Curt Doolittle

Theme: Reform

  • FROM: Helikzhan @curtd We continue as we have. 1. Informing 2. Boycotting 3. Wit

    FROM: Helikzhan
    @curtd We continue as we have.

    1. Informing
    2. Boycotting
    3. Withdrawing from their orgs
    4. Reorganizing under our own banners, economy and culture.
    5. Providing the existential threat to their survival by simply not engaging with it.

    RESPONSE BY:
    Curt Doolittle (PRO) @curtd Original Gabber

    @Helikzhan All of those strategies have however consistently failed over the past century and a half, because they are entirely passive – we lack teh monarchy and universal military as means of organizational defense against the female means of social destruction of knowledge, tradition, and institutions. What you’re suggesting is a repetition of the libertarian fantasy that incremental separation is possible. It’s not. Libertarians are always wrong. Just as much as marxists are always wrong. For the same reason. There is no means of voluntary separation from kelptoparasites who depend on that parasitism and absence of competition.

    1) The first existential threat to the enemy is forcible political separation, or forcibile political domination. Separation is superior becuase it eliminates the cost of spending the next 1000 years genetically pacifying their instinct for feminine kleptoparasitism. We simply separate, restore our evolutionary velocity and high trust by restoring society-as-army, under rule of law, and family as the purpose of policy, and leave them behind. There is no downside to this strategy because it takes the moral high ground.

    2) The second existential threat is conquest and rule – which honestly is something we don’t want. Let them suicide into favellas. The problem with this strategy is that it makes the entire planet fear you and boycott you.

    3) The third existential threat is one we find morally reprehensible – which is the even higher cost of deportation, displacement, or elimination. The problem with this method is that it makes the entire planet war with you.

    Those are our choices. They are the only choices. Everything else is wet-dreams of adolescent boys afraid to pay the high cost of obtaining their sovereignty by the only means sovereignty is ever produced: the organized application of violence we call an ‘army’.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-21 16:54:11 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107661495572644959

  • @Helikzhan All of those strategies have however consistently failed over the pas

    @Helikzhan All of those strategies have however consistently failed over the past century and a half, because they are entirely passive – we lack teh monarchy and universal military as means of organizational defense against the female means of social destruction of knowledge, tradition, and institutions. What you’re suggesting is a repetition of the libertarian fantasy that incremental separation is possible. It’s not. Libertarians are always wrong. Just as much as marxists are always wrong. For the same reason. There is no means of voluntary separation from kelptoparasites who depend on that parasitism and absence of competition.

    The first existential threat to the enemy is forcible political separation, or forcibile political domination. Separation is superior becuase it eliminates the cost of spending the next 1000 years genetically pacifying their instinct for feminine kleptoparasitism. We simply separate, restore our evolutionary velocity and high trust by restoring society-as-army, under rule of law, and family as the purpose of policy, and leave them behind. There is no downside to this strategy because it takes the moral high ground.

    The second existential threat is conquest and rule – which honestly is something we don’t want. Let them suicide into favellas. The problem with this strategy is that it makes the entire planet fear you and boycott you.

    The third existential threat is one we find morally reprehensible – which is the even higher cost of deportation, displacement, or elimination. The problem with this method is that it makes the entire planet war with you.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-21 16:51:42 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107661485843813618

  • @tmomoney @RadioFreeNorthwest NJP. Good people. Good start. Necessary but insuff

    @tmomoney@RadioFreeNorthwest NJP. Good people. Good start. Necessary but insufficient Program. More of a platform statement. Needs a list of reforms and how.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-19 18:13:40 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107650483545196918

  • THE PROBLEM WITH LAUNCHING A REVOLUTION The primary reason for business failure

    THE PROBLEM WITH LAUNCHING A REVOLUTION

    The primary reason for business failure is launching too early. The secondary reason for business failure is focusing internally rather than on customers. The third reason for business failure is a lack of capital. The fourth reason is a weak team or a divided team. We would fail for all of these reasons. ‘We can’t release buggy software and right now we’ve got buggy alpha software”

    The market has to be ready. The overton window has to be over the middle class. It probably has to be over ‘moms’. The economy has to create uncertainty. And the people must be angry about their conditions. Most of these conditions are converging as expected.

    The problem remains that the dumb young f___ks make coalesence and convergence of the factions impossible. As such we must understand that the people who are currently active and providing feedback and participating in conversations are the people least likely to matter. They are the least likely to show. The least likely to be competent. and the least l ikely to follow direction.

    Ergo 1) our bottom feeders will most likely cause failure of any revoution 2) we will need to leave large numbers of them behind and silence them in order to produce a revolution 3) because they are such ‘shits’ that they poison the well for any and all emerging talent. In other words, we may need a way of ‘burning’ them in order to achieve fictory if we cannot find a way to prevent the harm they do with every character they type on social media.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-19 03:18:04 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107646961869019592

  • @EthicalNecromancer At the end. We sell the constitution and it’s solutions rath

    @EthicalNecromancer At the end. We sell the constitution and it’s solutions rather than ideology or philosophy or pseudoscience. THose solutions will win the middle as well as the right.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-17 19:43:13 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107639510998384071

  • Save America Pass Voter Id End Sanctuary Establish minimum criteria for immigrat

    Save America
    Pass Voter Id
    End Sanctuary
    Establish minimum criteria for immigration.
    Deport Illegals
    Restore the Constitution of Natural Law
    Lock up the traitors and terrorists that constitute the Marxist, neo-Marxist, hate-feminist, postmodern, pc-woke, anti-civilization revolt.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-17 14:38:27 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107638312627257419

  • Save America Pass Voter Id End Sanctuary Establish minimum criteria for immigrat

    Save America
    Pass Voter Id
    End Sanctuary
    Establish minimum criteria for immigration.
    Deport Illegals
    Restore the Constitution of Natural Law
    Lock up the traitors and terrorists that constitute the Marxist, neo-Marxist, hate-feminist, postmodern, pc-woke, anti-civilization revolt.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-16 17:45:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1482770928392146944

    Reply addressees: @Mayoisstillspi1

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1481303418115219456

  • (e) and cannot reform itself and rule of law internally fast enough to provide c

    (e) and cannot reform itself and rule of law internally fast enough to provide competitive advantage to it’s desired sphere of influence. (f) where that previous sphere of influence was set back 70 years, and is all now ahead of russian development, and ukrainians want the same.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-16 02:25:15 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1482539416841293829

    Reply addressees: @oswaldspangled

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1482539020848668672

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @oswaldspangled (a) Russia undermined the ukrainian government and military (b) violated ukraine’s borders by expressly breaking core the principle by which the postwar order was constructed: borders.(c) did so surreptitiously, (d) then threatened to invade everyone including sweden. (more…)

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1482539020848668672

  • Well you know you kinda help a lot too – which is why I appreciate you. In fact,

    Well you know you kinda help a lot too – which is why I appreciate you. In fact, this discussion just helped me and us reform our presentation. So you know, this is why we need so many smart guys involved – because the f-ing problem is HARD. 😉

    Intellectual honesty is priceless.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-13 17:46:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1481684205461516292

    Reply addressees: @TimBeckley3 @Logos_Elect @oatzpig @dandy_dreams

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1481683820009046016

  • OK, so we discussed this question at the staff meeting today in an effort to try

    OK, so we discussed this question at the staff meeting today in an effort to try to understand why you and others are having a problem with my failure to communicate. I’ll publish it as soon as it’s ready.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-13 17:28:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1481679456066494470

    Reply addressees: @TimBeckley3 @Logos_Elect @oatzpig @dandy_dreams

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1481678403757502466