Theme: Civilization

  • THE 20TH CENTURY AS AN AGE OF MYSTICISM You know, sitting here, reading a Engels

    THE 20TH CENTURY AS AN AGE OF MYSTICISM

    You know, sitting here, reading a Engels, written in 1884, it’s pretty clear that it has only been, perhaps, since maybe, what, 1990, or maybe 2000, or maybe the milestone was Pinker’s 2002 book The Blank Slate, that the era of progressive and postmodern mysticism has begun to fade.

    The conservatives, the marxists, the postmodernists, all the political nonsense that was constructed in the 20th century as for the purpose of using mass media to persuade a large ignorant population to transfer power to the state. Hell, the nonsense we libertarians came up with for the same reason is just as frustrating. Or it would be if we weren’t the only people on the planet who actually contributed anything to the advancement of political theory since the enlightenment.

    Terrifying.

    Hayek was right. Looking back on it, the 20th century, or at least, starting with the works of freud, marx and cantor, and maturing into the 20th century, became an age of mysticism.

    It took only from Darwin to Marx to create economic obscurantism (experiences rather than necessities), and to Freud to convert from mystical obscurantism to psychological obscurantism (experiences rather than causes), and to Cantor to create mathematical mysticism (sizes rather than frequencies). Of course, the culprit is Kant, who could not bear that economics and individuals could determine status, so he invented a new irrationalism. But Hegel and Heidegger gave academia license to create more obscurantism.

    It’s terrifying.

    And I just stumbled on Hoppe. Damn. Lucky for me.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-03 17:25:00 UTC

  • DIVERSITY IS A BAD THING. I KNOW. WE ALL KNOW NOW. PUTNAM IS RIGHT. But I can’t

    http://www.theatlanticcities.com/neighborhoods/2013/11/paradox-diverse-communities/7614/YES, DIVERSITY IS A BAD THING. I KNOW. WE ALL KNOW NOW. PUTNAM IS RIGHT.

    But I can’t tell what happens under monarchy, where there isn’t any access to political power, and everyone has to compete in the market rather than rent seek via politics.

    As far as I can tell, diversity of neighborhoods might not be problematic if there isn’t any ability to influence the state.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-01 23:31:00 UTC

  • THE END OF THE EUROPEAN PROJECT –“The Europe which is treated here is not the c

    THE END OF THE EUROPEAN PROJECT

    –“The Europe which is treated here is not the clean, peaceful, rational continent of economists or technocrats, a prosperous and amnesiac world whose history is entirely written between the treaties of Rome of 1956 and of the great market of 1993. Thirty-five years is a bit short to understand a civilization born of the Roman conquest, the Germanic invasions and the Christianization of the peoples. [p. 13]”–


    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-30 06:41:00 UTC

  • TODD: THE END OF IDEOLOGY 1965-1990 (Via Craig WIlly) **The end of ideology: 196

    TODD: THE END OF IDEOLOGY 1965-1990

    (Via Craig WIlly)

    **The end of ideology: 1965-1990**

    “The 1960s, era of verbal political tumult, were in fact in the last throes of ideological politics: “Faith, in the broadest sense of the term, ideological as well as religious, leaves European political life.” (p. 545) The causes are wealth and education: “The two fundamental causes of the dissolution are indeed the rise of the cultural [educational] level of the populations and the achievement of an acceptable earthly city. […] It is indeed the compensatory ideology which disappears.” (p. 599)

    “There is the universalization of secondary education and the democratization of tertiary education. A person with only primary education is still highly dependent intellectually on his educational “betters” and may have only learned the holy texts he must submit to. Todd: “On the ideological level, [secondary education] dissolves the religious or quasi-religious submission to traditional sacred formulas.” (p. 550) Todd notes that this level of education also coincides with teen and young adult rebellion.

    “Individuals vote less and no longer live more-or-less encadrés by organizations (church, trade union, party…). The emancipation of the individual from the family coincides with the political disorganization of society.

