1.6-The Pattern of History · 2.8-Evolution · 3.7-Evolutionary Strategy · Uncategorized

The Future Is A Choice: Choose to Rule


We could take a very different perspective: “They are our minorities. They are our Africans, our Jews, our Caribbeans, our Mestizos. We have paid a high price for them. Under the right circumstances they make excellent wage labor. All we must do is return to our ancient industry of Ruling the Lesser Peoples. It is an industry we excel at and have profited from for thousands of years – much to the benefit of not only the ruled but all mankind. To rule for profit is just a choice. But to make that choice we must admit that our ancestors the aristocracy were right and we were wrong.”

You see, the future is just a choice. Rule and profit. Or be rule parasitically.

1.6-The Pattern of History · 2.8-Evolution · Definitions

Definition: Paedomorphic Evolution

It’s called Paedomorphic Evolution: Genetic Pacification selecting for lower maturity – the “juvenile”. One of which is Gracilization: loss of bone mass. The ‘strange’ sexual interests of the Japanese (and the asians) and our men’s attraction to Asian women, is very likely due to the greater paedomorphism of the asians and the lower levels of testosterone. The east and the west have been engaging in genetic pacification over a long long time. The rest of the world has not. Because they were unable to reduce the bottom population.

1.2-Uniqueness · 1.6-The Pattern of History

Q&A: “British civilization viz a viz the ancient Greek civilization?”

Q&A: “Curt: How would you compare the merits of the British civilization viz a viz the accomplishments of the ancient Greek civilization?”

The Aegean vs The North Sea
Reason vs Empiricism
Slave-hold Manors vs Manorialism
Athens/Sparta vs England/Germany
Rome vs the United States
Bronze vs steel
Trireme vs warship

In other words, there isnt any difference.

Athens and sparta exahusted each other leaving rome like england and germany exhausted each other leaving america.

The question is whether we spend another thousand years trying to restore our civilization, or we do it today.

1.2-Uniqueness · 1.6-The Pattern of History

Q&A: Social Capital In Europe?

Aug 24, 2016 2:23pm

—“Would you also say, sir, that Europe’s Scientific and industrial Revolutions were the result of this high trust/social capital, as opposed to the prevailing narrative that colonialism = industrial/scientific revolution? It’s always been a theory of mine that social capital is what allowed Europe and Western Civilization to accelerate ahead of other Civs, which runs contrary to the Guns, Germs and Steel narrative”—

Well, the tradition was there in the 700’s when the Friesians started immigrating to land in England. And Roger Bacon in 1200 started a tradition that  Francis Bacon brought to fruition in the 1500’s. Bacon had studied this contractualism and invented empiricism. And starting about the same time they started aggressively hanging vast numbers of troublemakers, and restoring the trade that would become the Hansa (Germanic) civilization.

So my view is that the colonial expansion ARRESTED the growth of germanic north sea civilization, and that while there was amazing wealth generated in England, France, holland, Spain, and Portugal by this switch from north sea to Atlantic, that the reason for the division between germanic and English civilizations that culminated in the world wars, was this catastrophe we call colonialism. (Durant has the same opinion).

Now, Americans speak English, but we separated from England before England split from germanic civilization. The majority of American whites are from germanic decent. And the majority of anglo whites are from pre-Germanic split. So that is why we have the language of the English and a culture more Prussian-like the germans.

And in my opinion, from what I’ve seen throughout history, as far as I can tell, the industrial revolution would have occurred in northern Europe just as it nearly occurred in Athens. England blew up just like Athens for the same reason – overreach.

If you have an empirical society, with enough literacy, and enough cultural capital, you will eventually produce innovations, since there is no opportunity to survive and compete by parasitism.

In other words, if we create rule of law we will continue to evolve. We have no choice. It’s the societies that dont create incremental suppression through natural law that stagnate.

Becuase it is too easy to develop stagnating-corruption and parasitism.

1.6-The Pattern of History · Uncategorized

Specialization In Everything

Athens indeed gets the credit for what were often spartan victories. And that is because navies (hamiltonian ethics) are more rewarding than armies (jeffersonian ethics).

And that western europe (france, italy, and britan) had prosperous navies only because germany held the territories against invasion.

And that rome was prosperous as a naval and trading power that fought with marines, but failed as an army because the cost of holding land was too great.

So my position (like most of my positions) relies upon the observation that specialization produces better armies, navies, and prosperity. Just as american entrepreneurship, british banking and finance, italian arts, german engineering, and russian military produce specialties that no one could produce on its own.

