Theme: Class

BAD BEHAVIOR: IS IT RACE, CLASS, CULTURE, SINGLE MOTHERHOOD, WHAT?

(good stuff)

—“Question: What’s the causal link between single parenthood and child dysfunction/criminality? Certainly in America the criminality has risen when single parenthood did also. Now, the right generally seems to argue it’s because of the necessity of the family, the left blames it on racism, and the HBD/Biodiversity folk attributes it to purely genetics. Nobody can give a straight answer and they all contradict each other. What’s your neutral take on it? It’s driving me a little mad”— A Friend

“All happy families are the same. All unhappy families are different. All happy people are the same. All unhappy people are different. All domesticatable animals are the same. All undomesticatable animals are different.”

A lot of things ‘have to go right’ to make a good person, and any of tem that go wrong makes a less good person. There are a LOT OF THINGS that can go wrong.

The more FREEDOM (social agency) you have in a society, the more dependence upon your abilities (genes), training (socialization and norms), and education (marketable skills).

So what you see in the world is that IQ very much reflects what you can do in a society. Because the society must accommodate the majority. So the dumber the majority the less freedom. The smarter the majority the more freedom. This is why westerners work by science, technology, rule of law and the one principle of the golden/silver rule, and why islamists for example simply are trained by the use of religion and repetition like small children or even domesticated animals. that difference is one standard deviation (one intellectual-species deviation) in lower average intelligence. The problem is that unlike the Africans who are more pro-social than we are (for obvious reasons – they kill each other pretty often otherwise), the islamic religion advocates aggression.

Under-domestication of underclasses, poor quality personality (iq/industriousness), low investment parenting, lack of socialization that provides what low investment parenting does not (getting your ass kicked if you’re an asshole) and the difference in the size of the underclasses between the races so that we actually DO discriminate against one another (correctly) unless we act and dress Conformatively.

So the answer to what goes wrong with single motherhood? ALL OF THE ABOVE. A single mother, working, living alone, with low IQ cannot distribute the tasks of feeding, *training*, educating, a child, unless his genetics and peers are so favorable that he can be insulated from competition and hardship. In other words, ALL CHILDREN ARE INFANTILIZED by our current educational system because of de-socialization of the right kind (survival) and socialization of the wrong kind (the industrial school system that lacks social competition). And that’s just the beginning of the problem.

The single-parent problem is only a problem because we have just enough money to live in our own apartments with a mother and child without (a) depending upon one another for survival and therefore socializing properly, or (b) providing in-family socialization and discipline, and (c) providing sufficient social skills and productive skills to find work in a modern economy.

Markets in everything matter. The market for socialization in a distribution of ages is more important than accelerating the rate of reading mathematics and sciences. There is no evidence that it makes any difference whatsoever.

Sports, socialization, big extended families for everyone below the professional +120 class.

I have run out of interest in this topic for the moment but it warrants about double this length.

We have to abandon ‘all kids are equal’ and ‘all people are equal’ and realize that we have mixes of good and bad traits and saturation in the markets for survival familial/intergenerational, social/inter-class+gender, and economic/inter-skill requires training. And to make a person achieve that in modernity requires training in a particular skill we have abandoned: mindfulness.

My problem with abrahamic religion is that it seeks to produce mindfulness through deceit. My preference for stoicism, even over buddhism, is that it is both literary and scientific, and requires no falsehood even if myths, literature, and histories are all exaggerations for the purpose of illustrating what might otherwise be invisible in a sea of tedious normalcy.

The difference is that it is CHEAP to lie (abrahamic religion) and perform nonsense rituals, and it is EXPENSIVE to tell the truth (stoic virtue disciplines).

And it is possible that some percentage of people (although I doubt it) are below the intelligence spectrum for Stoicism, and that we must achieve through repetitive imitative training (by doing) what stoicism asks us to achieve by repetitive discipline (by doing) ourselves.

Curt Doolittle

The Propertarian Institute

Kiev, Ukraine