Theme: Institution

  • MACRO ECON AND DANCING WITH THE DEVIL Most modern economics involves mastery of

    MACRO ECON AND DANCING WITH THE DEVIL

    Most modern economics involves mastery of the arcane mechanisms by which fiat money is administered via the banking systems. This is a little bit like studying crime. It teaches you a lot about crime. But it doesn’t teach you much about how to make an honest buck.

    But then. There is nothing honest about either the state or politics.

    I understand money just fine thanks. I don’t care to become a master of criminal enterprise. Understanding money is moral. Understanding organized crime is not.

    If you dance with the devil, the devil doesn’t change. The devil changes you.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-01 23:22:00 UTC

  • IMPORTANCE OF SIMPLE RULES: COMMENSURABILITY=LEGITIMACY “Our present-day Western

    http://blogs.elpais.com/atomium-culture/2013/11/the-power-from-below-understanding-europes-historical-institutional-diversity.htmlTHE IMPORTANCE OF SIMPLE RULES: COMMENSURABILITY=LEGITIMACY

    “Our present-day Western society is highly regulated and institutionalized: formal agreements are made at various levels within society to make things run smoothly, from driving a car, to disposing waste, to taking part in local and national elections. Breaching a rule usually carries a sanction.”

    **”However, if rules are simply added without attention to the internal coherence of the regulations, contradictory situations may emerge within the regulations and the rules may become ineffective: they may no longer be understood by the stakeholders or they may simply be ignored (leading to freeriding), with sanctions no longer being applied.”**


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-01 15:29:00 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

  • TODD’S FAMILY SYSTEMS AND FARMS: COMMUNIST (TOTALITARIAN) Communitarian favors s

    TODD’S FAMILY SYSTEMS AND FARMS:

    COMMUNIST (TOTALITARIAN)

    Communitarian favors sharecropping (métayage, fixed proportion of crop taken as rent, somewhat egalitarian)

    MANORIAL

    Absolute nuclear favors rent (fermage, fixed gold/silver rent, individualist families being already “proletariat-like” and less able to maintain a continuous property over generations, activity is already monetized)

    EXTENDED FAMILY

    Egalitarian nuclear favors large properties (grande exploitation, egalitarian families are less able to maintain evenly-split properties across generations, also “proletariat-like” but activity less monetized, less individual)

    FAMILY

    Stem favors family farms (propriété, stem families are very apt at maintaining property across generations)


    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-30 04:18:00 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

  • OUTBREEDING, COUSIN MARRIAGE AND VIOLENCE I do understand that genetics are impo

    OUTBREEDING, COUSIN MARRIAGE AND VIOLENCE

    I do understand that genetics are important to the differences between groups, but I study institutions, not genes.

    “…To get rid of violence, you could get rid of clannishness. and to get rid of clannishness, you need to get rid of inbreeding. which is exactly what happened in medieval Europe starting in the early part of the period. the roman catholic church, supported by secular authorities, banned cousin and other close marriages beginning in 506.

    “Enforcement of the various cousin marriage bans, which ranged from first to sixth cousins depending on what century you’re talking about, wasn’t easy — at least not in the beginning. the church, for instance, didn’t require that a marriage ceremony take place in a church until something like 1000 or 1100, so enforcement by the church in the early middle ages was probably patchy at best.

    “However, there were LOTS of secular laws throughout nw Europe banning close marriage, including very much so in anglo-saxon England. just a couple of examples: the law of Wihtred from the 690s outlawed cousin marriage — and the punishment for cousin marriage in another anglo-saxon law from sometime the 900s-1000s was slavery for the perpetrators. again, difficult to know how well these laws were enforced; but that there were plenty of such laws indicates that the authorities were keen to do something about all this close marriage.

    “The law of Wihtred is, i think, the earliest anglo-saxon law that i’ve come across which made cousin marriage illegal (at least in the part of England where the law of Wihtred applied). so the push against inbreeding in anglo-saxon England started at least as early as 690 a.d. again, it may not have been very effective at that point, but England’s outbreeding project had begun by that point.