1.2-Uniqueness · 1.6-The Pattern of History

A Very New Cut On Intellectual History


[S]o Zoroastrianism was constructed to divide the Persians and indians who were both southern indo european peoples.

Then the Talmud was constructed as a lie to justify retention of property after the end of the babylonian conquest.


The greeks invent reason, truth, science, politics for the management of people at scale.

The Romans, seeing the ‘verbalism’ (immorality) of the greeks, resist greek idealism and embrace practical and empirical means.


Then judaism evolved as a means by which to justify parasitism upon host civilizations while maintaining group cohesion.

Then christianity was constructed as a rebellion against the empire, that had deprived primitive people of their local status signals.

Then the bible was constructed to manage the hordes through false promise now that production by slavery was no longer possible.

Then the koran was constructed to unite the tribes and conquer the peninsula (and then the exhausted Byzantines and Sassanids, and North Africa, and then Spain. )


The Carolingians failed to construct an economic and political order. although the trade routes from Italy to the Netherlands and then to the north sea peoples created incremental organic evolution.

The Templars created the legal and credit system and were destroyed by the authoritarian church who was their debtor.

The Hansa recreated the legal, credit, and trade system. But were out-competed by the territorial powers that largely adopted their methods.

The development of the new world and colonies allowed the financing of the transition of the west to economic modernity. (despite that there was little long term benefit to western nations, and strangely enough quite a considerable benefit to colonies depending upon who colonized them.)


Then the anglos responded with the enlightenment, empiricism, and the restoration of truth (science).

The french responded with … rousseuan pseudoscience and pseudo morality, as a means of creating the terror, and attempting to unify all of europe under their despotism.

The germans respond with restating christian mysticism as kantian rationalism. And create a new vehicle for obscurantism.

The Jews responded by converting the hansa/templar system to their advantage in the territorial wars between Britain and France (Napoleonic wars) creating the Rothschild and consequent systems of order creation by using our own capital stock and lending it back to us.

Westerners responded with the nation-state, an attempt to construct professional bureaucracy, the gold standard, empire and the industrial revolution. Most importantly, american constitution and it’s somewhat failed attempt at natural law expressed as a formal logic of cooperation.

Jews responded with an attack on the academy and polity by creating the great pseudosciences: Boazian Sociology, Marxist Economics and Politics, Freudian Psychology. All of which were constructed to universalize separatist judaism or justify hosting jewish separatism despite it’s parasitisms. This merely taking the argumentatitve innovations of the french and germans combining them with the same obscurantist ‘preaching’ technique used to distribute Christianity, except now using the power of the printing press.

BRANCH : We branch now into various evolutions upon this new religion – faster innovation in the technologies of truth and falsehood.

Branch 1 – Jewish
Then the second wave: Popperian philsophy, Misesian Economics, Randian/Rothbardian Libertinism. (the half-failure/half-success)
Then the third wave: straussian neo-conservativsm and expansionary militarism of the ‘new rome’. (the madness of power)

Branch 2 – Neo Puritan
Then the adoption of Keyneisan Economics as the new innumerate pseudoscience. and Rawlsian Ethics as the pseudo morality.
Then the adoption of postmodern philosophy in academia.

Mises in economics, Brouwer in Mathematics, Bridgman in Physics (science), Popper in philosophy, A HOST of authors in Law. And a total catastrophic absence in Politics since majoritarianism was still influential everywhere.

RESTORATION: Science catches up with the deceit and starts to disprove it.

The various cognitive scientists, and neurologists, are largely responsible for our reframing of jewish monopoly conformity to western distribution of talents and abilities.

EO Wilson states that a synthesis of biology, morality, politics and economics – all the sciences – should be possible.

Archaeologists and historians and evolutionary biologists in our social orders.

Haidt, the empirical psychologists, and the anthropologists in the evolution of cooperation.

Doolittle in Economics, Politics, Ethics, Sociology, Psychology, Epistemology and Metaphysics.

In retrospect this is my view of the evolution of history as a competition between the different european tribes, most of which practice morality and one of which practices immorality. And the reason being that if we hold land we can construct moral rules because we must in order to create the commons of land holding. A parasitic people that does not need or cannot hold land need not create commons because they can use the host’s.

Law is for individuals. Individuals must be able to act in their interests, limited by the prohibition on parasitism.
But policy must exist for the production of commons that perpetuates the family, kin, tribe, and nation, or else it is just a lie to justify conquest.

Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine