[J]ust an insight into one of the many ways authoritarian cosmopolitan pseudoscience of psychology has damaged our world view: introversion is the result of deep thinking, and ‘neuroticism’ (worry) is the result of deep thinking. Both of which are criticized rather than rewarded. Everyone else is just ‘noise’ without the deep thinkers. My work on Propertarianism taught me to see us as locally specialized ants, and that there is no such thing as an ideal individual other than one who does so honestly and knowingly. Our observable personalities advocate for acquisition on behalf of our genes. Because of our different reproductive costs, very desirable males, very desirable females, and every gradation in between, is merely negotiating using his or her necessary strategy. What makes us ‘crazy’ is when we construct lies. MONOTHEISM did this damage via ‘one-ness’. That’s how damaging it is. It’s freaking tragic. Polytheism did not do this to us. This is a profound restatement of the nature of man. We are expensive creatures. We must act to acquire ‘property’ – that which we inventory for our own use and consumption. Cooperation is so disproportionately rewarding a means of acquisition we must bias in favor of cooperation to acquire. But cooperation invites parasitism. So we must act to punish violations of cooperation. And cooperation is always an act of experiment: trial and error. So we must preserve non-cooperation in our genes in order to ensure that unlike lemmings, we break off when cooperation is no longer in our interests. This is man. Everything else is accumulated lie. Most of it from babylonian and levantine deceit. Meanwhile in every epoch europeans seek to overturn this authoritarian deceit and return to our pagan egalitarian origins. Propertarianism tells us how. (a) we are all different and therefore need our own ‘gods’ for use in our own virtue ethics. (b) Monotheism is more damaging because of ‘one-ness’ (and equality) whereas polytheism (correctly) preserves differences (and hierarchy). (c) Perfect rulers are infallible and demand we obey(positivism), and imperfect rules are not always working in our interests and demand only we do not irritate them (falsificationism). Freudian Psychology further expanded one-ness and servitude by demanding conformity to a personality type that could be forcibly indoctrinated through peer pressure, guilt and shaming (and it worked), whereas polytheistic reasoning, and darwinian reasoning, and scientific analysis tell us that we each fulfill niche’s that need exploiting. Monotheism, 20th century Democracy, and Freudian psychology, all perpetuate a catastrophic fallacy of man. But why was this fallacy developed? Well, in Judaism it was developed for the same reason monotheism was developed between the Iranians and the Indians, who were originally the same people: to put them into conflict so that the Iranians could be controlled (by lying). Just as the jews needed a reason to unite different primitive tribes (by lying). Whereas in the west we did not encounter this problem since rule was achieved by arms, not deceit. It was only once Rome was too weak to enforce rule by arms that Justinian closed the schools and imposed christianity on the west. The value of christianity is in that it was ‘germanicized’ and that the central proposition: extension of kin love to non-kin was useful in uniting Europe under christian kings sanctioned by the church. This criticism of ‘monopoly’ and ‘monotheism’ and ‘one-ness’ and ‘equality’ is an application of the propertarian principle of the intertemporal division of reproductive perception, cognition, knowledge, labor and advocacy, between the consumptive (feminine) productive (libertarian), and accumulative (conservative) biases, wherein the only means by which we can make use of all available perception, cognition, and knowledge in the spectrum, is to conduct voluntary exchanges between the classes in that division of perception, cognition, and knowledge, just as the only means by which we can make use of the knowledge in the market is by voluntary exchange, money, prices, and contract. This a profound reformulation of the enlightenment vision of man, and the necessary form of government that assists him in production, reproduction, and genetic persistence. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy Testimonialism, Propertarianism, New Classical liberalism. The Propertarian Institute , Kiev, Ukraine.
Theme: Religion
-
HOPE IS NOT A TACTIC Sorry. But hope is not a tactic and faith is not a strategy
HOPE IS NOT A TACTIC
Sorry. But hope is not a tactic and faith is not a strategy. They are simply means of avoiding action while comforting yourself that you’re moral because of your beliefs instead of your actions.
Violence is a virtue when put to virtuous ends.