    “There is then an unprecedented peace and a religious reunification of Europe through indifference:

    “As we near the year 2000 a new map of Europe is emerging, religious unified, but by indifference. In this world where religious practice is tending towards zero we cannot speak anymore of confrontations between Catholics and Protestants, between secularists and Christians. The continent remains of Christian tradition and civilization, but the Churches are socially insignificant there. [p. 560]

    “The proletariat begins shrinking and, very quickly, intellectuals and workers cease to believe in its “inevitable” historic mission and destiny to change humanity. The débâcle, which often precedes the Soviet collapse, is particularly dramatic in France and Italy. Nominally “socialist” center-left parties, more or less ingloriously, cease to be workers’ movements and move on to be embraced by the conformist and well-thinking elements of the rapidly-growing middle classes. In the 1980s, the “new” French Socialist Party and the German Social Democrats make gains in the formerly Catholic areas (when disappointed these voters often then turn to Greens).

    “The collapse of collective religion and political beliefs, indeed of authorities, leaves the individual “free” and alone in the world, free and alone to find meaning, through his own limited capacities, in an unfathomably complex universe. On the rise of free and anxious individualism-nihilism:

    “Identification with any traditional ideological force allowed every individual to develop a feeling of being part of a group and a powerful feeling of security. The disintegration of collective beliefs isolates individuals and atomizes, in the area of representations, European societies at the very moment when they are reaching, for the first time in their history, a certain degree of material homogeneity, through mass consumption. […]

    “The disappearance of ideological encadrement adds to the concrete disappearance of the social class to cause a genuine feeling of panic. Workers, threatened by an unemployment which is no longer temporary but definitive, who are no longer able to believe in the Church, in the radiant future of communism, social-democracy or anarcho-socialism, or even in the greatness of their nation, experience the social transformation like an abandonment, like a cataclysm. Despite their relatively high living standard. An automobile, a refrigerator, a television, a telephone do not compensate for the feeling of social uselessness. [p. 599-600]

    “Thus, despite high standards of living, anxieties emerge and these are addressed by what Todd calls “micro-ideologies”: environmentalism, regionalism and xenophobia. In the case of Austria:

    “[The Austrian Freedom Party] is designating Yugoslavs as a whole, who make up the largest immigrant group in Austria, as scapegoats for a fairly undefined anxiety caused by the decline of the Church. [p. 604-5]

    “Todd apparently considers these micro-ideologies to be marginal phenomena, the expression of minorities who are only heard because of rising electoral absenteeism and apathy. He calls regionalism a “parody of nationalism.” He remarks ironically that both immigrants and xenophobic voters tend to be “workers, artisans or small shopkeepers”. He argues:

    “Micro-ideologies do not try to dream or create new societies. They are conservative, trying to protect the ideal city of the present. Environmentalist movements want to prevent environmental degradation by technology, whether nuclear or chemical. Xenophobic movements worry of the destruction of society by immigrants. Greens and Greys want to stop history. (p. 605)

    Whatever its “marginal” origins, environmentalism is officially a major issue for almost all nations and capable of providing an “ideal city” as valid as any.

    “Nationalism,” whether of the xenophobic, regionalist or sovereignist type, also appears resurgent and plausible in Europe. Todd speaks of immigration with his usual candor and indifference to political correctness, speaking of “immigration’s problematic, non-European core – Muslim, African or West Indian.” (p. 609) Again:

    “One of the commonalities of current sociological literature is to speculate on the ability of various immigrant groups to integrate. They stress that, until recently, immigrants were of a European, Christian origin, and that the existence of a common cultural foundation between the indigenous populations and the immigrants facilitated the process of integration. They also stress that immigration from the Third World poses specific problems, because it places in contact peoples with different family and religious traditions, sometimes opposed. [p. 616]

    “Todd considers the Front National untouchable. There is a scarcely a TV appearance in which he does not very vocally disown the FN, all the more so because it is the only major party which actually shares his political ideas on protectionism and Europeanism. Presumably this is because Todd, though having no patience for political correctness, is himself clearly a well-meaning, non-revolutionary moderate progressive, a “good liberal.” He also writes for example: “As we near the year 2000, Turks, Arabs and Pakistanis seem perfectly apt to assimilation.” (p. 617)

