Theme: Sex Differences

  • The Human Operating System

    [S]omething I wrote yesterday helped me clarify my argument on human anti-equalitarianism.

    – First: with very slight hormonal variation, we are able to reproduce in a distribution (division) of inter-temporal perception, cognition, knowledge and labor. And, that the initial division of perception cognition knowledge and labor began as a reproductive division of labor.

    – Second, that our information system consists of mutually beneficial consent through demonstration of voluntary exchange.

    – Third, that through denying people sustenance by other than market means, we forcibly incorporate them into this information system.

    – Fourth, that western truth telling, common law, property rights, rule of law, and forcible expansion of rule of law, construct the most efficient and therefore rapidly adaptive system by which we expand and enforce the quality of our information system.

    – Fifth, the side effect of this enforcement of market participation is the constant improvement our our genetics in no small party by the allocation of reproduction to the productive.

    – Sixth, that insuring individuals provides incentives that keep them within the information system.

    – Seventh, but reproduction via redistribution cannot be a ‘right’ because it is a forcible cost put upon others. In other words, your right of reproduction and insurance is predicated upon your ability to pay for your offspring. Or in moral terms reproduction without production is ‘a lie’ inserted into our information system.

    This list explains a great deal. Forgive me for using analogies, but it is a fairly short and tight description of the properties of the human operating system.

    With this understanding, Keynesian credit expansion for the purpose of increasing employment is suicidal. And by contrast, the Propertarian “shareholder” system is a natural extension of the human information system. In Propertarianism, I suggest inserting liquidity through the consumer directly, but limiting reproduction for dependents to one child, and limiting immigration to highly skilled individuals, and moving and therefore exporting capital and Propertarian institutions to groups of people, rather than moving people to capital.

    We have spent most of our scientific history (our search for truth) considering problems of mass and velocity. We have spent much of our economic history considering money and credit. But in both cases, we were mistaken – as the physicists and as Hayek have informed us. The model for all human understanding is that of information. Physics must be understood as information, and mass as a generalization of it. The economics of human cooperation must be understood as information, and physical representations a generalization of states of information.

    Hoppe’s criticisms of Hayek are purely psychological, and only half right. Hayek correctly unites physics and economics by combining information and institutions. And yes, Hayek placed his emphasis on the institutions without fully appreciating property. Hoppe places emphasis on property without fully appreciating institutions – particularly norms. Hoppe incorrectly defines property to suit rothbardian separatist ends, rather than as a general and universal rule of human evolution. And very likely, without fully appreciating the distribution of human character traits – he is an odd, somewhat angry and frustrated duck himself – so it is no wonder. Hayek understands man correctly – and is a saint of a man if there was one. But neither man of either character grasped the very great specialization in our perception and cognition – nor that they are both useful and necessary.

    The only end to our evolutionary development is to increase intelligence, decrease impulsivity and aggression, to the point where we still perform our different reproductive functions relying upon our emotional intuitions, but where we are able to rationally observe them for what they are, and enjoy them, rather than be driven by them. Thankfully this requires only increasing our median intelligence by a standard deviation. Unfortunately for other groups, it means they are nearly prohibited from it.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Human Operating System

    [S]omething I wrote yesterday helped me clarify my argument on human anti-equalitarianism.

    – First: with very slight hormonal variation, we are able to reproduce in a distribution (division) of inter-temporal perception, cognition, knowledge and labor. And, that the initial division of perception cognition knowledge and labor began as a reproductive division of labor.

    – Second, that our information system consists of mutually beneficial consent through demonstration of voluntary exchange.

    – Third, that through denying people sustenance by other than market means, we forcibly incorporate them into this information system.

    – Fourth, that western truth telling, common law, property rights, rule of law, and forcible expansion of rule of law, construct the most efficient and therefore rapidly adaptive system by which we expand and enforce the quality of our information system.

    – Fifth, the side effect of this enforcement of market participation is the constant improvement our our genetics in no small party by the allocation of reproduction to the productive.

    – Sixth, that insuring individuals provides incentives that keep them within the information system.

    – Seventh, but reproduction via redistribution cannot be a ‘right’ because it is a forcible cost put upon others. In other words, your right of reproduction and insurance is predicated upon your ability to pay for your offspring. Or in moral terms reproduction without production is ‘a lie’ inserted into our information system.

    This list explains a great deal. Forgive me for using analogies, but it is a fairly short and tight description of the properties of the human operating system.

    With this understanding, Keynesian credit expansion for the purpose of increasing employment is suicidal. And by contrast, the Propertarian “shareholder” system is a natural extension of the human information system. In Propertarianism, I suggest inserting liquidity through the consumer directly, but limiting reproduction for dependents to one child, and limiting immigration to highly skilled individuals, and moving and therefore exporting capital and Propertarian institutions to groups of people, rather than moving people to capital.