Source date (UTC): 2015-09-25 15:55:00 UTC
-
AS FAR AS I KNOW THIS IS THE DEFINITIVE ANALYSIS OF THE CHURCH 1) The church ser
AS FAR AS I KNOW THIS IS THE DEFINITIVE ANALYSIS OF THE CHURCH
1) The church served as a wealthy but weak professional administrative branch of government.
2) The church could grant moral authority to nobility and monarchy, or revoke it. Meaning that if revoked, your lands were marked for conquest by others.
3) The central tenet of christianity is the extension of kinship love to non-kin, breaking familial and tribal bonds. This is the only meaningful principle. It also happens to intuitively reflect hunter gatherer ethics and morality.
4) The church was able to legally enforce this policy by the prohibition on cousin marriage, and the grant of property rights to women.
5) While the church pursued these policies purely out of self interest: the removal of competition to the church as government, and the cheaper acquisition of lands, the net effect was to restore order to Celtica after the Roman destruction of Celtic Civilization and the impact of the migration period, and to provide sufficient administrative support that Saxon (north sea hanseatic) civilization could evolve into what we think of as Protestant Europe.
There is nothing valuable at all in the literature. It is mere nonsense. The ‘good’ outcomes were the product of one principle ‘love’ and one institution: property rights under the common saxon law, administered by literate if ignorant clerks.
Rome created a false history of european barbarism. The church, starting with Bede, has been successful in authoring a false history of Europe. Just as the “democratic era’ has authored a false history of europe. Just as americans are being taught a false history of europe. Economic history tells us differently.
Aristocracy, sovereignty and Militita, Rule of Law, the common law of property, Extra-kinship love and high trust.
These institutions produce the lowest transaction costs, and therefore highest possible economic velocity humans are capable of.
Source date (UTC): 2015-09-25 05:48:00 UTC
-
I AM ALL FOR PRAYER I am all for prayer. If that means talking to our gods. I do
I AM ALL FOR PRAYER
I am all for prayer. If that means talking to our gods. I do that all the time. I mean, who else will listen to our bitching, whining, insecurity, envy, uncertainty and indecision? lol. The great thing about an all-knowing god is that you know you can’t lie to him, and so, in your prayers it’s hard to lie. And I think a quiet time where we are unable to lie to ourselves is a particular discipline we all benefit from. I think the more “neurotic” (worrying) we are, the more important prayer is for us. Now, I have worked to where I can achieve the same discipline by writing arguments. So to some degree writing has become an equivalent discipline for testing my own thoughts. But there are things I would not write down. Even in conversation with myself. And it is those things I reserve for ‘prayer’ (talking to my god).
(Funny: I doubt sociopaths pray, but if they do, can they lie to their gods? lol)
Source date (UTC): 2015-09-10 07:51:00 UTC
-
INSIGHT INTO THE DAMAGE OF LEVANTINE MONOTHEISM AND PSYCHOLOGY UPON THE FRAMEWOR
http://bit.ly/1K1OwnHAN INSIGHT INTO THE DAMAGE OF LEVANTINE MONOTHEISM AND PSYCHOLOGY UPON THE FRAMEWORK OF WESTERN THOUGHT
Just an insight into one of the many ways authoritarian cosmopolitan pseudoscience of psychology has damaged our world view: introversion is the result of deep thinking, and ‘neuroticism’ (worry) is the result of deep thinking. Both of which are criticized rather than rewarded. Everyone else is just ‘noise’ without the deep thinkers.
My work on Propertarianism taught me to see us as locally specialized ants, and that there is no such thing as an ideal individual other than one who does so honestly and knowingly.
Our observable personalities advocate for acquisition on behalf of our genes. Because of our different reproductive costs, very desirable males, very desirable females, and every gradation in between, is merely negotiating using his or her necessary strategy. What makes us ‘crazy’ is when we construct lies.
MONOTHEISM did this damage via ‘one-ness’. That’s how damaging it is. It’s freaking tragic. Polytheism did not do this to us.
This is a profound restatement of the nature of man.
We are expensive creatures. We must act to acquire ‘property’ – that which we inventory for our own use and consumption. Cooperation is so disproportionately rewarding a means of acquisition we must bias in favor of cooperation to acquire. But cooperation invites parasitism. So we must act to punish violations of cooperation. And cooperation is always an act of experiment: trial and error. So we must preserve non-cooperation in our genes in order to ensure that unlike lemmings, we break off when cooperation is no longer in our interests.
This is man. Everything else is accumulated lie. Most of it from babylonian and levantine deceit. Meanwhile in every epoch europeans seek to overturn this authoritarian deceit and return to our pagan egalitarian origins.
Propertarianism tells us how.
(a) we are all different and therefore need our own ‘gods’ for use in our own virtue ethics.
(b) Monotheism is more damaging because of ‘one-ness’ (and equality) whereas polytheism (correctly) preserves differences (and hierarchy).
(c) Perfect rulers are infallible and demand we obey(positivism), and imperfect rules are not always working in our interests and demand only we do not irritate them (falsificationism).
Freudian Psychology further expanded one-ness and servitude by demanding conformity to a personality type that could be forcibly indoctrinated through peer pressure, guilt and shaming (and it worked), whereas polytheistic reasoning, and darwinian reasoning, and scientific analysis tell us that we each fulfill niche’s that need exploiting.
Monotheism, 20th century Democracy, and Freudian psychology,all perpetuate a catastrophic fallacy of man. But why was this fallacy developed? Well, in Judaism it was developed for the same reason monotheism was developed between the Iranians and the Indians, who were originally the same people: to put them into conflict so that the Iranians could be controlled (by lying). Just as the jews needed a reason to unite different primitive tribes (by lying). Whereas in the west we did not encounter this problem since rule was achieved by arms, not deceit. It was only once Rome was too weak to enforce rule by arms that Justinian closed the schools and imposed christianity on the west. The value of christianity is in that it was ‘germanicized’ and that the central proposition: extension of kin love to non-kin was useful in uniting Europe under christian kings sanctioned by the church.
This criticism of ‘monopoly’ and ‘monotheism’ and ‘one-ness’ and ‘equality’ is an application of the propertarian principle of the intertemporal division of reproductive perception, cognition, knowledge, labor and advocacy, between the consumptive (feminine) productive (libertarian), and accumulative (conservative) biases, wherein the only means by which we can make use of all available perception, cognition, and knowledge in the spectrum, is to conduct voluntary exchanges between the classes in that division of perception, cognition, and knowledge, just as the only means by which we can make use of the knowledge in the market is by voluntary exchange, money, prices, and contract.
This a profound reformulation of the enlightenment vision of man, and the necessary form of government that assists him in production, reproduction, and genetic persistence
Curt Doolittle
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
Testimonialism, Propertarianism, New Classical liberalism.
The Propertarian Institute , Kiev, Ukraine.
Source date (UTC): 2015-09-08 05:27:00 UTC
-
Its harvest time. And God made Plums, Cherries, Blueberries and Raspberries for
Its harvest time. And God made Plums, Cherries, Blueberries and Raspberries for us. How cool is that?!!! OMG. So AWESOME!
Source date (UTC): 2015-09-07 03:40:00 UTC
-
NOTES ON JULIUS EVOLA’S RIDE THE TIGER (reason the european right fails) 1) EXPE
NOTES ON JULIUS EVOLA’S RIDE THE TIGER
(reason the european right fails)
1) EXPERIENTIAL LANGUAGE SHOWS HIS LACKING. He has to use a lot of experiential terms because he does not understand the ‘scientific’ content of our ‘traditions’ that he ‘feels and intuits’.
2) WE CANNOT RE-EVOLVE INTUITIONISTIC TRADITIONS, WE CAN ONLY IMPOSE OBSERVABLE LAW. Without understanding that content, one cannot impose the content of that prior (traditional) order by procedural, institutional, intentional means. The habituated, ‘unscientific’ mythos that the ‘traditional world’ evolved under cannot be institutionally reconstructed. In other words, while one can accidentally evolve, by trial and error, a set of myths, rituals, traditions, norms and habits, and institute them by the legislation; once the scientific . In other words, if content is ‘true’ then it can be imposed by rule of law.
3) ARISTOCRATIC ACCUMULATION VS PROLETARIAN CONSUMPTION. He is speaking of the aristocratic mind, and how there is no longer a role for aristocratic mind in our ‘bourgeoise’ or better stated ‘consumer’ civilization, in which we signal by consumption rather than the production and paternal ‘farming’ of civilizational excellence: the true, the commons, and the beautiful. In other words, he is speaking as an aristocratic producer of commons, not a bourgeoise production of consumption, nor a mere consumer of production. He lacks the language (Propertarianism) to make his statements in what we would today call a ‘technical’ or ‘scientific’ language.
That’s the IMPORTANT POINT: Conservative construction of commons vs progressive consumption of commons
4) LACKING LANGUAGE MEANS LACKING THEORY. Through traditional lends, he uses antique terminology that misleads him (as do many french, german and Italian thinkers). Imprecise words (allegories) are an intellectual prison just as precise words (theories) are an intellectual key to intellectual freedom.
5) VIRTUE ETHICS He is looking for a virtue ethics (as are most of us, since they are the easiest to understand and adopt with the least general knowledge), which evolves in response (as justification of) a set of metaphysical value judgements. But one cannot construct virtue ethics by institutional means. One can only justify scientific institutions by a means of virtue ethics.
6) SAVIOR MYTH. As such, (like Hoppe), Evola’s solution is to preserve our literature and intentions, and seize an opportunity that MAY come in the future. Meaning he has failed to develop an institutional solution to restore the scientific (objectively good) content of our traditions. In other words, he is creating a christian “savior mythos” for himself. And not a solution for ourself. My solution is actually pretty simple: continue the evolution of the common law of non-imposition against any form of property, into a formal inviolable, verbalism-impervious, logic of cooperation.
7) BELIEF WITHOUT MEANS OF PERSISTENCE VS INCENTIVES WITH MEANS OF PERSISTENCE. While as an intellectual I sympathize with and share sentiments and intuitions with, as well as aesthetic history, he provides little explanation of the incentives and institutions that allowed those traditional circumstances to arise, and he focuses as do most ‘philosophers’ upon what good ‘belief’ is (which is nonsense, since belief is justificationary). ‘Belief’ and ‘value’ are terms hungover from the age of mysticism. We need not believe incentives. They exist. They can be constructed. We can construct a high trust order. In fact, it’s not even complicated. Few recipes are complicated. It’s discovering them.
8) MY OWN GERMANIC (PREWAR) BIAS. I realize that I am an anglo analytic (scientific) not a continental rational (moral), and that english is a technical language and that continental intellectual history is poetic, literary, romantic, moral and spiritual. They have the curse of norms that island people (the anglosphere) has in canada thanks to the french abuse of canada in the 70’s, but which americans and to some degree australians do not quite. In this case it is most obvious that America is a german country speaking the english language prior to the breakup of germanic civilzation into anglo and german wings in the 1830’s. And americans retain the pre-war germanic political culture, albeit in english language, more so than do either Britain or Germany today.
9) NOTHING TO LEARN FROM HIM BUT POETIC LICENSE. Realistically, I just can get nothing from him. I have developed propertarianism and testimonialism to escape the limits of the ages of mysticism and rationalism, and to bring political discourse into the age of science.
10) OTHERS MIGHT GAIN MEANING PRIOR TO PROPERTARIANISM. Perhaps for many others of the aristocratic (paternal) class, it is, and will be, easier to understand Evola prior to understanding Propertarianism and Testimonialism. Perhaps I am the product of my half century of science and computer science. Perhaps I have been trained to eradicate the subjective experience from my perceptions such that the subjective experience sounds to me as talk of gods will sounds to scientists and aethists. So becasue of that training, and my now near universal loss of appreciateion for fictional literature, and what I term justificationary moralizing, I can find no value in looking backward into less parsimonious political literature. But that does not mean others will not. It means only that like classical liberalism, anglo libertarianism, cosmopolitan libertarianism, anarcho-capitalism, and Neo-Reaction, that Evola is a step in the intellectual history that many must go through, even though he has no solutions and provides us no means of achieving our ends – or even understanding what too seek and how.
RESTATING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ADVOCATIVE INFORMAL BELIEF AND PROHIBITIONARY FORMAL INSTITUTIONS.
