. It’s when the /r tries to replace (or successfully overruns) the apex /K that we get system imbalance and social cancer.”—Anne Summers

    I hadn’t thought of that analogy but yes, cancer is uncontrolled hyper consumption growth that breaks the balance between cells and the host. So yes, r overringing K is simply the sociological expression of cancer by behavioral information rather than genetic information.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-18 09:46:00 UTC

  • Is There a Place for The Left?

    —“Under your natural law, Is there a place for the left?”—

    [T]here is a place for EXCHANGE between anyone, but predation and parasitism by no one. It’s not true that left wingers invent more than right. It’s true that leftists and rightists innovate in different areas: left consumption and release of normative constraint vs right order and release of existential constraints. I mean, I have absurd orderliness, and I still was voted most likely to succeed as a practicing artist by the faculty two years in a row. creativity occurs across the spectrum, but it’s creativity in WHAT? There is a place for everyone, there is just no place for parasitism and the left innovates means of parasitism and consumption to obtain its freedom from the right, and the right innovations suppression of parasitism and consumption in order to obtain its freedom from the left. The left and the feminine mind it evolved from cannot compete so it engages in rents, parasitism and predation to obtain what they see as proportionality independent of merit, and what we see as proportionality by merit. They have lower agency. They are not fully human. And this is why we must separate if possible, so that we can continue to speciate by proportionality: whether equalitarian and irreciprocal, or meritocratic and reciprocal. REVOLT, SEPARATE, PROSPER, SPECIATE.  They will devolve and we will evolve and leave them behind.

  • Is There a Place for The Left?

    —“Under your natural law, Is there a place for the left?”—

    [T]here is a place for EXCHANGE between anyone, but predation and parasitism by no one. It’s not true that left wingers invent more than right. It’s true that leftists and rightists innovate in different areas: left consumption and release of normative constraint vs right order and release of existential constraints. I mean, I have absurd orderliness, and I still was voted most likely to succeed as a practicing artist by the faculty two years in a row. creativity occurs across the spectrum, but it’s creativity in WHAT? There is a place for everyone, there is just no place for parasitism and the left innovates means of parasitism and consumption to obtain its freedom from the right, and the right innovations suppression of parasitism and consumption in order to obtain its freedom from the left. The left and the feminine mind it evolved from cannot compete so it engages in rents, parasitism and predation to obtain what they see as proportionality independent of merit, and what we see as proportionality by merit. They have lower agency. They are not fully human. And this is why we must separate if possible, so that we can continue to speciate by proportionality: whether equalitarian and irreciprocal, or meritocratic and reciprocal. REVOLT, SEPARATE, PROSPER, SPECIATE.  They will devolve and we will evolve and leave them behind.

  • Is There a Place for The Left?

    September 18th, 2018 12:18 PM IS THERE A PLACE FOR THE LEFT?

    —“Under your natural law, Is there a place for the left?”—

    [T]here is a place for EXCHANGE between anyone, but predation and parasitism by no one. It’s not true that left wingers invent more than right. It’s true that leftists and rightists innovate in different areas: left consumption and release of normative constraint vs right order and release of existential constraints. I mean, I have absurd orderliness, and I still was voted most likely to succeed as a practicing artist by the faculty two years in a row. creativity occurs across the spectrum, but it’s creativity in WHAT? There is a place for everyone, there is just no place for parasitism and the left innovates means of parasitism and consumption to obtain its freedom from the right, and the right innovations suppression of parasitism and consumption in order to obtain its freedom from the left. The left and the feminine mind it evolved from cannot compete so it engages in rents, parasitism and predation to obtain what they see as proportionality independent of merit, and what we see as proportionality by merit. They have lower agency. They are not fully human. And this is why we must separate if possible, so that we can continue to speciate by proportionality: whether equalitarian and irreciprocal, or meritocratic and reciprocal. REVOLT, SEPARATE, PROSPER, SPECIATE. They will devolve and we will evolve and leave them behind.