    “In any event, this is what Todd has to say about the FN in the book:

    “Front National voters themselves are undoubtedly, unbeknownst to leftwing and rightwing politicians, unnoticed universalists. They demand less the throwing into the sea of immigrant populations than their absolute alignment on majority French habits and customs. The inability of political elites to produce a brutally assimilationist discourse of the type, “Immigrants will become Frenchmen like the others whether they like it or not,” has encouraged the emergence of the Front National. Elitist discourse on the right to difference generates incoherence and anxiety in the land of the universal man. [p. 614]”


    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-30 05:54:00 UTC

  • TODD ON THE EU –“My opposition to the Maastricht Treaty stems very directly fro

    TODD ON THE EU

    –“My opposition to the Maastricht Treaty stems very directly from my knowledge of the anthropology and history of our continent. A real sensibility to the diversity of European customs and values can only lead to one conclusion: the central monetary management of societies as different as, for example, France and Germany, must lead to a massive dysfunction, first, of one or other society, and, then, of both. There is, in the ideology of unification, a will to break human and social realities which recalls, strangely but invincibly, Marxism-Leninism.”–

    The EU IS A MARXIST AMBITION


    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-30 05:51:00 UTC

  • THE ATHENIAN DEMOCRACY INVENTS INBREEDING? (badly translated from the french by

    THE ATHENIAN DEMOCRACY INVENTS INBREEDING?

    (badly translated from the french by me)

    “It is the Athenian democracy who invents inbreeding.”

    “It is not case that patrilineal endogamy we find in the history of Mesopotamia and the Middle East is the oldest. The only explanation, is that it was invented by the Greeks, who also later dropped it. The first case of proven patrilineal endogamy is in Athens, at the time of the flowering of democracy in the fifth century.

    Initially, the cause of this movement is a bit racist civic folding of the Greek city that Robert Lowie called the “pride of race”. The original ethnic democracy. Equality in a body of citizens is not defined as a universal dream, as discussed in France, but compared to men outside, which equates to barbarians.

    It’s like the current Israeli democracy. Equality body of citizens, it is also the inequality of those who are outside. Equal citizens body based on the fact that all this is preferable in that is outside. We can see how the idea of inbreeding can leave it. American democracy is always white Democracy.”


    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-29 16:52:00 UTC

  • EMMANUEL TODD’S FAMILY STRUCTURES (From HBD Chick) absolute nuclear family – no

    EMMANUEL TODD’S FAMILY STRUCTURES

    (From HBD Chick)

    absolute nuclear family

    – no cohabitation of married children with their parents

    – no precise inheritance rules; frequent use of wills

    – no marriage between the children of brothers

    – anglo-saxons, netherlands, denmark

    – christianity, capitalism, ‘libertarian’ liberalism, feminism

    egalitarian nuclear family

    – no cohabitation of married children with their parents

    – equality of brothers laid down by inheritance rules

    – no marriage between the children of brothers.

    – northern france, northern italy, central and southern spain, central portugal, greece, romania, poland, latin america, ethiopia

    – christianity (catholicism); the “liberte, egalite, fraternite” form of liberalism

    authoritarian family

    – cohabitation of the married heir with this parents

    – inequality of brothers laid down by inheritance rules, transfer of an unbroken patrimony to one of the sons

    – little or no marriage between the children of two brothers

    – germany, austria, sweden, norway, belgium, bohemia, scotland, ireland, peripheral regions of france, northern spain, northern portugal, japan, korea, jews, romany gypsies

    – edit 01/08/12: socialism/bureaucratic socialism or social democracy, catholicism. fascism sometimes, various separatist and autonomous (anti-universalist) movements (think german federalism)

    exogamous community family

    – cohabitation of married sons and their parents

    – equality between brothers defined by rules of inheritance

    – no marriage between the children of two brothers

    – russia, yugoslavia, slovakia, bulgaria, hungary, finland, albania, central italy, china, vietnam, cuba, north india (note that many of these countries, the eastern european ones, also have a tradition of marrying young)