    “lorraine lancaster, still considered the authority on anglo-saxon kinship, concluded that, although its importance was beginning to wane (as indicated by a shift in who would be awarded wergeld in the event of a crime against a person, that person’s kinsmen or their guild), an individual’s extended kindred remained of importance in anglo-saxon/english society well into the 1000s. that suggests to me that “clannishness” was still around in the 1000s in England. feuding was definitely still a regular event.

    “The situation had changed quite a bit by the 1300s when nuclear families were all the rage and englishmen no longer relied so extensively on their extended families. people were still violent in 1300s England, but of course the shift from clannishness to non-clannishness — i.e. from violence to non-violence — would’ve taken some time. evolution doesn’t happen overnight.

    _____

    The state’s monopoly on violence and outbreeding don’t have to be mutually exclusive explanations for why there may have been a genetic change in nw europeans leading to a decline in violent behaviors. the answer might be both. like Jayman said…

    –“Inbreeding, and hence clannishness, can interfere with this process, because while the State is selecting for less violent people, clan conflict presents a counteracting selective pressure for people who are more violent (and can fight feuds).”–

    “…so in places where inbreeding has not abated or did not abate as early as in England — the arab world/middle east, china (or parts of it anyway), the highlands of Scotland, the Auvergne — the state hasn’t managed to quell violence as easily. the combo of outbreeding + an effective state seems to be a winning one. Better yet if you don’t need such a very strong state (modern nw Europe) and the population is just non-violent naturally.”

    -HBD_Chick and Jayman (Doing what academia seems to be afraid to.)


    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-29 06:19:00 UTC

  • "Way's Of Thinking" Are Premodern Solutions. We Need Understanding of Our Failures and Institutions That Correct Them.

    We dont need another way of thinking. We cant convince anyone to adopt it. We dont need a new religion or belief. What we need is to understand why our beliefs, ways of thinking, and institutions failed to survive the extension of the franchise, and what to do about it now that they have failed. We cannot turn back the clock. Nor is the absurdity of the progressive fantasy either possible or survivable. It appears possible to reform our institutions by impending systemic collapse, or by outright insurrection. But it is clear that the majority favors feudal equality over entrepreneurial freedom. Numbers tell us that they do. So if we are to have freedom and they equality without one side conquering the other then we must sever our relations into multiple states or develop an alternative to majority monopoly rule. Given the value of scale in an insurer of last resort, and the virtue of a multiplicity of city states. And given the economic opportunity and cultural freedom that secession creates for each state, it may be possible to design a compromise solution which serves the moral differences and financial commonalities if each given modern technology. It would take a few years to implement but that time would permit demographic adjustment as well as the dismantlement of the federal monopoly, and the possibility if the solution would give vent to what is now leading to civil war.

  • “Way’s Of Thinking” Are Premodern Solutions. We Need Understanding of Our Failures and Institutions That Correct Them.

    We dont need another way of thinking. We cant convince anyone to adopt it. We dont need a new religion or belief. What we need is to understand why our beliefs, ways of thinking, and institutions failed to survive the extension of the franchise, and what to do about it now that they have failed. We cannot turn back the clock. Nor is the absurdity of the progressive fantasy either possible or survivable. It appears possible to reform our institutions by impending systemic collapse, or by outright insurrection. But it is clear that the majority favors feudal equality over entrepreneurial freedom. Numbers tell us that they do. So if we are to have freedom and they equality without one side conquering the other then we must sever our relations into multiple states or develop an alternative to majority monopoly rule. Given the value of scale in an insurer of last resort, and the virtue of a multiplicity of city states. And given the economic opportunity and cultural freedom that secession creates for each state, it may be possible to design a compromise solution which serves the moral differences and financial commonalities if each given modern technology. It would take a few years to implement but that time would permit demographic adjustment as well as the dismantlement of the federal monopoly, and the possibility if the solution would give vent to what is now leading to civil war.