Category: Civilization, History, and Anthropology

MARXIST STORYTELLING (JUSTIFICATION, PILPUL CRITIQUE) VS THE WEST, VS THE IDEAL ECONOMY
Storytelling is (Mythologizing) has a long history in semitic pre-abrahamic, and abrahamic religion, and of course, as a consequence in the marxist revision of the semitic religions.

Yet always and everywhere this Storytelling (Mythologizing) exists to evade the central problem of human behavior: Rule of Law, by the Natural Law, of Self Determination by Self Determined means, Limiting us to Sovereignty in Demonstrated interests and reciprocity in display word and deed, (a) produces incentives (b) produces meritocracy (c) produces natural hierarchy, (d) produces empirical decidability (e) which in turn produces courts for the suppression of violations of reciprocity (f) at the expense of continuing natural selection by the suppression of the reproduction of the unfit for the stage of technological development.

Conversely the problem of socialism is the (a’) production of incentives, (b’) the production of corruption instead of meritocracy, (c’) the production of an unnatural hierarchy (competence in corruption), (d’) produces arbitrary decidability (corruption), (e’) which prohibits the function of courts in suppression of corruption and irreciprocity (d’) and exacerbates dysgenic reproduction. And it’s dysgenic reproduction that is undermining the west at the moment, and is starting to undermine china.

And lastly, the falsehood (by marx) that ‘society’ is family rather than that society consists of families, clans, sometimes tribes and nations, that require incentive to cooperate, compete, and avoid conflict and war. In other words, society is a product of a market for cooperation. It is only among the incomptent ignorant and weak, that they claim that others hold any obligation to them, other than the one that we can all hold to one another: non-aggression, non violence, non-predation, non-parasitism.

In particular why do the competent care for being preyed upon by the incompetent? The standard question is: why if will parasitically prey upon me and mine (the competent), would I and mine not parsitically prey upon you (the incompetent)? Why if you parasitically wish to prey upon me and mine (the productive) through government, would I and mine not parasitically prey upon you by enserving or enslaving, and ruling you (the unproductive)? Worse, in an age where labor no longer has any value, and increasingly will have no value, why not separate from you or end you?

This is the rational question of the strong and the competent. Therefore it is better to find a means of non-parasitism between the classes so that these classes and countries can cooperate interally and externally.

Reality: We need economies that suit our demographics. The demographic composition of africa is in th 60’s and 70’s meaning only 10% of the pouplation is capable of self regulatory and self learning behavior necessary for a economy other than agrarian. The composition of south eurasia, meaning MENA+India is in the low 80’s, meaning that more than half the population is unemployable in any skilled labor, and the intellectual classes are extremely limited in number. In europe and east asia, our demographics are around 100-105, meaning all but 10-15% of our populations are capable of ecnomic participation in advanced economies. This is because your political and economic condition is dependent upon i) demographic distribution (summarized in IQ), and ii) smart fraction – meaning the percent of the population over 125.

So, the non-ideological description of these diverse needs, is that some groups can maintain a market economy, some groups require a military economy (soviet), and some groups require a peasant economy (much of the ‘developing’ world).

And the utopian economy supplies the market, the military, and the peasant economies, so that all classes operate by the means it’s possible for them to operate under.

Because we have learned, even in europe, that the majority of the population cannot bear the responsibility of northern european high trust polities, where individuals are fully responsible for themselves. Instead, the majority prefer serfdom (socialist) economies because their survival is insured (as were serfs and slaves) and their market competition is limited to the production of sufficient income to pay for entertainment and other luxuries. And for those that are truly dependent, they can retain their in-famiily dependence and shared reciprocal insurance and obtain some redistribution from their betters in exchange for limiting their reproduction.

Cheers

Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
The Science of Cooperation