Theme: Institution

WHY SOME CIVILIZATIONS FAIL

If you have been following me for a long enough time now that you should be able to observe that I am making a very technical argument that feels, and intuits, to be horrible or excessive to those trained in consensus, cooperation at all costs, literature and philosophy rather than physics, economics, and calculation.

In my understanding the ‘sympathetic’ properties of traditional argument are a form of mothering and tolerance that can be and has been, exploited under most if not all religions – the assumption of the value of the preservation of attempts at reconciliation of differences.

But, there is only value in seeking cooperation if and only if we are in fact seeking cooperation, and doing so truthfully. Because otherwise it is not an attempt at truth or trade but deception, boycott, or parasitism.

I have, as did nietzsche, (and have the chinese thru different means) come to understand that this was a profound mistake. There is a limit to the extension of kinship love to non kin and that limit is determined by the willingness to speak truthfully regardless of the impact on the status (dominance/competence) hierarchy.

And the end result of tolerance is dysgenic, and the benefits of civilization gradually lost. It is fairly common knowledge that the even given that islam was spread by the sword and destroyed the great knowlege producing civilizations, the rather rapid failure of islamic civilizaiton esp after 1200 was due to its underclass utility and its consequential stagnation by overemphasis on tolerance rather than encouraging, rewarding, competition, and the social reward of heroism. Combined with inbreeding, and inbreeding with slaves (which is about the inverse of american blacks and whites) this produced first predation, then peace, then stagnation. The only reason for the conquests was a vast number of excess males, just as we are seeing today. And that is the cause of all disorder: an excess of males with no sexual market value because the economy is too primitive to provide them with opportunity. The only result under that model is the STEM family (extended tribal family) wherein people of low productivity pool their resources. This causes inbreeding, and reinforces not only familialism, and tribalism, but the low trust endemic in the islamic world (which muslims are incognizant of).

Families will evolve to be dysfunctional if we do not have the competition between mother’s foolish exhaustive tolerance, and father’s limits, brother’s competition and alliance and sister’s competition and satisfaction.

This same principle applies to nations and civilizations, and those that took the maternal path (islam, africa) and those that took the paternal path (aryan and modern europe, east asia) progressed rapidly and everyone else DECLINED. The same thing that happened in Islam happened in west africa. From dominance to decline in fairly short order.

So in argumentative technique, I have used for many years, and I am open about using, never letting the evil people have the last word, but (a) returning any ridiucule, ralllyin or shaming (b) restating the central argument (c) criticizing them for not making such an argument, and then (d) staying with it until they are exhausted. This is somewhat like putting a child in room and ignoring him, except we cannot put these particular chlidren in a room, or beat and slap those particular teens and adults. Instead, we merely exaust every opportunity that they have for gratification for their behavior.

I had to learn that my people were wrong. Most of us have to. The reason being that most of us and most of our people, and nearly all of our ancestors have been wrong. Not only wrong, but in many cases destructive.