    We have spent most of our scientific history (our search for truth) considering problems of mass and velocity. We have spent much of our economic history considering money and credit. But in both cases, we were mistaken – as the physicists and as Hayek have informed us. The model for all human understanding is that of information. Physics must be understood as information, and mass as a generalization of it. The economics of human cooperation must be understood as information, and physical representations a generalization of states of information.

    Hoppe’s criticisms of Hayek are purely psychological, and only half right. Hayek correctly unites physics and economics by combining information and institutions. And yes, Hayek placed his emphasis on the institutions without fully appreciating property. Hoppe places emphasis on property without fully appreciating institutions – particularly norms. Hoppe incorrectly defines property to suit rothbardian separatist ends, rather than as a general and universal rule of human evolution. And very likely, without fully appreciating the distribution of human character traits – he is an odd, somewhat angry and frustrated duck himself – so it is no wonder. Hayek understands man correctly – and is a saint of a man if there was one. But neither man of either character grasped the very great specialization in our perception and cognition – nor that they are both useful and necessary.

    The only end to our evolutionary development is to increase intelligence, decrease impulsivity and aggression, to the point where we still perform our different reproductive functions relying upon our emotional intuitions, but where we are able to rationally observe them for what they are, and enjoy them, rather than be driven by them. Thankfully this requires only increasing our median intelligence by a standard deviation. Unfortunately for other groups, it means they are nearly prohibited from it.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

  • THE HUMAN OPERATING SYSTEM Something I wrote yesterday helped me clarify my argu

    THE HUMAN OPERATING SYSTEM

    Something I wrote yesterday helped me clarify my argument on human anti-equalitarianism.

    – First: with very slight hormonal variation, we are able to reproduce in a distribution (division) of inter-temporal perception, cognition, knowledge and labor. And, that the initial division of perception cognition knowledge and labor began as a reproductive division of labor.

    – Second, that our information system consists of mutually beneficial consent through demonstration of voluntary exchange.

    – Third, that through denying people sustenance by other than market means, we forcibly incorporate them into this information system.

    – Fourth, that western truth telling, common law, property rights, rule of law, and forcible expansion of rule of law, construct the most efficient and therefore rapidly adaptive system by which we expand and enforce the quality of our information system.

    – Fifth, the side effect of this enforcement of market participation is the constant improvement our our genetics in no small party by the allocation of reproduction to the productive.

    – Sixth, that insuring individuals provides incentives that keep them within the information system.

    – Seventh, but reproduction via redistribution cannot be a ‘right’ because it is a forcible cost put upon others. In other words, your right of reproduction and insurance is predicated upon your ability to pay for your offspring. Or in moral terms reproduction without production is ‘a lie’ inserted into our information system.

    This list explains a great deal. Forgive me for using analogies, but it is a fairly short and tight description of the properties of the human operating system.

    With this understanding, Keynesian credit expansion for the purpose of increasing employment is suicidal. And by contrast, the Propertarian “shareholder” system is a natural extension of the human information system. In Propertarianism, I suggest inserting liquidity through the consumer directly, but limiting reproduction for dependents to one child, and limiting immigration to highly skilled individuals, and moving and therefore exporting capital and Propertarian institutions to groups of people, rather than moving people to capital.

    We have spent most of our scientific history (our search for truth) considering problems of mass and velocity. We have spent much of our economic history considering money and credit. But in both cases, we were mistaken – as the physicists and as Hayek have informed us. The model for all human understanding is that of information. Physics must be understood as information, and mass as a generalization of it. The economics of human cooperation must be understood as information, and physical representations a generalization of states of information.

    Hoppe’s criticisms of Hayek are purely psychological, and only half right. Hayek correctly unites physics and economics by combining information and institutions. And yes, Hayek placed his emphasis on the institutions without fully appreciating property. Hoppe places emphasis on property without fully appreciating institutions – particularly norms. Hoppe incorrectly defines property to suit rothbardian separatist ends, rather than as a general and universal rule of human evolution. And very likely, without fully appreciating the distribution of human character traits – he is an odd, somewhat angry and frustrated duck himself – so it is no wonder. Hayek understands man correctly – and is a saint of a man if there was one. But neither man of either character grasped the very great specialization in our perception and cognition – nor that they are both useful and necessary.

    The only end to our evolutionary development is to increase intelligence, decrease impulsivity and aggression, to the point where we still perform our different reproductive functions relying upon our emotional intuitions, but where we are able to rationally observe them for what they are, and enjoy them, rather than be driven by them. Thankfully this requires only increasing our median intelligence by a standard deviation. Unfortunately for other groups, it means they are nearly prohibited from it.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2015-04-05 03:56:00 UTC

  • “According to the US Department of Health and Human Services, women are more lik

    —“According to the US Department of Health and Human Services, women are more likely to abuse children than men. In Australia, “mothers carried out almost 68 per cent of cases of emotional and psychological abuse committed by parents, about 53 per cent of physical abuse and more than 94 per cent of neglect cases.” If you ever find yourself asking why there are so many violent people out there, you might want to start by looking at all those women beating up little children.”—

    I haven’t seen the data but it’s consistent with everything else I have come across.

