Theme: Reform

  • Funny, but a witticism not a criticism. Conservatism is scientific in process an

    Funny, but a witticism not a criticism. Conservatism is scientific in process and allegorical in language. I want to fix it


    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-11 07:19:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/642236012274581504

    Reply addressees: @mdavilamartinez

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641992610094014464


    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/641992610094014464

  • I Am Trying To Repair The Enlightenment

    [C]OMPARISONS:
    1) Ashkenazi Separatist Pseudoscientific (belief) Libertinism
    vs European Universalist Empirical (Legal) Libertarianism.

    2) Ashkenazi Neo Conservatism (Make the world safe for separatists)
    vs Anglo Burkeian Conservatism ( Parent the world into prosperity).

    3) Ashkenazi (Pseudo-scientific/Pseudo-moral) Communism
    vs Anglo-German (pseudo-scientific/Pseudo-moral) Secular Humanism.

    METHODS:
    1) Anglo American (critical) Empirical (Law).
    2) German (justificationary) Rationalism (Philosophy).
    3) French (subjectivist) Moralism (literature).
    3) Ashkenazi (overloading) pseudo-moralism, pseudo-scientism, pseudo-rationalism (Pseudoscience)

    All cultures tried to universalize their sectarian ideologies as rational and scientific platforms. Yet these different group evolutionary strategies all failed the test of universalism. The anglos were right in method (science) and wrong in vision of man (aristocracy of everyone). The germans were wrong in method (kantian rationalism) and right in vision of man (paternal hierarchy).

    The Ashkenazis were at best hermeneutic, and at worst deceitful (separatism without paying costs of commons) and pragmatic by creating a new ‘religion’ – a new means of suggestion by loading,framing and overloading; thereby taking advantage of western high trust and pathological altruism.

    Through this rather broader lens, we see that all the enlightenments failed. (I don’t address the french because no one takes them seriously). We see that the last century was plagued by lies, pseudoscience, pseudo-rationalism, and justification, and as Hayek warned us, was a century of mysticism (which was the best word he could come up with at the time.)

    That is why I am aggressively anti-ancap: because I see it as another great lie that has been propagandized upon my people, and has misdirected their energies and aspirations away from the only possible source of liberty: the prohibition on parasitism, the common law, universal standing, every man a sheriff, and universal militia. There is no state and no ruler if we rule by law.

    So where the person looking at leaves sees minor errors in the ancap-libertines, and where the person looking at trees sees a set of competing ideologies, I look at the forest and see group evolutionary strategies covering a spectrum from anglo empirical and legal ‘truth’, to german justification (kant and the german idealists), to french pretense of reason(Rousseau), to ashkenazi systemic deception: Freud, Boaz, Marx, Cantor, Mises, Frankfurt-School, Rothbard. The second great deception (authoritarian pseudoscience) duplicating what was done to rome by abraham, jesus, peter and paul: the first great deception: authoritarian monotheism.

    That explains why I am hostile to well intentioned fools.

    Because they’re part of the problem: useful idiots of the libertine rather than communist and neo-conservative types.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine.

  • I Am Trying To Repair The Enlightenment

    [C]OMPARISONS:
    1) Ashkenazi Separatist Pseudoscientific (belief) Libertinism
    vs European Universalist Empirical (Legal) Libertarianism.

    2) Ashkenazi Neo Conservatism (Make the world safe for separatists)
    vs Anglo Burkeian Conservatism ( Parent the world into prosperity).

    3) Ashkenazi (Pseudo-scientific/Pseudo-moral) Communism
    vs Anglo-German (pseudo-scientific/Pseudo-moral) Secular Humanism.

    METHODS:
    1) Anglo American (critical) Empirical (Law).
    2) German (justificationary) Rationalism (Philosophy).
    3) French (subjectivist) Moralism (literature).
    3) Ashkenazi (overloading) pseudo-moralism, pseudo-scientism, pseudo-rationalism (Pseudoscience)

    All cultures tried to universalize their sectarian ideologies as rational and scientific platforms. Yet these different group evolutionary strategies all failed the test of universalism. The anglos were right in method (science) and wrong in vision of man (aristocracy of everyone). The germans were wrong in method (kantian rationalism) and right in vision of man (paternal hierarchy).

    The Ashkenazis were at best hermeneutic, and at worst deceitful (separatism without paying costs of commons) and pragmatic by creating a new ‘religion’ – a new means of suggestion by loading,framing and overloading; thereby taking advantage of western high trust and pathological altruism.

    Through this rather broader lens, we see that all the enlightenments failed. (I don’t address the french because no one takes them seriously). We see that the last century was plagued by lies, pseudoscience, pseudo-rationalism, and justification, and as Hayek warned us, was a century of mysticism (which was the best word he could come up with at the time.)

