Seduced and Betrayed by Donald Trump

By Paul Krugman, Dec. 2 2016 (LINK to article)

"the white working class is about to be betrayed."

You are probably right, Paul. But whoever is in power invariably betrays the majority of those who elected them. Your own side is no better, although, of course, you cannot see this.

As an inherently tribal animal, our brains evolved to be blindly loyal to its own tribe, which made sense when tribes were real, before being replaced by the state, which is not a genuine tribe or nation at all, but merely poses as such, in order to lay claim to our tribal loyalty, thereby legitimising itself, its ruling elites and the immense power they wield and abuse.

And it is not just the "white working class" that is being betrayed. Blacks are betrayed even more, despite all the Democrats claims to be their champions. Ultimately EVERYONE is betrayed by the STATE, the primary purpose of which is to facilitate society's SELF-exploitation (and self-betrayal), to the personal advantage of its ruling elites and favoured (especially wealthy and academic/formerly priestly) clients, at the expense of society at large and its long-term survival.

This is why civilisation itself (not just particular economies) are bound to a cycle of boom and bust, which ultimately leads to their demise.

Academics' own tribal loyalties blind them to this, making it impossible for social and political scientists to develop a realistic understanding what are supposed to be their subjects of expertise.

Demonising Tribalism in Others, While Indulging Our Own

Donald Trump’s Demand for Love

By Frank Bruni, Nov. 22 2016 (LINK to article)

"Donald Trump’s Demand for Love"

Don't we ALL want to be loved?

Of course we do, but we need to clarify what it means, in this context, which we can only do from the perspective of evolutionary psychology.

We are an inherently tribal animal, who craves the approval of his or her tribe. Only, our original tribes are long gone, their place now filled by substitute tribes, the most important of which is, of course, the state.

The state conflates and confounds very different aspects of the original tribal environment in which human nature evolved, long before the first states and civilisations emerged from it, with the modern "nation state" now deceitfully posing as our tribe or nation (intra- and inter-tribal environment) itself, while at the same time facilitating society’s SELF-exploitation (as an extra-tribal environment, on a par with the natural environment) to the personal advantage of its ruling elites and favoured (especially wealthy and academic/formerly priestly) clients, at the expense of society at large.

Academics have failed to recognise this, because they are themselves privileged clients and employees of the state, with a massive personal self-interest in rationalising and defending its role, self-image (as our "nation") and ideologies (social, political, economic and racial, formerly religious), on which the state bases its claim to moral and knowledgeable authority: http://philosopherkin.blogspot.co.uk

2nd comment

I've just submitted a comment in which I argue that we ALL crave to be loved, not by anyone, but by members, especially high status members, our own tribe, being the inherently and intensely tribal animal that we are.

The problem is that our original tribes are long gone and members of the same society identify with different substitute tribes with varying degrees of overlap.

Most citizens of a state identify with it as their nation, because that is what we have been taught for centuries to do, but with increasing DIVERSITY there is an increasing divergence between how different groups and individuals perceive this nation.

America's liberal left have a very different understanding of America than conservatives, especially the Alt Right, which they demonise as a consequence.

The liberal left form an ideological, "progressive", tribe of their own, whose values and perceptions are increasingly out of touch with much of the rest of America, as Donald Trump's election win demonstrates.

The only way to deal with this is not by demonising other tribes, but by developing an understanding of them, and of one's own tribe(s), in the context of human tribal nature and how it is manipulated and exploited by the state, for its own purposes, as well as by capital for commercial purposes, branding being the most conspicuous example.

Delusions of Nationhood

Can the U.S. Win This Election?

By Thomas Friedman, Oct. 12 2016 (LINK to article)

"it won’t just be emotionally depressing, we’ll really start to decline as a nation."

America (nor any other country) can not begin to tackle its problems, which are now existential, until it recognises its OWN true nature as a mercenary "patron state" deceitfully posing as a nation, in order to legitimise itself, its ruling elites and the immense power they wield and abuse, at the expense of society at large and its long-term survival.

