Category: Civilization, History, and Anthropology

THE CRISIS OF THE AGE IS QUITE SIMPLE
There are only two surviving intellectual groups in the world, the (right wing) Europeans and the (left wing) Jews. They both started with law as their first formal foundation, and that foundation is the reason for the success of both groups: law begets reason, reason begets learning, learning begets knowledge, and knowledge generates opportunities.

However, both groups differ in sex bias in their group evolutionary strategies. The Europeans invested in the martial and had control of territory and took the male strategy, and the Jews invested in the clerical service of the Egyptians instead they lost control of territory, and so took the female strategy.

It should not surprise us that modernity has produced a conflict between the masculine and feminine strategies by the two groups that specialize in each strategy, when the result of modernity is the opportunity for the expression of the feminine by the inclusion of both Jews and women in the masculine European polity.

We are merely going through the natural consequence of the introduction of the feminine into the masculine – and the rather obvious discovery that these two strategies are incompatible within the same polity if for no other reason than the feminine minimizes responsibility for everything, especially the commons and seeks status through conspicuous consumption. Conversely, the masculine seeks status through responsibility for capitalization and in particular commons despite adversarial competition and risk. Worse, the feminine is not survivable and never has been any more than women are survivable without men, and men are unable to reproduce without women.

The truth is that neither the sexes, nor the groups that pursue the opposing strategies of the sexs, need each other any longer. We have used market, bureaucracy procedure, and technological systems to alleviate the dependency between the sexes to the point where relationships and marriage are for friendship, or worse, entertainment, and not reproduction that would alleviate the labor of survival, provide mutual insurance, and ensure their future care. Nor do we have any rational incentive to compromise with one another. And we prefer to associate with those with whom we share strategies, instincts, values, traditions, beliefs, and wants.

But we are not reproducing. Very shortly 40% of households will be childless. And shortly in generational time afterward, there will be no per capital surplus by which the young can use systems to indirectly care for the old. And our whole of modernity built on systems of irresponsibility for self for reproduction for family for society is crashing around our feet.

When we lose duty to the community, and surrender the institution of the family, and eschew the responsibility of marriage and children, we are committing slow but certain suicide.

There are solutions. But they are duties, not luxuries.

Hopefully, this put the crisis in context.

Cheers

Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
The Science of Cooperation