    – communism, edit 01/08/12: socialism

    endogamous community family

    – cohabitation of married sons with their parents

    – equality between brothers established by inheritance rules

    – frequent marriage between the children of brothers

    – arab world, turkey, iran, afghanistan, pakistan, azerbaijan, turkmenistan, uzbekistan, tadzhikistan

    – islam

    asymmetrical community family

    – cohabitation of married sons and their parents

    – equality between brothers laid down by inheritance rules

    – prohibition on marriages between the children of brothers, but a preference for marriages between the children of brothers and sisters

    – southern India

    – hinduism; a variety of communism unlike that found elsewhere

    anomic family

    – cohabitation of married children with their parents rejected in theory but accepted in practice

    – uncertainty about equality between brothers: inheritance rules egalitarian in theory but flexible in practice

    – consanguine marriage possible and sometimes frequent

    – burma, cambodia, laos, thailand, malaysia, indonesia, philippines, madagascar, south-american indian cultures

    the eighth family type, which is additional to todd’s scheme (i.e. it doesn’t fit the three definitional dichotomies he uses, which maybe indicates a problem with his definitions?), is the african family. todd sort-of throws his hands up in the air and declares that african family systems are simply hopeless to understand (because they don’t fit his model) — and, anyway, there’s not enough data on them (which was prolly true in the early 1980s — and maybe still is now!). anyway, here’s all he has to say about the africans:

    african systems

    – instability of the household

    – polygyny


    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-29 07:55:00 UTC

  • THE EXTENDED FAMILY’S WAR ON INDIVIDUALISM –“communism is a transference to the

    THE EXTENDED FAMILY’S WAR ON INDIVIDUALISM

    –“communism is a transference to the party state of the moral traits and the regulatory mechanisms of the exogamous community family. Sapped by urbanization, industrialization and the spread of literacy, in short by modernization, the exogamous community family passes on its egalitarian and authoritarian values to the new society. Individuals with equal rights are crushed by the political system in the same way they were destroyed in the past by the extended family when it was the dominant institution of traditional Russian, Chinese, Vietnamese or Serbian society.” —


    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-29 06:50:00 UTC

  • (CORE)The Family Shrinks as Property and Wealth Expand

      (However) Primitive matrilineality (endogamous) Community Family (endogamous) Patriarchal Community Family (exogamous) Authoritarian Family Egalitarian Nuclear Family (~catholic) Absolute Nuclear Family (endogamous) (Anglo Saxon) Post-Marital Individual Family (endogamous) (Feminism) The Anglo Saxon Absolute Nuclear Family – no precise inheritance rules, frequent use of wills; – no cohabitation of married children with their parents; – no marriage between the children of brothers. “…think of England as being like this for at least 750 years. We live in small families. We buy and sell houses. … Our parents expect us to leave home for paid work …You try to save up some money from your wages so that you can afford to get married. … You can choose your spouse … It takes a long time to build up some savings from your work and find the right person with whom to settle down, so marriage comes quite lately, possibly in your late twenties.

  • (CORE)The Family Shrinks as Property and Wealth Expand

      (However) Primitive matrilineality (endogamous) Community Family (endogamous) Patriarchal Community Family (exogamous) Authoritarian Family Egalitarian Nuclear Family (~catholic) Absolute Nuclear Family (endogamous) (Anglo Saxon) Post-Marital Individual Family (endogamous) (Feminism) The Anglo Saxon Absolute Nuclear Family – no precise inheritance rules, frequent use of wills; – no cohabitation of married children with their parents; – no marriage between the children of brothers. “…think of England as being like this for at least 750 years. We live in small families. We buy and sell houses. … Our parents expect us to leave home for paid work …You try to save up some money from your wages so that you can afford to get married. … You can choose your spouse … It takes a long time to build up some savings from your work and find the right person with whom to settle down, so marriage comes quite lately, possibly in your late twenties.