    That is why I am aggressively anti-ancap: because I see it as another great lie that has been propagandized upon my people, and has misdirected their energies and aspirations away from the only possible source of liberty: the prohibition on parasitism, the common law, universal standing, every man a sheriff, and universal militia. There is no state and no ruler if we rule by law.

    So where the person looking at leaves sees minor errors in the ancap-libertines, and where the person looking at trees sees a set of competing ideologies, I look at the forest and see group evolutionary strategies covering a spectrum from anglo empirical and legal ‘truth’, to german justification (kant and the german idealists), to french pretense of reason(Rousseau), to ashkenazi systemic deception: Freud, Boaz, Marx, Cantor, Mises, Frankfurt-School, Rothbard. The second great deception (authoritarian pseudoscience) duplicating what was done to rome by abraham, jesus, peter and paul: the first great deception: authoritarian monotheism.

    That explains why I am hostile to well intentioned fools.

    Because they’re part of the problem: useful idiots of the libertine rather than communist and neo-conservative types.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine.

  • I AM TRYING TO REPAIR THE ENLIGHTENMENT COMPARISONS: 1) Ashkenazi Separatist Pse

    I AM TRYING TO REPAIR THE ENLIGHTENMENT

    COMPARISONS:

    1) Ashkenazi Separatist Pseudoscientific (belief) Libertinism

    vs European Universalists Empirical (Legal) Libertarianism.

    2) Ashkenazi Neo Conservatism (Make the world safe for separatists)

    vs Anglo Burkeian Conservatism ( Parent the world into prosperity).

    3) Ashkenazi (Pseudo-scientific/Pseudo-moral) Communism

    vs Anglo-German (pseudo-scientific/Pseudo-moral) Secular Humanism.

    METHODS:

    1) Anglo American (critical) Empirical (Law).

    2) German (justificationary) Rationalism (Philosophy).

    3) French (subjectivist) Moralism (literature).

    3) Ashkenazi (overloading) pseudo-moralism, pseudo-scientism, pseudo-rationalism (Pseudoscience)

    All cultures tried to universalize their sectarian ideologies as rational and scientific platforms. Yet these different group evolutionary strategies all failed the test of universalism. The anglos were right in method (science) and wrong in vision of man (aristocracy of everyone). The germans were wrong in method (kantian rationalism) and right in vision of man (paternal hierarchy).

    The Ashkenazis were at best hermeneutic, and at worst deceitful (separatism without paying costs of commons) and pragmatic by creating a new ‘religion’ – a new means of suggestion by loading,framing and overloading; thereby taking advantage of western high trust and pathological altruism.

    Through this rather broader lens, we see that all the enlightenments failed. (I don’t address the french because no one takes them seriously). We see that the last century was plagued by lies, pseudoscience, pseudo-rationalism, and justification, and as Hayek warned us, was a century of mysticism (which was the best word he could come up with at the time.)

    That is why I am aggressively anti-ancap: because I see it as another great lie that has been propagandized upon my people, and has misdirected their energies and aspirations away from the only possible source of liberty: the prohibition on parasitism, the common law, universal standing, every man a sheriff, and universal militia. There is no state and no ruler if we rule by law.

    So where the person looking at leaves sees minor errors in the ancap-libertines, and where the person looking at trees sees a set of competing ideologies, I look at the forest and see group evolutionary strategies covering a spectrum from anglo empirical and legal ‘truth’, to german justification (kant and the german idealists), to french pretense of reason(Rousseau), to ashkenazi systemic deception: Freud, Boaz, Marx, Cantor, Mises, Frankfurt-School, Rothbard. The second great deception (authoritarian pseudoscience) duplicating what was done to rome by abraham, jesus, peter and paul: the first great deception: authoritarian monotheism.

    That explains why I am hostile to well intentioned fools.

    Because they’re part of the problem: useful idiots of the libertine rather than communist and neo-conservative types.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-03 08:04:00 UTC

  • Revolution: The Plan

    [W]estern Man is moral man, and moral men need: 1 – A Moral Justification for the application of Violence to institute change. (They are being lied to, and stolen from, and conquered systematically, and I explain how, why, and how to stop it.) (Ideologies require promise of actionable results within the current lifetime.)

    2 – A Solution to Demand: a set of institutional changes (concentration of effort) (an expansion of the classical liberal legal order to suppress lying, wishful thinking, bias and error in matters of the political commons; and a reconstruction of the houses of government as a market for the voluntary construction of commons.) 3 – A means of transition from one order to another. (An ordered means of rapid transformation within the status quo.) 4 – A set of tactics for raising the cost of the status quo: insurrection via: nullification (gradual disempowerment and transition to new government), secession(construction of a new government retaining the previous competitor), revolution (replacement of the people in government and modification of institutions eliminating the previous competitor) and civil war (destruction of the government and replacement with an entirely new one, eliminating the previous competitors). 5 – A set of leaders (speakers) to rally action. (I need 100 people. That’s all. I need only twelve who are very good.) Propertarianism and Testimonialism will be a more complete framework than has been produced before, even if we take into account all of Locke,Hume,Smith and Jefferson as a set. And if I fail, then the work sits in books and records until someone decides to use it or create something better. But I will have my good service. One leads a horse to water, but cannot make it drink. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine
  • Revolution: The Plan

    [W]estern Man is moral man, and moral men need: 1 – A Moral Justification for the application of Violence to institute change. (They are being lied to, and stolen from, and conquered systematically, and I explain how, why, and how to stop it.) (Ideologies require promise of actionable results within the current lifetime.)

    2 – A Solution to Demand: a set of institutional changes (concentration of effort) (an expansion of the classical liberal legal order to suppress lying, wishful thinking, bias and error in matters of the political commons; and a reconstruction of the houses of government as a market for the voluntary construction of commons.) 3 – A means of transition from one order to another. (An ordered means of rapid transformation within the status quo.) 4 – A set of tactics for raising the cost of the status quo: insurrection via: nullification (gradual disempowerment and transition to new government), secession(construction of a new government retaining the previous competitor), revolution (replacement of the people in government and modification of institutions eliminating the previous competitor) and civil war (destruction of the government and replacement with an entirely new one, eliminating the previous competitors). 5 – A set of leaders (speakers) to rally action. (I need 100 people. That’s all. I need only twelve who are very good.) Propertarianism and Testimonialism will be a more complete framework than has been produced before, even if we take into account all of Locke,Hume,Smith and Jefferson as a set. And if I fail, then the work sits in books and records until someone decides to use it or create something better. But I will have my good service. One leads a horse to water, but cannot make it drink. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine
  • REVOLUTION: “THE PLAN” Western Man is moral man, and moral men need: 1 – A Moral

    REVOLUTION: “THE PLAN”

    Western Man is moral man, and moral men need:

    1 – A Moral Justification for the application of Violence to institute change. (They are being lied to, and stolen from, and conquered systematically, and I explain how, why, and how to stop it.) (Ideologies require promise of actionable results within the current lifetime.)

    2 – A Solution to Demand: a set of institutional changes (concentration of effort) (an expansion of the classical liberal legal order to suppress lying, wishful thinking, bias and error in matters of the political commons; and a reconstruction of the houses of government as a market for the voluntary construction of commons.)

    3 – A means of transition from one order to another. (An ordered means of rapid transformation within the status quo.)

    4 – A set of tactics for raising the cost of the status quo: insurrection via: nullification (gradual disempowerment and transition to new government), secession(construction of a new government retaining the previous competitor), revolution (replacement of the people in government and modification of institutions eliminating the previous competitor) and civil war (destruction of the government and replacement with an entirely new one, eliminating the previous competitors).

    5 – A set of leaders (speakers) to rally action. (I need 100 people. That’s all. I need only twelve who are very good.) Propertarianism and Testimonialism will be a more complete framework than has been produced before, even if we take into account all of Locke,Hume,Smith and Jefferson as a set.

    And if I fail, then the work sits in books and records until someone decides to use it or create something better. But I will have my good service.

    One leads a horse to water, but cannot make it drink.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-02 03:13:00 UTC

  • But fundamentally Propertarianism/Testimonialism is radical and progressive not

    But fundamentally Propertarianism/Testimonialism is radical and progressive not reactionary.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-01 09:52:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/638650578986487809

    Reply addressees: @Outsideness @SanguineEmpiric @MatthewRenauld

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/638643403207512065


    IN REPLY TO:

    @Outsideness

    @SanguineEmpiric @curtdoolittle @MatthewRenauld A critique of MM would have earned that ‘obviously’. Not sure response to an HRx post does.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/638643403207512065

  • The world doesn’t need me to write an analysis of NRx. It needs someone to advan

    The world doesn’t need me to write an analysis of NRx. It needs someone to advance it.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-01 09:50:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/638650139318611968

    Reply addressees: @Outsideness @SanguineEmpiric @MatthewRenauld

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/638643403207512065


    IN REPLY TO:

    @Outsideness

    @SanguineEmpiric @curtdoolittle @MatthewRenauld A critique of MM would have earned that ‘obviously’. Not sure response to an HRx post does.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/638643403207512065

  • I am not trashing NRx. I state why the NRx needs reformation in order to expand.

    I am not trashing NRx. I state why the NRx needs reformation in order to expand. (Which I think I provide.)


    Source date (UTC): 2015-08-31 11:49:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/638317716315766784

    Reply addressees: @MatthewRenauld @Outsideness

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/638317296251990016


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @MatthewRenauld @Outsideness So you mean you don’t have any substantive criticism, and are resorting to name calling? 😉 Right? (Yes).

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/638317296251990016


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @MatthewRenauld @Outsideness So you mean you don’t have any substantive criticism, and are resorting to name calling? 😉 Right? (Yes).

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/638317296251990016