Every problem that appears such that we recognize it has a cause and until we find that cause, we are treating symptoms but not curing the patient. To make matters difficult, these causes are often removed by time and distance from the point of impact.
As you wander through politics, you will eventually find that there is only one issue: the health or lack thereof of the civilization. Everything else is a method to that end. However, most of these end up being misdiagnosed causes and so even radical fixes do not in actuality fix anything.
For the heretical, a few examples:
- Banks are not the cause of bankruptcy; bad regulation and mass irresponsibility are.
- Bad government is not the cause of bad government; a clueless population that elects liars and demands unrealistic benefits is.
- Crime is not the cause of crime, for example; degenerates plus tolerance for degeneracy causes crime.
- Drug abuse is not the cause of drug abuse; misery, boredom and permissiveness causes drug abuse.
- Degeneracy is not the cause of degeneracy; lack of will to make moral decisions plus lack of strong social standards is.
- Pornography is not the cause of rape; a stultified desire for power over other human beings is the cause of both.
Note that cause/effect reasoning is abused in another way, also, which is the liberal tendency to blame social institutions and culture values for the failings of the individual. If Johnny drinks his way through life and ends up impoverished, the banks did it to him, in this view.
We have no shortage of mis-diagnosed causes of our decline, but here’s one example of a talented writer who has picked an intermediate cause and claimed it as the primary cause (in his defense, he never claims to have found a root cause).
This, ladies and gentlemen, is the reality of Black Run America; a nation where every institution is entirely devoted to protecting and promoting the interests of Black people above all others. – SBPDL
He has noticed something true, but it’s not the root cause. The truth of race in America is that all of our diversity-mania, anti-discrimination hysteria and perfervid rage for an egalitarian order is actually a method. This method aims to achieve something else, which is Total Equality (TE).
Since 1789, when the French Revolution overthrew the monarchy and created a republic based on equality, we have been living in an era without leaders. Instead, we are led by the People themselves, which by statistics means we are led by the most numerous group, the proles.
Today, we are living in Prole-Run America (PRA). It is run by proles, who vote, buy products and create social trends. Those votes, purchases and trends in turn determine what the power structure accomodates. The People are the focus of the society and its leaders, and the rest follow their lead.
Then, in order that we may see clearly what we are doing, let us imagine democracy to be divided, as indeed it is, into three classes; for in the first place freedom creates rather more proles in the democratic than there were in the oligarchical State.
That is true.
And in the democracy they are certainly more intensified.
Because in the oligarchical State they are disqualified and driven from office, and therefore they cannot train or gather strength; whereas in a democracy they are almost the entire ruling power, and while the keener sort speak and act, the rest keep buzzing about the bema and do not suffer a word to be said on the other side; hence in democracies almost everything is managed by the proles. – Plato, The Republic
When you hear about an “evil” corporation, realize that this corporation is selling products the proles demand. An evil bank is writing the policies that government commands and the People desire. Our evil politicians are in office because most of our people voted for them, even if on the basis of lies.
The problem is not our institutions, our leaders, or diversity. Those are intermediate causes. The root cause is that we have handed power to the group least suited to wield it, which is the average (meaning not distinguished by any superior performance) citizen.
The average citizen is oblivious to anything outside his little world. He is selfish, and doesn’t really care about the consequences to others. He litters, and drives too big of a car, and watches too much TV. He’s not suited for anything, except buying products and voting for manipulative politicians.
Prole-Run America (PRA) is what happens when we put all these gullible proles in charge of the most powerful nation-state on earth. They vote for pleasant illusions, and they get angry when unpleasant truths are mentioned, and do their best to bury them and drive away the truth-tellers.
In large groups, they band together and decide to take money from other people, or to make war on other nations like Libya whose only sin is not being a liberal democracy like us. The proles swarm and make trends, turning our culture from forward-looking to inward-looking.
They insist that every concept in politics, economics or the news be super-simplified until it barely explains itself. They will make you rich for pandering to their urges, making excuses for their failings, and offering them whatever venal act or product they desire.
As a result, everyone follows the proles. We need their votes, purchases and trends. Why have Beethoven when the proles want Lady Gaga? Why have filet mignon when the proles want cheeseburgers? Why have sensible politics when the proles want more free handouts, welfare and entitlements?