Belief and ‘value’ are not meaningful words in political philosophy. They are artifacts of religious mysticism and its half hearted reformation: rational philosophy. Adults today speak in terms of Institutions, incentives, economics, and law.
Curt Doolittle
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2015-09-05 04:15:00 UTC
-
Christian Love and Propertarianism
[I]f you haven’t noticed, I’ve bought the love thing hook line and sinker. I tell other men I love them on a daily basis. And it’s infectious. We don’t support each other enough.
Our culture tells us to be stalwart stoic warriors in the germanic tradition. But we no longer have normative means of obtaining positive reinforcement for our actions – thanks largely to feminists. So we have to take matters into our own hands. The red pill means not just that we love ourselves, but that we love other men. And tell them so, when they do works in our interest. Technically, Propertarianism tells us only to suppress parasitism (free riding/imposed costs). But Aristocratic Egalitarianism tells us to treat with brotherly love, all who engage in abstinence of parasitism, act as sheriff to police it, militia to defend it, and warrior to demand it. There is precious little in Propertarianism that was not in Aristocratic Christianity, Mithraism, and the initiatic brotherhood of indo European warriors that led to the construction of the Vedas. We are man’s aristocracy. Shall we abandon man to immorality? Or shall we lead him to universal love and abstinence from parasitism? Lets lead. They failed. We must take back rule. Leave them government, but take back rule. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy -
Christian Love and Propertarianism
[I]f you haven’t noticed, I’ve bought the love thing hook line and sinker. I tell other men I love them on a daily basis. And it’s infectious. We don’t support each other enough.
Our culture tells us to be stalwart stoic warriors in the germanic tradition. But we no longer have normative means of obtaining positive reinforcement for our actions – thanks largely to feminists. So we have to take matters into our own hands. The red pill means not just that we love ourselves, but that we love other men. And tell them so, when they do works in our interest. Technically, Propertarianism tells us only to suppress parasitism (free riding/imposed costs). But Aristocratic Egalitarianism tells us to treat with brotherly love, all who engage in abstinence of parasitism, act as sheriff to police it, militia to defend it, and warrior to demand it. There is precious little in Propertarianism that was not in Aristocratic Christianity, Mithraism, and the initiatic brotherhood of indo European warriors that led to the construction of the Vedas. We are man’s aristocracy. Shall we abandon man to immorality? Or shall we lead him to universal love and abstinence from parasitism? Lets lead. They failed. We must take back rule. Leave them government, but take back rule. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy -
Religious Christians don’t trouble me – even in arguments. Largely because I agr
Religious Christians don’t trouble me – even in arguments. Largely because I agree with their sentiments if not their reasoning. The way I handle debates with them is merely that people in prior times understood the universe far less that we do, and spoke in very primitive terms. So I tend to agree with the wisdom of the ages, I just recognize that the people who captured those words of wisdom had only those words to capture ideas with. Translated into modern speech, most of it still stands scrutiny – at least as far as ‘love thy neighbor’, ‘turn the other cheek’, ‘do unto others as you would have done unto you’, and ‘do not unto others as you would not have done unto you”, “obtain virtue through charity”, and that the ten commandments are the first substantive attempt to capture property rights in primitive language. All of that is pretty good stuff.
The church gave us the feminine half of the spectrum, and aristocracy gave us the masculine: Every man a warrior, father, sheriff, judge, and legislator. That we should submit to anyone or any god is not in our canon. Sorry. Never.Gonna.Happen. Aristocracy is the cult of non-submission. Women submit out of their nature. As a man I submit to no man and no god, and not even the will of the universe. Western civilization is competitive. The Temples and the Aristocracy(government). The church and the Aristocracy. And the end of our civilization was due to the failure to add a democratic house of the church for women and the underclasses when the church fell.
Competition allows calculation by trial and error. The individual, the family,the jury and truthful testimony, and the science of constructing truthful testimony, create a market for innovation in every field of human action. We can repair the collapse of the church but adding its secular equivalent to the government, and limiting membership in every house to those who practice such membership: commons, insurance and care, business and industry, justice and war.
Source date (UTC): 2015-08-24 04:51:00 UTC