    Why? Men just leave.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-04-01 12:24:00 UTC

  • Women are more likely to feel charitable. But men and women are equally likely t

    Women are more likely to feel charitable. But men and women are equally likely to act charitably. I have to read more about it.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-03-31 02:23:00 UTC

  • Dear god. Thank you for alpha females. Strong women. Unafraid of men. Unintimida

    Dear god. Thank you for alpha females. Strong women. Unafraid of men. Unintimidated by men. Smart. And feminine. And Unafraid of femininity.

    Thank you to my sisters. And my mother. And my grandmother. Who trained me to appreciate strong women.

    The world would be unbearable without them.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-03-28 15:14:00 UTC

  • GENIUS BIT OF THE DAY —“I’m trying to get over my American prohibition on self

    GENIUS BIT OF THE DAY

    —“I’m trying to get over my American prohibition on selfishness, but women need somewhere to put their monumental nurturing instinct. Because if they don’t put it into their man, or their children, they’ll put it into cats and Socialism.”— Roman.

    (rolling lol)


    Source date (UTC): 2015-03-24 15:01:00 UTC

  • And women have successfully voted to destroy western property rights in every el

    And women have successfully voted to destroy western property rights in every election after the first generation of women voters. Today almost all elections are decided by women, and principally by unmarried women and single mothers (see Pew). Without women voters we would never have moved to the left, destroyed the constitution, destroyed the family (the compromise), and had rampant immigration.

    Until we developed paternalism, women used sex to manage extended families. Men developed property, and paternalism, and instead of a few men reproducing, many did. All advancement in human history is the product of property rights – and women have destroyed them. And destroyed the west.

    So the future looks very much like the conquest of the west, and the return to greco-islamic paternalism. Why? Because women used democracy to violate the compromise that made western civilization possible.

    For men, it is much more desirable to live in a paternal world. It is easy for us to dominate women. We don’t make civilization for ourselves, but for the admiration of our wives and daughters.

    The only choice women have ever had was the one western men gave them. And they destroyed it with their folly and greed.

    Women gossip. Women destroy each other through hen-pecking in groups. Women destroy advanced society. It’s not complicated. It’s in their nature.

    Through most of history, women (gossips) were considered the root of all evil. It appears that even in advanced society, history repeats itself.

    We made a mistake deifying women in the victorian era.

    We were right all along.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-03-24 03:20:00 UTC

  • The Mirror View of Feminism: The Destruction of the Compromise

    [A]nd women have successfully voted to destroy western property rights in every election after the first generation of women voters. Today almost all elections are decided by women, and principally by unmarried women and single mothers (see Pew).

    Without women voters we would never have moved to the left, destroyed the constitution, destroyed the family (the compromise), and had rampant immigration.

    Until we developed paternalism, women used sex to manage extended families. Men developed property, and paternalism, and instead of a few men reproducing, many did. All advancement in human history is the product of property rights – and women have destroyed them. And destroyed the west.

    So the future looks very much like the conquest of the west, and the return to greco-islamic paternalism. Why? Because women used democracy to violate the compromise that made western civilization possible.

    For men, it is much more desirable to live in a paternal world. It is easy for us to dominate women. We don’t make civilization for ourselves, but for the admiration of our women, wives and daughters.

    The only choice women have ever had was the one western men gave them. And they destroyed it with their folly and greed.

    Women gossip. Women destroy each other through hen-pecking in groups. Women destroy advanced society. It’s not complicated. It’s in their nature.

    Through most of history, women (gossips) were considered the root of all evil. It appears that even in advanced society, history repeats itself.

    We made a mistake deifying women in the victorian era.

    We were right all along.

  • The Mirror View of Feminism: The Destruction of the Compromise

    [A]nd women have successfully voted to destroy western property rights in every election after the first generation of women voters. Today almost all elections are decided by women, and principally by unmarried women and single mothers (see Pew).

    Without women voters we would never have moved to the left, destroyed the constitution, destroyed the family (the compromise), and had rampant immigration.

    Until we developed paternalism, women used sex to manage extended families. Men developed property, and paternalism, and instead of a few men reproducing, many did. All advancement in human history is the product of property rights – and women have destroyed them. And destroyed the west.

    So the future looks very much like the conquest of the west, and the return to greco-islamic paternalism. Why? Because women used democracy to violate the compromise that made western civilization possible.

    For men, it is much more desirable to live in a paternal world. It is easy for us to dominate women. We don’t make civilization for ourselves, but for the admiration of our women, wives and daughters.

    The only choice women have ever had was the one western men gave them. And they destroyed it with their folly and greed.

    Women gossip. Women destroy each other through hen-pecking in groups. Women destroy advanced society. It’s not complicated. It’s in their nature.

    Through most of history, women (gossips) were considered the root of all evil. It appears that even in advanced society, history repeats itself.

    We made a mistake deifying women in the victorian era.

    We were right all along.