Prole-Run America (PRA) is the downfall of America. It is a once-powerful country destroying itself from within. Just as the evil corporations are not our problem, the evil Vandals are not our problem. They are just the coup de grace which will come after we destroy ourselves.
Our problem is the individual. The individual citizen, detached from responsibility or concern for consequences, follows his selfish and insular desires. In his wake, he leaves mounds of garbage and poorly-executed ideas. He doesn’t care; he’s getting what he wants.
Most of our fellow proles right now are congratulating themselves on living in the best time ever. They are blind to the fact that this country is disintegrating, and soon will be no more. They don’t notice, because they are distracted by all this free stuff, and good things to buy, and how important they feel.
Together the proles form a crowd, and unaware of the superior logic of anything more complicated than what they can understand, they join up like a lynch mob to smash down the bad ideas and replace them with “safe” ideas in which everyone is equal. The wisdom of crowds turns into brainwashing conformity:
We tweak our stories so that they become better stories. We bend the facts so that the facts appeal to the group. Because we are social animals, our memory of the past is constantly being revised to fit social pressures.
The power of this phenomenon was demonstrated in a new Science paper by Micah Edelson, Tali Sharot, Raymond Dolan and Yadin Dudai. The neuroscientists were interested in how the opinion of other people can alter our personal memories, even over a relatively short period of time. The experiment itself was straightforward. A few dozen people watched an eyewitness style documentary about a police arrest in groups of five. Three days later, the subjects returned to the lab and completed a memory test about the documentary. Four days after that, they were brought back once again and asked a variety of questions about the short movie while inside a brain scanner.
This time, though, the subjects were given a “lifeline”: they were shown the answers given by other people in their film-viewing group. Unbeknownst to the subjects, the lifeline was actually composed of false answers to the very questions that the subjects had previously answered correctly and confidently. Remarkably, this false feedback altered the responses of the participants, leading nearly 70 percent to conform to the group and give an incorrect answer. They had revised their stories in light of the social pressure. – Wired
Alone, we can make reasonable estimates. Together, we fall, because we influence each other and converge on a mean. This mean isn’t one that exists in reality, but in the human mind. We become locked in the intersection of narcissism and oblivion, unaware of anything but ourselves.
Our problem is not one of the issues on the surface, like diversity, the national debt, or the wars overseas. Our problem is that those problems came about because we cannot make decisions, because our motives are corrupt, and because the People cannot lead. Proles are not competent as leaders, and are even worse in large groups.
As a result, like Rome and Greece before us, we enter the slow spiral of decline:
In “Suicide of a Superpower,” out this week, I argue that the America we grew up in is disintegrating, breaking apart along the fault lines of politics, race, ethnicity, culture and faith; that the centrifugal forces in society have now become the dominant forces.
Our politics are as poisonous as they have been in our lifetimes. – Pat Buchanan, “Is America Disintegrating?”
We are falling apart because there is no center.
Instead, we have as many centers as we have people, each pulling in their own direction.
Equality does not produce leadership. It produces the destruction of leadership. Our country drifts without the ability to make firm choices. We try to be everything to everyone. When that doesn’t work, we fight even harder for universal True Equality, like cultists following a dying religion.
As we fall apart, the profiteers are always there:
Today, most authoritarian rulers prefer to keep a low profile. In any case, real power no longer belongs with the medal-wearing figure strutting in front of the crowd, but with the grey men watching from their corporate boardrooms.
To multinational giants such as Glencore, the world’s biggest commodity trader, which controls 50 per cent of the global copper market, 60 per cent of zinc and a quarter of the world’s barley, sunflower and rape seed, most of these dictators must look like pygmies. – Daily Mail
They would not exist if it were not for the proles who demand their products cheaply so that we can all live like kings, or at least whatever slice of kingly life an equal king can lead. Our politicians do nothing because the voters punish inconvenience and unpleasant truths, and reward pleasant illusions.
You’d have to be a fool as a politician to do anything but lie, manipulate, cheat and steal. The voters basically told you to do that. They do not accept true answers; they demand illusions instead. As a result, they sabotage their own prole-leadership.
Add President Clinton to the long list of people who deserve a share of the blame for the housing bubble and bust. A recently re-exposed document shows that his administration went to ridiculous lengths to increase the national homeownership rate. It promoted paper-thin downpayments and pushed for ways to get lenders to give mortgage loans to first-time buyers with shaky financing and incomes. It’s clear now that the erosion of lending standards pushed prices up by increasing demand, and later led to waves of defaults by people who never should have bought a home in the first place. – Business Week
They are only too happy to accept “free” things which are paid for with money taken from others. No one in the crowd expects to have to pay it back; they doubt that they’ll ever have much money in their lives, so nothing minus nothing is still nothing. Might as well get something for themselves, no matter the cost.
Some of the 40 million Americans currently receiving food stamps from the nation’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program may soon be able to use them at participating fast food restaurants.
Yum! Brands – the parent company of Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, KFC, Long John Silver’s and A&W – is lobbying to have food stamps be accepted at their restaurants. – WALB
They have trained you to see an evil corporation and blame it. But that’s as off-base as blaming black people for the fact that liberals use them as moral shields for their own wrongdoing. “I’m nice to black people, so I can’t be evil, even if you caught me red-handed!” is a familiar refrain.
What’s going on here is a study in cause and effect. The evil corporation arose because the opportunity is there and the voters are too dumb to figure it out. But what set it down that path was illusory promises and irrational policies, set into motion because those ideas sounded pleasant to 300 million proles.
Prole-Run America (PRA). It will be the last stage of America, and then we can rebuild again. The next nation will start with a simple premise, which is that leaders do what is right, and not simply what is popular, trendy or profitable as the proles would do.
Locust: Interesting article, lots here to think about, my question would be how liberalism (globalism, socialism, serfism, communism, or whatever) the inept versus the elite explains the nature of blacks in Africa, where liberalism does not exist?
In Israel today we are seeing an old conflict, even an ancient one, playing out: is the government created for its own purposes, or is the government an outward manifestation of the will of a collective, organic group united by shared values, called a culture?
Our modern view is that every person is equal, therefore whether you fill Paris with Somalis and Inuit or Japanese and Peruvians, those people are still “French.” Why? Because they live within the lines on the map that defines the political agreement known as “France.”
The old school way (which is experiencing a massively powerful revival) is to think that wherever they live, people of French descent share certain values and an outlook on life, and thus are a united people, both culture and heritage. Move them to the moon, or Somalia, and they’re still French.
Pundits and other witty and underpaid (thus bitter) people love to tear down anything they see as above them, so they are targeting the notion of the nation. They want to replace it with the nation-state, which is a subset of globalism; nation-states are lines on maps, not organic populations.
As a result, these people have made the claim that no country can assert its need to be of a single culture, and still be democratic/free/whatever.
In response, Rivlin announced that he would not conduct any further debate on the issue in the Knesset Presidium, claiming that the bill does not contravene the essential definition of Israel as a democratic country. He did, however, express his objections to the bill, which states that Israel’s democratic regime would be subordinate to the state’s Jewish identity, and which drops Arabic as an official language.
Both Jewish and Arab MKs from the left-wing parties, as well as other public figures, have expressed deep concern about the bill, sponsored by MK Avi Dichter (Kadima ), which, in practice, does away with the State of Israel’s constitutional foundation. They argue, justifiably, that the bill contravenes the Declaration of Independence and its principles, and threatens the delicate balance between the state’s national identity and its democratic and civil character. – Haaretz
Those who object to Israel as an organic population are wrong, of course. All that is required to be a democracy is to use democratic means of determining power. There is nothing in that definition about citizenship, or even who can vote. Any democratic power structure is a democracy.
What they’re objecting to is that this is a democracy by a population for its own self-interests, and not the globalist ideal of the nation-state where anyone can wander in, rent a room and be a citizen. The nation has higher values than commerce and obedience to leftist dogma, which makes it a threat to leftists and international finance.
Israel has successfully dodged this problem for sixty years but now it is coming home. As missiles rain from the sky, Iran develops a nuclear weapons program, and the USA waffles in its support, Israel must face the hard questions. Is it a state of Jews and Judaism, or merely another place to rent?
Coincidentally, all of us face this problem. If you build a nice place, others want to come stay there and take advantage of what you have made. In the process, they obliterate what you are, and leave behind more of what can be found anywhere else. Diversity is lost. Specialization is reversed.
I pointed out there are basically two sides: The Open Society myth-propagating bourgeois, who somehow think our Postmodern finance-Capitalism still has anything to do with meritocracy. The other side essentially consists of the more historically aware people who have affirmed the fact that we do not live in an Open Society at all.
Our Postmodern society propagates the myth that we are all equal, to lull people asleep. Most people buy this crap because they personally are not ambitious and as such never run into the invisible walls keeping them back from the actually influential positions. They just want to be thrown their daily loaf of bread and watch football and they’re fine.
However, if you have ideas that are clearer and better argued than those of your superiors, in any organization you are regarded as a threat by the other control freaks. For this reason alone many incompetent people get promoted simply because they won’t get into the way, and afterward they can play the role of scapegoats.
The real masters never leave the shadows. Smart people in influential positions are dangerous because they know how to direct light towards those shadows. How would you run for a seat in Washington or Brussels without the support of the media? Without money by companies to bring yourself under attention through advertisements? You are just one man. You can’t get there unless you dance to the tunes of some larger fraction. Prove your loyalty and you may just have a shot. Raise your hand and wave bye bye to the Open Society.
Generally, people like to think that they are being governed by an authority that is capable and in the end wants the best for everyone. This goes back to a letter from Ancient Egypt where two orphans paid some guy to write that letter to the pharaoh for them. It goes back to the peasants coming out of their cottages to touch the mantle of emperor Otto when he traveled across their fields. It goes back to people massively coming to weep at Stalin’s funeral even though almost everyone had at least one family member that was arrested and transported to a gulag.
This should make clear why the Open-Society myth is still widely accepted. Put crudely, paperboy can become an astronaut and all that. Truth is this can only happen during a large political upheaval, when large chunks of nepotistic networks, the regular channels of promotion, are eliminated and when there is much pressure on getting competent people into influential positions fast.
I’m getting frustrated more and more by the cliché that: “Democracy is in the end responsible for the decisions, so it’s the voters who are to blame for everything.” Let me just dismantle this illusion by a few examples. The voters never wanted the monetary system to be used as a source of permanent bankruptcy by the American state. They never wanted mass-importation of Mexicans, Islamists, or Eastern-Europeans. The electorate never wanted China to be a world super power. The electorate never wanted the euro-crisis, they never wanted a failed Greek economy to be smuggled into the euro zone. The electorates never wanted serial rapists to be walking out on the streets because the prisons are too full.
I accept that nine out of ten people aren’t interested in politics, and consider it not as a matter of life importance, but as just another optional part-time hobby. I accept that most people would rather color pictures of the Boston Tea party and get an A++ for their History exam, than to actually learn about the causes of the War of Independence and be presented with a challenging test and maybe get a B. Heck, their parents will be happier if the test is easier, too. Because the knowledge in the world of nowadays doesn’t count for shit; all that counts is the paperwork to “prove” it. Which proves again the Open Society is a corrupt and infamous myth.
This is what’s going to happen: Let’s take a politically incorrect party, such as Wilders and his PVV. He’s never going to get anything done. He may have a bunch of seats in the Parliament and in Brussels, but he doesn’t have the state officials on his side. Because those are the factors that decide everything: Top-ranking state officials, lobbyists, the heads of big business, and the media. Bureaucracy. Money. Perception. That’s the power right there. They have all the knowledge, all the connections. Politicians can give a bit of commentary but they have four years to present an image of themselves. After that jack goes back in the box. Everyone is too afraid of their image so no-one ever dares to seriously reform. Hence Obama adopted the Bush administration.
A few years ago when a minister introduced an obligatory tests for immigrants, this is what happened: Turks and Moroccans, for example, had to learn the language before they could move in. Else they would have no reasonable prospective of becoming part of the society. Therefore this proposal was welcomed by a moderate majority of parliament. However it was gunned down by some court in Brussels because it contradicted some “inalienable rights”. Nobody ever voted for that decision.
Then a minister for the labor party came up and pointed out that many directors of public institutions, for example the cure cancer foundation and various variants of the feed poor kiddies in Africa foundation, kept major parts of the contributions to themselves. He also noticed there were reckless self-enrichment events going on in the banking sector. Hence he intended to reform that. And pretty much everyone thought it was a good idea. Then some constitutional court came out of nowhere and said: “No, you can’t do that because there’s no legal ground to make such a decision if it involves other people’s institutions.”
Do I have to spell it out for you? Democracy has very, very little to do with what actually happens in a state. There’s only one ground that is truly considered when it comes to drawing up a bill:
- The executability (feasibility) of the proposal with the eye towards social stability
Let me do my best to make clear what politics really is: In my city it was calculated that many customers were lured away from the center towards larger-scale shopping malls in other cities. The prognosis was that this would lead to a serious decline in the city’s population make-up and the tax income. So they started working on a large-scale building program to re-invent the center.
However the Environmentalist party and the Christian party unleashed all hell and had massive rallies to gun down the proposal. In the end they had a victory during the elections. But when it came to it, they never abandoned the project. They just said: “Well, the point of saying that nothing should really happen is behind us.” They didn’t encourage the building-project but didn’t slow it down either. So, I noticed, apparently something has been set in motion and for some reason they lacked the power and the will to unplug it. The truth is they lack the knowledge, control, and oversight of what professional state-officials are doing. And they don’t want to look like idiots so they averted attention from the project and just muddled through those four years of governing term.
They made a mess of it and four years later the Liberals won the elections and made a coalition with the Socialist party. They picked the project back up, but decided to play it smart this time. They eliminated the section of the plan which had caused the biggest frustration, and pacified the most militant groups that had opposed the plan. The battle-readiness of the protesters had pretty much died down and they too had gotten weary of so many complicated procedures.
When I was on my way to the prole-protests, I met a biology professor. And he told me about how he sometimes had to deal with officials in Brussels. “I noticed something about them,” he said; “these people never speak to ordinary folks, and they live in their own bubble. At the beginning of the conversation they delineate the discussion-space, and if you say anything beyond that space, they regard you as having placed yourself outside of the discussion.”
Remember that those officials have more power than elected politicians. Because if they want to, they can sabotage the projects of the governing politicians, and the governing politicians will be punished by the governing party. The governing party will in turn be punished by the electorate for failing to execute their plans. Which is basically what you see happening already: New government promised more law and order and additional police, but they can’t realize it because of the financial situation.
This is what politics really is:
- Raison D’etat veiled in a varnish-layer of Weltanschauung or ideology
State officials cook up bills and proposals to keep society running. In those proposals, all that matters is feasibity and social stability: Can it actually be realized with the current means in the current circumstances, and will implementation cause social unrest and civil disobedient against the state? These are technicalities that can’t move people, that can’t inspire people. They feel no connection to something as bleak as that sort of reasoning. Which is where the politicians come in, to “translate” the proposals. With other words to explain them with catchy phrases such as: “But we believe in the power of people to take responsibility for their own lives!” (budget cuts) “We believe we must ensure the social solidarity of our society!” (more state control)
I hope to have dismantled all of the naïve bullshit once and for all. There is a very long way to go between popular sentiment and codified law. The “experts” throw a few crumbs to the masses (for example entitlement programs). But if you fixate on that you miss the point of the real political struggle: The fact we are trapped in a state system that has its own stability as the only goal, in which any claims about ethics, values and morality are by definition reduced to private opinions.
With other words our state is a self-perpetuating engine, a self-rolling stone, whose trajectory can’t be evaluated in terms of a right or wrong direction. The experts are conditioned only to think: “Will this create a huge outrage if we do this, might it unravel the state?” For the rest they throw small benefit programs to chanceless people, inject a bit of funds here and there to stimulate business. Not because these things are Good or Just – it’s primarily to keep people docile. It’s just maintenance of the engine, to keep it running.
This leads into a discussion of proles versus elites in the finance crisis, but that is a wider issue that requires further dismantling of empty idols.
American foreign policy fails in the mideast
American wars since WWII have followed this pattern: find an enemy who competes with our superpower status, then discover some “reason” (justification) for declaring war on them, and then conquest following by a police action against a guerrilla army.
This was the pattern in Viet Nam and Korea, and now Iraq and Afghanistan follow it. We must construe our enemies as enemies of “freedom” and democracy so that we feel justified in smashing them utterly, and once we’ve done that, we try to fix the mess we’ve made.
In doing so, we start believing our own press releases, and actually bring “democracy” to these places. However, they are not ready for what we want from them, which is modern liberal democracy; they are too invested in their own politics. As a result, democracy becomes a method of brutality.
The Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, has said he would side with Pakistan in the event of war with the US, in a surprising political twist that is likely to disconcert his western allies.
“If there is war between Pakistan and America, we will stand by Pakistan,” Karzai said in a television interview, placing his hand on his heart and describing Pakistan as a “brother” country.
The offer was widely interpreted as a rhetorical flourish rather than a significant offer of defence co-operation. Despite recent tension between Pakistan and the US, open warfare is a remote possibility. – The Guardian
Not surprisingly, many of our former allies have turned on us. They know we are insincere, and a tottering empire which has corrupted itself by replacing its culture with commerce and a nanny state, made its people decadent, and lost sight of any goal except power and wealth for their own sake.
Our mideast policy fails when we expect these people to do anything but what they were doing before we intervened, which is make tribal warfare upon one another.
The US suffered a major diplomatic and military rebuff on Friday when Iraq finally rejected its pleas to maintain bases in the country beyond this year.
Barack Obama announced at a White House press conference that all American troops will leave Iraq by the end of December, a decision forced by the final collapse of lengthy talks between the US and the Iraqi government on the issue.
The Iraqi decision is a boost to Iran, which has close ties with many members of the Iraqi government and which had been battling against the establishment of permanent American bases. – The Guardian
However, it’s hard to blame these places: the problem is within our nation, not theirs.
We are the ones who can only motivate the voters to approve war when we construe our opponent as Hitler or a godless Satan.
We are the ones who are so unsure of our “right” to intervene, even if the results are better, that we later expend billions and thousands of lives trying to democratize the unruly.
We are the ones who are so neurotic in our own tentative approval of liberal democracy, since we’ve seen firsthand how it turned peaceful thriving 1950s America into a chaotic urban warzone, that we export it like a drug addict looking for others to share a needle.
And now, we are the ones to watch our fond notions collide with reality. In our heads, we are white knights bringing democracy and peace and love; in reality, we are another warlord intruding on their territory, and they want it back.
What follows is inevitably brutal.
A local military commander in the city of Misrata, where the forces which captured him took his body, said “over-enthusiastic” fighters took matters into their own hands when they came face to face with the man they despise.
“We wanted to keep him alive but the young guys, things went out of control,” he said speaking on condition of anonymity.
Few people in Libya — where thousands of people, including civilians, were killed by Gaddafi’s forces in the seven-month rebellion — say they are troubled by the manner of his death.
But if he was indeed killed by his captors, it will cast doubt on the promises by Libya’s new rulers to respect human rights and prevent reprisals. – Reuters
In the name of morality, we are the brutal killers without remorse. Do we expect people to believe our propaganda about being the moral alternative?
Of course not. Instead, they are getting back to business after the brief interruption of our silly moral crusade. Like church ladies dismayed that the homeless people we are “helping” turned around and sold those work tools to buy booze, we are projecting our own values onto others, and coming up short every time.
An Egyptian court has sentenced a Facebook user to three years’ prison for creating a page on the social networking site to publish opinions thought to be offensive to Islam and the Prophet Mohamed.
Judge Sherif Kamel, head of the Azbakiya Court of First Instance, said Ayman Youssef Mansour created the page “Al-Monadel Mard” on Facebook and used it to express opinions that threaten national unity. Mansour’s opinions were seen by the court as derogatory to Islam. – Almasry Alyoum
We have made a false world of ourselves from our comfy suburbs, the television advertisements that apparently we believe, and the political half-truths (“white lies”) we tell to each other to avoid being offensive and to make friends with everyone and anyone.
Our foreign policy in the mideast has failed not because the mideast is a horrible place, but because we went in with unrealistic expectations and never adjusted our fond mental image to match reality. Nature, being logical and consistent, simply served us up with the failure we deserve.