Curt Doolittle

Theme: Religion

  • THE SACREDNESS OF EUROPEAN ROYALTY, LAW, FAITH (Trifunctionalism) Well, I’d make

    THE SACREDNESS OF EUROPEAN ROYALTY, LAW, FAITH
    (Trifunctionalism)

    Well, I’d make undermining (“GSRRM”), meaning gossiping, shaming, ridiculing rallying, moralizing, psychologizing, insult and undermining of the Royal Familes a crime of sedition, and tolerate only rational respectful criticism of policies, crimes, or violations of traditional discipline respect and ritual.

    For those of you who don’t understand it, Western civilization is trifunctional with three sacred institutions: the martial aristocracy, the neutrality of the natural law and the judiciary, and the non aggression and caretaking of the faith and its priesthoods, whteher supernatural or secular.

    This trifunctionalism allows competition between the three sets of elites that master the three means of cooperation vs coercion: masculine military (state) of force and defense, neutral economy (judiciary) of reciprocity and duty, and feminine faith (family) of seduction and care.

    No other civilization is trifunctional: preventing authority by preservation of internal competition using the natural (scientific) law of cooperation: tort.

    But (there is always a but), while trifunctionalism provides continuous competition between the three classes of elites, thereby ensuring that none can impose their monopoly form of authority upon us, leaving only cooperation between factions within limits, the weakness of trifunctionalism is that it is more tolerant of innovation, and unfortunately more tolerate of including innovations in sedition especially from propaganda, finance, and cults, using deception, pseudoscience sophistsry occultism, and false promises of freedom from nature’s laws.

    So we must be ever vigilant against those who would seek to undermine any one of our ‘sacred’ institutions of state, law, and faith. And not seek to empower any of them to the detriment of the others, by invading the window of responsibility of one another.

    Love you all.

    Cheers.
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natual Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-14 01:23:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657557273051295744

  • ( Yes. But I spent about a year – a frustrating year – learning that they have l

    🙁 Yes. But I spent about a year – a frustrating year – learning that they have learned the abrahamic method of deceit, so thoroughly, that it’s instinctual to lie. And its impossible for them to take responsibility for anything – at all.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-13 01:04:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657190156993011713

    Reply addressees: @Psyche_OS

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657185029796028416

  • WHY DOESN’T PORTUGAL HAVE A HIGH TRUST POLITY? Portugal is Latin, not Germanic,

    WHY DOESN’T PORTUGAL HAVE A HIGH TRUST POLITY?
    Portugal is Latin, not Germanic, and was infected by the Muslim conquest of Spain, after recovery, was a long time under the church, outside the Lotharingian trade route from Italy to the north sea, outside the manorialism of the Hajnal line, outside the Hanseatic league, outside the protestant reformation, like Spain predatory in colonization, and so outside the west germanic and anglo development of the modern rule of law state, late to industrialization, early to the seduction of communism and socialism.

    That said, they do pretty well, have not fallen into the reproductive collapse of the absolute nuclear family, nor excess immigration to compensate. And they’ll get there within a generation or three. Why? The internet’s mass access to information was more effective than all previous revolutions at inspiring the public other than the industrial.

    Christians hate this, but the longer a people were under the church, the lower the trust of the population. The church was far more corrupt than any secular government today by orders of magnitude, and Russian and Chinese propaganda has nothing on the church. The Jews may have invented it in the middle east, but Europeans using religion were really happy to use lying and propaganda to take unearned credit, evade responsibility for demonstrated crimes, and to profit like an organized crime syndicate whenever possible.

    Christianity isn’t alone. Jewish and Islamic irreciprocal ethics, wither jewish organized crime against the commons, and Islamic organized warfare against all more advanced civilizations, combined with mandatory ignorance is even worse than church corruption.

    Not that Chinese and russian desperate attempts to preserve pre-industrial imperialism for the benefit of single class against the interest of the people, is any better.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Reply addressees: @BeedrillHive @heimbergecon

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-12 18:37:38 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657092687516909570

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657078397091078144

  • So contrary to the christian dogma, our founders were men of the enlightenment e

    So contrary to the christian dogma, our founders were men of the enlightenment empiricism and reason who understood the common people needed their religion yet saw the organized church as hostile to the people.

    The uniquenss of the anglosphere and america is that we are bound by rule of law of the natural law – and left behind the corruption of the aristocracy, the church, and the lazy indolent peasantry.

    Reply addressees: @GEsenhourn @anneapplebaum

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-12 13:04:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657008958857420802

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657003679046680576

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    I am a jeffersonian christian, in that jesus was a philosopher only able to speak in the language and logic of his location and time, and the church was a politica system that sought to bring cheap semitic rule by superstition where costly european rule by reason – an aristocatic method – was ‘challenging’ to bring to the wider word of vast underclasses made worse by the prosperity the aristocacy had created giving slaves, underclasses and women the relative safety and choice that for the first time ’empowered’ them at least a little bit.

    So I am loyal to the truth: the laws of nature. Christianity despite it’s church nonsense and superstition does inform us how to produce a higher trust society more prepared for economic prosperity by treating everyone as a customer – of cooperation. It’s utility-bearing but not true.

    This means I am opposed to hostile religions, and tolerant of christian superstition of the peasantry. But I am and always will be aristocracy: sovereignty, liberty, and freedom, under rule of law insured by force of arms. As such my loyalty is to the people regardless of their weakness or folly.

