Curt Doolittle

Theme: Religion

  • ABRAHAMISM IS THE GREATEST CANCER EVER INVENTED BY MAN Our common-law tradition

    ABRAHAMISM IS THE GREATEST CANCER EVER INVENTED BY MAN

    Our common-law tradition and the militia built the west. We escaped Abrahamic religion, and immediately restored our ancient trajectory. The reason for degeneracy is the reintroduction of Abrahamic Religion in pseudoscientific (marxist) and peudorational (postmodernist) prose

    Sorry. I have spent extraordinary effort in testing our most cherished beliefs: and Abrahamism created the dark ages. Jews did nothing. We did very little. And muslims destroyed the four great civilizations of the ancient world – dragging them backward into inescapable ignorance.

    Every civilization needs literature, oaths, and festivals for the intergenerational propagation of general rules of decidability that express their group competitive strategy. No civilization needs lies, and Abrahamism in word and form is just lies.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-09 11:22:00 UTC

  • The Science of Christianity (really)

      —-“What is the overall message of the bible?”— (“Salvation”) It is: “If you submit (abandon) your reason, and surrender (abandon) your will to the commands of an evil omnipotent and omniscient fictional character, and imitate the life of another very benevolent and charitable fictional character, that you will find salvation (be saved) in a non existent afterlife, after you die.” Scientifically: Now scientifically speaking, christianity is reducible to:1) the eradication of hatred from the human heart. 2) the extension of kinship love to non-kin. 3) the extension of exhaustive forgiveness before punishment, imprisonment, enserfment, enslavement, death, or war. And this turns out to be the optimum strategy for producing persistent high trust cooperation. It’s just counter intuitive since we evolved very aggressive altruistic punishment. And functionally: More than 1/3 if not 1/2 of people are lack the agency both internal and environmental, and or the intelligence, and or the resources to contrive a means of successfully competing in market civilization, when ones self worth and status are determined by by that success. As such providing an alternative method by which people of limited agency, ability, and resources can develop virtuous behavior, and personal mindfulness, and therefore happiness with their self image, through merely extension of kinship love, forgiveness, and charity is a successful strategy. Moreover, the externalities produced in a market civilization by large numbers of these people constructs the trust necessary for prosperity in a market civilization. And Politically: Despite lacking agency, ability, knowledge, education, and resources, people are able to use ‘faith’ and the ‘christian strategy’ to defend against threats to their strategy, their self image, and the good they do to society, are impervious to corruption, to persuasion, to coercion, and to abandonment of that strategy (hence why intelligence agencies love to hire christians). The problem is that there is an ever declining percentage of the population willing to use this strategy by faith, even if there is an ever expanding population willing to use this strategy if stated as scientifically as I have here. So while a demand for ‘church’ remains, a demand for the primitivism of semitic underclasses, has been replaced by a demand for the advance reason of european middle classes. The already devoted are irrelevant. It’s those who are not open to devotion that don’t need a religion of faith, but a religion of reason, that need mindfulness.

  • The Science of Christianity (really)

      —-“What is the overall message of the bible?”— (“Salvation”) It is: “If you submit (abandon) your reason, and surrender (abandon) your will to the commands of an evil omnipotent and omniscient fictional character, and imitate the life of another very benevolent and charitable fictional character, that you will find salvation (be saved) in a non existent afterlife, after you die.” Scientifically: Now scientifically speaking, christianity is reducible to:1) the eradication of hatred from the human heart. 2) the extension of kinship love to non-kin. 3) the extension of exhaustive forgiveness before punishment, imprisonment, enserfment, enslavement, death, or war. And this turns out to be the optimum strategy for producing persistent high trust cooperation. It’s just counter intuitive since we evolved very aggressive altruistic punishment. And functionally: More than 1/3 if not 1/2 of people are lack the agency both internal and environmental, and or the intelligence, and or the resources to contrive a means of successfully competing in market civilization, when ones self worth and status are determined by by that success. As such providing an alternative method by which people of limited agency, ability, and resources can develop virtuous behavior, and personal mindfulness, and therefore happiness with their self image, through merely extension of kinship love, forgiveness, and charity is a successful strategy. Moreover, the externalities produced in a market civilization by large numbers of these people constructs the trust necessary for prosperity in a market civilization. And Politically: Despite lacking agency, ability, knowledge, education, and resources, people are able to use ‘faith’ and the ‘christian strategy’ to defend against threats to their strategy, their self image, and the good they do to society, are impervious to corruption, to persuasion, to coercion, and to abandonment of that strategy (hence why intelligence agencies love to hire christians). The problem is that there is an ever declining percentage of the population willing to use this strategy by faith, even if there is an ever expanding population willing to use this strategy if stated as scientifically as I have here. So while a demand for ‘church’ remains, a demand for the primitivism of semitic underclasses, has been replaced by a demand for the advance reason of european middle classes. The already devoted are irrelevant. It’s those who are not open to devotion that don’t need a religion of faith, but a religion of reason, that need mindfulness.

  • “In the wide swath of history, we went from church and state as bedfellows, to s

    —“In the wide swath of history, we went from church and state as bedfellows, to statutory corporations and state as bedfellows, from veritable theocracy to fascism, with a small window of Enlightenment in-between.”—Angus Jameson Sock

    —“As a side note, statutory shielding of personal liability for stockholders, officers, and boards of directors is just as bad of an idea as clergy being personally immune from the broader actions of the church.”—Angus Jameson Sock

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-06 21:16:00 UTC

  • Somebody save Britain

    http://yournewswire.com/london-churches-mosques/

    Somebody save Britain

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-05 12:55:00 UTC

  • We Are Always Wrong

    You know, if we had let the soviets expand their ‘communism’ into the islamic countries, they would have crushed islamism, enforced education, and removed muslim illiteracy as well as superstition. Yet their economies would have eventually failed as all socialist economies do. And then they would have transferred to consumer capitalism and markets out of envy rather than resistance. We are always wrong. Kings were far better than democracies.

  • We Are Always Wrong

    You know, if we had let the soviets expand their ‘communism’ into the islamic countries, they would have crushed islamism, enforced education, and removed muslim illiteracy as well as superstition. Yet their economies would have eventually failed as all socialist economies do. And then they would have transferred to consumer capitalism and markets out of envy rather than resistance. We are always wrong. Kings were far better than democracies.

  • British Responsibility for Islam.

    —“What is often forgotten is Britain’s responsibility. Islam prior to 1918 was centralized and centred in Istanbul – it was being codified there (and in Ottoman Cairo) and was modernizing. … When Britain backed the Arabs in 1915, they also backed the Saud family and, intententionally, the reactionary Islam of the Arab peninsular to use against the Ottomans – as a consequence we’ve seen the rise to prominence of Wahabbist Islam.”—Aaron Kahland Yes, I think it’s not understood that they Koran in use today was written in the 1920’s.

  • British Responsibility for Islam.

    —“What is often forgotten is Britain’s responsibility. Islam prior to 1918 was centralized and centred in Istanbul – it was being codified there (and in Ottoman Cairo) and was modernizing. … When Britain backed the Arabs in 1915, they also backed the Saud family and, intententionally, the reactionary Islam of the Arab peninsular to use against the Ottomans – as a consequence we’ve seen the rise to prominence of Wahabbist Islam.”—Aaron Kahland Yes, I think it’s not understood that they Koran in use today was written in the 1920’s.

  • Four Africas

    FOUR AFRICAS If you look at Africa, North Africa developed rapidly under the Egyptians and Phoenicians, and only failed under islam. If you look at west africa, it sure looks like civilization should have taken off there, and the only thing I can see so far is (a) limited productivity of the territory meaning high cost of administration, (b) lack of eurasian or south american domesticated animals and vegetables, (c) painful disease gradients, and (d) isolation from trade once they reached sufficient scale, that they needed eurasian technology from others to continue scale. I’m just too ignorant still to understand. But it looks like a ‘Jared Diamond’ argument there. If you look at east africa, the two red sea routes (the isthmus across the south, and the river at the north) this territory was ‘hostile and unexplored’ and the trade route poorly usd until roman times (and was prime booty for islam). If you look at the territory between east and west africa, and between east africa and the highlands of southern africa, these regions are just too costly to transit for trade – especially in comparison to the mediterranean. I mean, geography is just … damn, africa is HUGE. The route across the isthmus like that between alaska and siberia was walkable or at least open to simple migration out of africa. The semitic peoples (i think) developed out of west eurasians on this land bridge route, then moved north, and once the semitic peoples developed they migrated southward and established kingdoms in the horn of africa. (the one that is now slowly splitting off of africa to form a large island as big as the british isles.) Even once horses were introduced, the climate is not beneficial for raising horses (especially compared to mongolia or the european plain). Trade tended to round the west coast rather than cross the center. Meaning that trade with west africa was prohibitively distant until the age of sail. —“cavalryman in West Africa ultimately lost out to the musketeer. Firearms were not only, eventually, a more efficient arm of warfare: they were also very much cheaper than horses. The same happened in Asia, of course: but perhaps not quite so inevitability. For a very long time firearms were inferior both in range and rate of fire to the Turkish compound bow. The Tatars of the Crimea were still, in the seventeenth century, raiding effectively in Eastern Europe against the opposition of field artillery and troops armed with muskets. And western writers on Ottoman expansion have tended to lay too much emphasis on the Janissaries – infantry musketeers – as against the Ottomans’ more significant light cavalry. But gunpowder had nevertheless sounded the death-knell of the mounted archer’s invincibility. In West Africa the heyday of the cavalryman lasted for a much shorter period than in Asia – not more than five centuries”— Still have to study each of these west african empires, because it sure looks like there was sufficient mass there.
    Apr 04, 2018 6:30pm