    And, the duty of the peasantry, as jesus counseled, is to be loyal to the aristocracy in matters of reality (the state).

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1657003679046680576

  • I am a jeffersonian christian, in that jesus was a philosopher only able to spea

    I am a jeffersonian christian, in that jesus was a philosopher only able to speak in the language and logic of his location and time, and the church was a politica system that sought to bring cheap semitic rule by superstition where costly european rule by reason – an aristocatic method – was ‘challenging’ to bring to the wider word of vast underclasses made worse by the prosperity the aristocacy had created giving slaves, underclasses and women the relative safety and choice that for the first time ’empowered’ them at least a little bit.

    So I am loyal to the truth: the laws of nature. Christianity despite it’s church nonsense and superstition does inform us how to produce a higher trust society more prepared for economic prosperity by treating everyone as a customer – of cooperation. It’s utility-bearing but not true.

    This means I am opposed to hostile religions, and tolerant of christian superstition of the peasantry. But I am and always will be aristocracy: sovereignty, liberty, and freedom, under rule of law insured by force of arms. As such my loyalty is to the people regardless of their weakness or folly.

    And, the duty of the peasantry, as jesus counseled, is to be loyal to the aristocracy in matters of reality (the state).

    Reply addressees: @GEsenhourn @anneapplebaum

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-12 12:43:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657003678924955649

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656930500705939456

  • Why would you make the assumption that I haven’t read Guenon in particular? Or t

    Why would you make the assumption that I haven’t read Guenon in particular? Or that I don’t grasp the entire movement’s attempt, like the french and german before it, to find an alternative justification for priors, after Darwin, Maxwell, Spencer and Nietzsche eliminated the supernatural, physical, biological, social, and moral foundations that religons dependend upon – while at the same time Boaz, Freud, Marx, and many other developed other pseudoscientific techniques from the jewish culture as well.
    I didn’t do much more in that post than enumerate possibilities for god(s), and then the human cognitive hieararchy, then state that it’s untestifiable that there are such thing as gods; that its demonstrable that all such claims were anthropomorphic projections at best, and absolute deciets at worst.
    I kind of doubt you understand the meaning of metaphysics, and how and why cultures develop different metaphysical rules both explicity and implicit.
    And It’s non-logical to assume people who came before us didn’t observe the same patters in reality that we do and expressed them in the only paradigm, vocabulary and logic available to them at that time and place. So of course wisdom literature that survives tends to include more than a grain of truth when converted from archaic to present form.

    Reply addressees: @JohnDuttonTrad

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-11 22:57:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656795755623972864

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656789987113807873

  • As such god is the most easily accessible standard of weight and measure of huma

    As such god is the most easily accessible standard of weight and measure of human behavior, because imitation, empathizing, and sympathizing are innate human abilities. So even children, the illiterate, and the less able can learn it. Every other form of judgement requires…

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-11 19:06:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656737550420017161

    Reply addressees: @OtonielFilho5 @bierlingm

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656736854270410766

  • Are you loyal to american and our rich anglo institutions first or are you loyal

    Are you loyal to american and our rich anglo institutions first or are you loyal to your religion tradition and culture first?

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-11 12:47:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656642167044206592

    Reply addressees: @anneapplebaum

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656629995052122115

  • GREAT THINKERS MOSTLY WEREN’T – RELIGIOUS JUSTIFICATION OF MORALITY INCLUDED

    GREAT THINKERS MOSTLY WEREN’T – RELIGIOUS JUSTIFICATION OF MORALITY INCLUDED https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1656637982445543431

  • Most great thinkers were terribly wrong – and while religious prophets have caus

    Most great thinkers were terribly wrong – and while religious prophets have caused the most bloodshed than any other thinkers, philosophers have been a mixed bag, most of which was hamful, while natural philosophers (economists, engineers, scientists) have dragged mankind out of ignorance, superstition, starvation, and disease.

    Kant is no different. Rousseu began the revolution against empiricism with moral justification claiming man had a nature he did not, kant imitated him with rationalism, trying to recreate the authority of religion without mysticism. And together they caused all that followed them to follow the continental project of rejecting the Anglo invention of the modern state, rule of law, natural law and natural rights and obligations, by the PROHIBITION on authority that the french, germans, and jews tried to recreate.

    Now I can define Morality scientifically and you will be unable to falsify it. It’s just reciprocity in whatever context. Though I won’t bore you with the properties of reciprocity at present. For morality at scale we simply expand reciprocity by scale into political and international scopes of human interaction, resulting in natural law. This is a purely scientific project that began with Aristotle and was only complete today.

    Does that mean that all people will agree with reciprocity and natural law define personal to political to international morality? Of course not. Because everyone wants a moral code that benefits them, not one that is equal across all. In other words, most people are immoral and only as moral as they must be. And they justify their immorality for various reasons of psychological, economic, and political utility.

    Gods are the product of the minds of men, for various psychological reasons, we share in common, even if some more so and some less so. They were the best we could do in the ancient and medieval worlds. They were not the best the greeks could do, and they are not the best that we can do. Because religion is terribly expensive and so far we are unwilling to pay the price of a new non-false religion.

    Cheers

    Reply addressees: @OtonielFilho5 @bierlingm

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-11 12:30:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656637982269374466

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656537425756266497