States have been deceitfully posing as nations since the end of the Middle Ages, supported by their academic elites, as they always are, because of their massive personal self-interest (subconscious more than conscious) in rationalising and defending their state employer, its role, self-image (as a "nation") and ideologies (social, political, economic and racial, formerly religious), on which the state bases its claim to moral and knowledgeable authority.

And it is not just academics, of course, who have a massive personal self-interest in rationalising and defending the state and status quo, but everyone who is anyone in society, with any power or influence.

Why would they want to question the state and status quo which serve them personally so well?

I can think of only one reason: state and status quo are leading us towards disaster, which they are. But first they have to recognise THIS.

Why Would Muslims Want to Settle in the West?

And why would western governments encourage them to do so?

This is an expanded version of the comment I submitted to the NYT in response to the article, "Raising American Muslim Kids in the Age of Trump" by Wajahat Ali, August 6 2016 (LINK to article)

I can't help asking myself why a Muslim with ancestral, cultural, religious and historical roots in a distant continent would want live in America, or any other western, essentially European, country, populated and ruled by people with quite different ancestral, cultural, religious and historical roots?

The obvious answer is that the West is materially so much richer and offers so much more freedom and opportunity than any Muslim country does, other than to their wealthy elites.

I also ask myself why western governments have allowed so many Muslims (and other poor-world immigrants) to settle in their countries, given that many, certainly in Europe, are already overpopulated and that ethnic differences (whether racial, cultural or both) have always been a source of social tensions and conflict?

It took me a long time to work out what I believe to be the full answer to this question. An obvious reason, widely recognised, is the interest of state and capital in cheap and compliant foreign labour, people to do the jobs that white people (the native or founding and still dominant race in all western countries) are often not prepared to do for low wages. A less obvious reason, one that took me quite a while to recognise, because so contrary to our understanding of the "democratic nation state", is its role in facilitating the state's age-old strategy of divide and rule.

In a multi-ethnic society, not only can its ruling elites play the different ethnic groups off one against the other (especially minority ethnic groups against the ethnic white majority), but also elevate themselves above the rest of society as a morally superior, i.e. unprejudiced, "colour-blind" and xenophilic, elite. The masses, of course, human nature being what it is, tend to be prejudiced towards other ethnic groups and inclined to xenophobia, but must submit, as also naturally inclined to do, to the authority of and domination by their "moral superiors". 

As a Native Briton and European I identify strongly with European Americans, because I share so much with them in the way of ancestors, culture, religion, history, and even prehistory.

The West's ruling elites are imposing the madness of mass poor-world immigration the oxymoronic absurdity of "multi-ethic nationhood" on their populations by demonising and dismissing anyone who objects as a bigot, xenophobe or racist, thereby asserting their claim to moral authority and POWER.

George Orwell might well have incorporated this into his dystopian novel, 1984, had he been capable of imagining what to him at the time would have been quite unimaginable.

The sooner our elites recognise this madness for what it is the better, so that we can put an end to it in a civilised fashion, before it puts an end to our civilisation, as it otherwise will.

First, however, we must recognise and develop an understanding of how we got ourselves into this civilisational mess: In part it was due to an extreme overreaction to the extraordinary evils of Nazism and the Holocaust, which I elaborate on in this and appended BLOGS.

The State, The Matrix & The One

I recently submitted the following to the op-ed section of the NYT

Dear Editors,

If I were to tell you that I am The One, a real-life Neo, here to save humanity from The Matrix, you would take me for a nutter or a joker. Nutters don’t usually realise they are nutters, so perhaps that is what I am, but let’s assume, if you will bear with me, that I’m a joker, and that many a true word is sometimes spoken in jest.

The Matrix, as I see it, is not a near-future creation by intelligent machines, as it is in the film, but an ancient creation of man himself, which has developed over the centuries and long dominated the world. I am referring to civilisation itself, i.e. the STATES which comprise it, in their various forms, notwithstanding that relatively recent developments have given rise to a single, increasingly global, civilisation 

We are all so immersed in, subjectively familiar with, and dependent on the state, i.e. the society it provides a distinctive framework for, that we fail to recognise it for what it is, just as we once failed to recognise the true nature of the material universe. I am referring especially to academics, who are generally seen as experts and authorities in their particular field of study. Today's social and political scientists, who are responsible for our understanding of society, the state and civilisation are still stuck in a pre-Copernican, i.e. pre-Darwinian, dark age, and mainstream society with them.

To make a historical, instead of a cinematic, analogy, one might see me as a modern-day Galileo, challenging the established world view. While Galileo challenged the Church's Earth-centred view of the universe with the more realistic Copernican view, I'm challenging modern academia's anti-Darwinian view of society with a pro-Darwinian view.

Pro-Darwinian, anti-Darwinian! What am I talking about? Perhaps I am a nutter.

In overreaction to the horrors and evil of Nazism (something the NYT itself warned its readers about in an editorial, The Price of Fear, following the Paris terrorist attack last November), which hijacked and abused the half-baked ideas of social Darwinism to justify its own insane racial ideology, ruthless eugenics and euthanasia programmes, and wars of aggression, a previous generation of academics made a taboo of the whole idea of applying Darwin's ideas to their own species, despite this being the only way to understand ourselves, human societies, the state and our situation.

What a human-evolutionary, i.e. Darwinian, perspective reveals is that the state conflates and confounds very different aspects of the original tribal environment in which human nature evolved, long before the first states and civilisations emerged from it, with the modern, deceptively named, "nation state" now deceitfully posing as our tribe or nation (intra- and inter-tribal environment) itself, while at the same time facilitating society’s SELF-exploitation (as an extra-tribal environment, on a par with the natural environment, which we are also exploiting to destruction) to the narrow and short-sighted personal advantage of its ruling elites and favoured (especially wealthy and academic/formerly priestly) clients, at the expense of society at large, which must ultimately lead to its self-destruction. Thus, the passing of all earlier civilisations, including those of ancient Greece and Rome, the precursors of modern European/western civilisation, which is now rapidly approaching its own self-demise.

The state is like an abusive step-parent which did away with our natural, loving parents (our original tribes and nations) before we had any contact with them (although we retain a race memory of what a genuine nation should be like), bringing us up to believe that it was our nation (our natural loving parents) with our, its citizens, best interests at heart, when in fact, its primary purpose is to facilitate our self-abuse and exploitation, playing us off one against the other in a self-harming and ultimately self-destructive fashion.

The state does serve us, of course, and we are all very dependent on it, but as a shepherd serves his flock, which is not for the flock's sake (notwithstanding any genuine concern he may feel for a lost of injured lamb), but for his own and/or his employer's sake, for the meat and wool the flock provides and can be exchanged at market for money.

Because of the taboo against viewing their own species from a Darwinian perspective (based on the fear of it leading down the same path the Nazis followed) academics fail to recognise the cycle of civilisational boom and bust that has thus far put an end to all civilisations, and will soon put an end to our own.

I don’t have Neo’s super powers to impress and convince others with. All I have are insights into the perverted Darwinian nature of the state and civilisation itself, which mainstream academics are loath to recognise, least it undermine their own status as favoured clients and employees of the state. They won't admit this, of course, even to themselves, preferring instead to demonise my ideas by associating them with Nazism, i.e. the Devil, just as their priestly predecessors once did with Galileo's ideas.

Those who want to free themselves from the Matrix of state power and delusion, I invite to test my ideas with their own reason. Many - initially, at least - will prefer to stay within the Matrix of their delusions about the state and status quo, so long as it seems to be working for them, which it may do for a while longer, but not for very much longer, because already we are exceeding the limits of our planet’s ability to support the grossly materialistic civilisation and economy on which we currently all depend.

If our civilisation is to survive and prosper, there must be rapid and radical change, i.e. revolution, which we have an understandable aversion to, our brain being wired to want to preserve the socio-economic environment on which it depends and has been successful in, as everyone who is anyone in society, with any power or influence, invariably has been. The thought of radical change scares the shit out of us, so that even as we recognise the urgent need for radical change, our brains rationalise and defend the status quo, thus preventing us from taking the necessary action.

So, I have now revealed myself to you as The One. The question is, will you pass this information on to your readers by publishing it in your op-ed section, so that they can decide for themselves whether I am a nutter, a joker or, perhaps, The One?

I can guess the answer to this question, which is both yes and no. You will publish it one day, I think, but not yet. In the meantime, I shall post it on my own blog, followed by subsequent posts in which I will elaborate on these ideas further.

The West's Overreaction to Nazism

America's Need for New, Post-White, Constitution

Campaigns of Ultimate Disappointment

By Charles Blow, April 14 2016 (LINK to article)

"this country, in its founding documents, wasn’t designed to easily facilitate change, let alone revolutionary change."

America's founding documents were conceived and written down by Europeans (white men) for Europeans, but this simple historical truth is buried under a mountain of Orwellian double think.

If the founding fathers were to return and express the horror they would undoubtably feel about what has become of the country they founded they would be condemned as bigots, racists and white supremacists.

Clearly, Americans have to deal with America as it is today, but need to stop pretending that it is the kind of country and nation that its founding fathers imagined it would become.  It is nothing like what they imagined, but something very different, and not just because of all the technological advances which have transformed American society. They envisaged and took for granted that America would remain the predominantly white, mono-racial society that it was back then.

America needs to end the deceit of honouring its founding fathers and begin debating the creation of a new - not so much "post-racial" as "post-white" - constitution, written and approved of my the vast majority of modern Americans, in place of the bunch of white men who wrote the present constitution and have also been largely responsible for all its amendments.

However, before such a constitution can be drawn up, not just for America, but for all democracies, we need to reeducate ourselves in respect to our understanding of the state itself, which is very different from what is generally supposed, academics having deceived us, and themselves, about its true nature.

Like their medieval predecessors and counterparts, academics are privileged clients and employees of  the state, with a massive personal self-interest (subconscious more than conscious) in rationalising and defending its role, self-image (as our "nation") and ideologies (social, political, economic and racial, formerly religious), on which the state bases its claim to moral and knowledgeable authority.

Modern states are not genuine nations at all, but mercenary "patron states" deceitfully posing as nations, in order to legitimise themselves, their ruling elites and they immense power they wield and abuse, to their own and favoured (especially wealthy and academic) clients' personal advantage, at the expense of society at large and its long-term survival (thus our inability to rise to the challenge of climate change and other anthropogenic threats to our own survival).

The state is like an abusive step-parent which did away with our natural, loving parents (our original tribes and nations) before we were born, and brought us up to believe that it was our nation, genuinely concerned for all its children’s (citizens’) well-being and long-term survival, when in fact, its real intention is to facilitate our self-abuse and self-exploitation.

This is a revolutionary view indeed, but only in being more truthful and realistic than what is currently considered mainstream. It is a difficult, painful and frightening truth to recognise and face up to, just as it would be for a dependent child being told the truth about its abusive step-parents.

The point I'm making is that before drawing up a new constitution, we first need to recognise and develop and understanding of the true nature of the state.

Tribal Identity & its Relationship to State, Nation & Race

Inventing the Irish

By Barry Kennerk, March 24 2016 (LINK to article)

I'm an Englishman, but also consider myself a Native Briton, which includes all the Irish. On a larger scale still I see myself as a Native European. And finally, on a global scale, I see myself as "ethnic European", i.e. a white man, with kin all over the world. This is my "race" which I identify with.

This is a very politically incorrect way to feel, I know, but it is how I feel, and how I feel, is how I feel, and I see no good reason to deny it or feel ashamed of it, notwithstanding the huge "moral pressure" one is under to do precisely this, because of the taboo surrounding "race".

Surely, it is perfectly natural to feel an affinity towards those one is most closely related to and shares so much culture and history, as well as prehistory, with. Why do we have a culture which demonises such feelings as "racist"?

It is, I suggest, because the STATE needs its citizens to identify with itself and their fellow citizens, irrespective of race, rather than with the citizens of other states who may be of the same race.

The state fears a sense of racial/tribal identity amongst its different ethnic groups, because it has the potential to undermine its claim to nationhood, which legitimises it, its ruling elites and the immense power they wield and abuse.

The state - even democratic ones - teaches its citizens a very misleading understanding of itself which we would do well to investigate: LINK.

America a Social & Power-Political Construct

The End of American Idealism

By Charles Blow, March 7, 2016 (LINK to article)

"Sometimes it’s hard to shake the uneasy feeling that we are witnessing the dissolution of an idea that was once America."

For reasons of ideology, power-politics and personal advantage, it is assumed that "race doesn't matter", or even exist, when clearly it does. You, Mr. Blow, know this better than anyone, but like most people, indulge in Orwellian doublethink.

In fact, Race, i.e. ethnic origins and identity, form the natural basis of shared national identity and genuine nationhood.

America is a myth, a social, i.e. power-political and economic, construct; unlike race (except when you try dividing closely related peoples from the same subcontinent into different races, as the Nazis insanely did), which is REAL and important. Not in the way that racial supremacists believe it is, but because central to any deep and meaningful sense of both personal and group identity.

Like my own country, America is NOT a nation, but a mercenary "patron state" deceitfully posing as a nation, in order to legitimise itself, its ruling elites and the immense power they wield and abuse.

This is a difficult, painful and frightening truth to recognise and face up to, but the truth it is, and the sooner it is faced up to the better.

Why have the academics we look to as authorities in understanding society and civilisation not already done so? Like their medieval predecessors and counterparts, they are themselves privileged clients and employees of the state, with a massive personal self-interest in rationalising its role, self-image (as our "nation") and ideologies (social, political, economic and ethical).

I elaborate on these ideas HERE.

America's Founding Ethno-Nationalism

Looking On the Bright Side of Trump

By Ross Douthan, Feb. 24 2016 (LINK to article)

" . . the [Republican] party’s donors and consultants don’t want to work for a party trending toward ethno-nationalism . . ."

America's founding fathers took the new country's "ethno-nationalism" for granted: The American nation was originally white, i.e. ethnic European, like the country it split from. All other races, specifically African and Native Americans were totally marginalised and effectively ignored in regard to America's national identity.

The Civil War was primarily about maintaining the Union, i.e. the POWER of the ruling white elite in the federal government, rather than ending slavery, which would have ended soon enough anyway, as it did everywhere else, without the need of bloody civil war. America might also have won its independence from Britain, had its leaders been a little more patience with their brethren across the ocean, as all Britain's other colonies eventually did, without resorting to violence.

The more recent history of western civilisation would have been very different if America, i.e. its ruling white elites, hadn't been so quick to resort to force and violence in defending and projecting their power.

The American melting pot worked extremely well for everyone who passed for white, for the simple reason that race and ethnic origins form the NATURAL basis of national identity and genuine nationhood, which "progressive" ideology now denies and suppresses, of course.

The reason for this denial and suppress of the natural ethnic basis of national identity is the state's need to pose as a single nation, in order to legitimise itself, its ruling elites and the immense power they wield and abuse.

What we have is a classic case of Orwellian "doublethink", whereby the American state claims to represent a single nation and people, when clearly it does not, the very notion of "multi-ethnic nationhood" being an oxymoronic absurdity.

So long as whites formed the overwhelmingly dominant majority, this absurdity could be maintained, but not for much longer, as whites increasingly lose their dominance, not least thanks to an ideology of white racial self-denial and self-contempt, which began as an understandable OVERREACTION to the evils of Nazism and the Holocaust (as well as those of Jim Crow and Apartheid), before being hijacked and incorporated into the state's age-old strategy of divide and rule, whereby American society is divided into a morally superior, supposedly "colour-blind", elite and the morally inferior, naturally (human nature being what it is) less colour-blind, masses, who must submit to the authority of and domination by their "moral superiors".

See BLOG in which I elaborate further.

Fixing OUR Problems Requires Knowing Who WE Are

Fixing Our Broken Water Systems

By the Editorial Board (LINK to editorial)

"Fixing Our Broken Water Systems"

"Our" water systems. "Our" children. "Our" country, "Our" history. "Our" values. "Our . . .

This "our" is a lie and deceit, and the root cause of America's intractable social and political problems, as it is of all other societies, organised by mercenary "patron states" deceitfully posing as nations, in order to legitimise themselves, their ruling elites and the immense power they wield and abuse.

Until we recognise and develop an understanding of this fundamental truth, "we" are a lost cause.

Every American has his or her OWN idea of what it means to be an American, of who "we", "us" and "our" relates to. If America's wealthiest one percent felt the urgent need to "fix our broken water systems", it would be done in a jiffy. But clearly, they don't. They have - for them - for important things to do, like maintaining their private yachts and planes.

Why does the Editorial Board not recognise this, but persist with the deceit of American nationhood?

Like the academics they look to as authorities in understanding society and the state, they are themselves well served by the state and status quo, and thus have a massive personal self-interest (subconscious more than conscious) in rationalising and defending its role, self-image (as a "nation") and ideologies (social, political, economic and ethical), on which the state bases its claim to moral and knowledgeable authority.

America, know thy self! What you are, and what you are not.

See BLOGS in which I elaborate on these ideas.

Europe's Welfare States are Built on Sand

Livin’ Bernie Sanders’s Danish Dream

By David Brooks, Feb 12 2016 (LINK to article)

Bernie Sanders's Danish dream will not work in America, any more than it will continue to work for much longer in Europe, and this is why:

Britain's welfare state, which, as a British citizen, I know most about, was founded in the aftermath of WW2 when there was a very strong sense of national identity and social solidarity.

It follows that if the state represents a nation, its citizen SHARE with one another, rather than everyone simply seeking their own personal advantage. It was by sharing the costs, dangers and hardships of the total war against Nazi Germany that, once joined by two powerful allies, it was able to triumph.

We continue to live very much in the aftermath of that war and the overreaction* to Nazism, but the sense of shared national identity and social solidarity has all but disappeared, undermined by a socio-economic system and ethos that priorities personal advantage over social solidarity (thus the ever-increasing divide between rich and poor) and by mass poor-world immigration, which has destroyed the natural ethnic basis of national identity and genuine nationhood. This seems an odd thing for the state to do, but not in view of its true nature, since it serves its age-old strategy of divide and rule (see BLOG in which I elaborate).

Britain has revealed itself for what really is - and always was, of course - which is a mercenary "patron state" deceitfully posing as a nation, in order to legitimise itself, its ruling elites and the immense power they wield and abuse, to their own and favoured (especially wealthy and academic) clients personal advantage, at the expense, and ultimate self-destruction, of society at large.

* The West's Overreaction to Nazism

The Demonisation & Exploitation of Human Tribalism

What O.J. Simpson Taught Me About Being Black

By By John McWhorter Feb. 3, 2016 (LINK to article)

" . . what I saw was [black] people ignoring the facts in favor of a kind of tribalism."

Tribalism is also responsible for racial prejudice and, to some extent, I'm sure, for white police brutality towards blacks, but it is no good simply demonising it; it is far to much and deep a part of human nature.

We are an inherently and intensely tribal animal, whose original tribal environment (in which human nature evolved long before the first states and civilisations emerged from it) was done away with by the state, which now deceitfully poses as our tribe or nation itself (intra and inter-tribal environment), while at the same time facilitating society's SELF-exploitation, to the personal advantage of its ruling elites and favoured (especially wealthy and academic/formerly priestly) clients, at the expense of society at large.

The "nation state" demonises, suppresses, manipulates and exploits its citizens' tribal nature, patronising blacks and demonising "white racism", i.e. tribalism, as part of its age-old strategy of “divide and rule”, whereby society is divided into a morally superior, now supposedly "colour-blind", elite and the morally inferior, naturally (human nature being what it is) less colour-blind, masses, who must submit to the authority of and domination by their "moral superiors".

We need to understand our tribal nature and work with it, instead of allowing the state and capital to manipulate and exploit it for their own power-political and commercial purposes. See BLOG in which elaborate on human tribal nature and what is preventing academics from giving it the serious attention and study it deserves.

We are Being Tribally Scammed by the State

In Online Dating, ‘Sextortion’ and Scams

By Kate Murphy, Jan. 15, 2016  (LINK to article)

“For most of us, there are pockets and maybe whole sections of our minds and hearts that are not really reality-driven. . . . People don’t want to know what’s behind the curtain, they really don’t.” 

This reminds me very much of our relationship with the STATE. which for centuries has manipulated our inherent and intense tribal nature for its own mercenary purposes, posing as it does, not as a lover, but as our tribe or nation, which evolution adapted our brains to feel a deep yearning for and no less passionate about and loyalty towards.

The modern "nation state" conflates and confounds very different aspects of the original tribal environment in which human nature evolved, long before the first states and civilisations emerged from it. It deceitfully poses as our tribe or nation (intra- and inter-tribal environment) itself, while at the same time facilitating society’s SELF-exploitation (as an extra-tribal environment, i.e. as human resource and market), to the personal advantage of its ruling elites and favoured (especially wealthy and academic) clients, but at the expense of society at large, which, effectively, is being scammed.

It's a form of "self-scamming", of course, which, as in the case of romantic scamming,  our brains are wired to be mugs for, but which ultimately is not just harmful, but self-destructive.

See BLOG in which I elaborate on these ideas.

The Gordian Knot of Post-Racial Ideology and Reality

The Other Obama Legacy

By Charles Blow, Jan. 14, 2016 (LINK to article)

In this piece Charles Blow is clearly indulging - as most writers do on the subject of race - in Orwellian double think:

"I spoke to a room full of beaming high school and middle school boys, a vast majority of whom were black,” he writes, but then goes not to say that  “. . race is tangential to [Obama's] record."

Mr Blow's black identity is clearly and understandably of huge importance to him, but at the same time, in line with post-racial ideology, he is denying, or playing down, the importance of race.

We cannot have an honest discussion about race and ethnicity without facing up to their reality and importance, which post-racial multicultural ideology denies, or plays down, and suppresses. Thus the ease with which “progressives”, who embrace this ideology, exhort Europe to take in ever more refugees and immigrants irrespective of their different ethnic origins and identities.

The ideology of post-racial multiculturalism was, I believe, misconceived, in overreaction to European (white) imperialism, slavery, Jim Crow, Apartheid and, above all, Nazism and the Holocaust.

Interestingly, a recent NYT editorial, The Price of Fear (Nov. 20 2015), warns against just such an overreaction:  “In the reaction and overreaction to terrorism [evil] comes the risk that society will lose its way.”

Race and ethnicity are clearly not just the social construct we are taught they are (except when you try dividing closely related peoples from the same subcontinent into different races, as the Nazis insanely did), but real and important. Not in the way that racial supremacists believe they are, but because central to any deep and meaningful sense of both personal and group identity.

This, however, contradicts the “nation state’s" claim to represent a single nation, thus creating the demand for the Orwellian double think that has us tied up in a Gordian knot.

Notwithstanding our fears of the consequences, this Gordian knot urgently needs to be cut.

I elaborate on these ideas in THIS and appended blogs.

The False Premise of American Nationhood

When the State of the Union Is Strong, but Doesn’t Feel Like It

By Bryce  Covert, JAN. 13, 2016 (LINK to article)

This commentary on the "state of the union" is so wrong-headed it is difficult knowing where to begin in criticising it.

It is based on false premises. First and foremost, the false premise that America is a nation. It is not. Like all states, it is a mercenary "patron state" deceitfully posing as a nation, in order to legitimise itself, its ruling elites, and the immense power they wield and abuse, to their own and favoured (especially wealthy and academic) clients personal advantage, at the expense of society at large.

Then there is the false premise (which follows from the first) that economic growth is an absolute good, that everyone, no matter how wealthy they may be, always needs more money.

Far from being an absolute good, perpetual economic (and population) growth poses a dire threat to any society's very survival.

In order to understand where I'm coming from with my criticism, one must view ourselves, our society and civilisation from a human-evolutionary perspective, which tragically a previous generation of academics made a taboo of doing, in OVERREACTION to the Nazis having hijacked the half-baked ideas of social Darwinism, which they abused for their own evil purposes.

It is exactly the kind of overreaction warned against in a recent NYT editorial, The Price of Fear: “In the reaction and overreaction to terrorism [evil] comes the risk that society will lose its way".

Western civilisation has indeed lost its way - badly, and unless corrected, fatally.

Avatar Illustrates Difference Between States & Nations

A Times Course for Young World Changers Asks, ‘Sustain What?’

By  Andrew C. Revkin, Dec. 31, 2015 (LINK to article)

"We’ll look at the Sustainable Development Goals adopted by the world’s nations . . "

This sentence contains the fundamental misconception that we must recognise and correct, before we can really get to grips with the issue of "sustainable development".

The misconception is in equating state and nation, which in reality are two very different things. However, in order to recognise the difference, one must view human nature and the societies it has, over the centuries, given rise and shape to from a human-evolutionary perspective, which a previous generation of academics made a taboo of doing, in overreaction to the Nazis having hijacked and abused, for their own evil purposes, the half-baked ideas of social Darwinism.

Modern states deceitfully pose as nations, in order to legitimise themselves, their ruling elites and the immense power they wield and abuse. There is not enough space here for me to elaborate further, so I will illustrate the difference between state and nation in reference to the film, Avatar, which, if you haven't seen it, you can learn about from Wikipedia.

The indigenous inhabitants of Pandora, the Na'vi, represent a genuine nation, while the Earthling employees of the Resources Development Administration engaged in mining activities on Pandora represent citizens of a state, or states.

This BLOG attempts a human-evolutionary perspective on civilisation.

Moral Supremacism of the Liberal Left

America’s Bountiful Churn

By Roger Cohen, Dec. 31 2015 (LINK to article)

"Decency demands that in 2016 Western societies do better in accommodating the millions fleeing the Syrian debacle."

And the 10s, if not 100s, of millions fleeing war and poverty in other parts of the poor world? Does the West have to accommodate all these people too?  

Germany is not defined by its territorial borders alone, but in large degree by the shared ethnic origins and history of its people, who are not Turks or Syrians, who have their OWN ethic origins, history and culture.  

What you are encouraging the creation of, Roger, is a powder keg of ethnic divisions and conflict. And when this powder keg explodes, as eventually it is bound to do, will you take part responsibility?  Of course not. You'll blame the "far right" and "racists" for not accepting your own absurd vision of a global melting pot.  

I don't believe that you mean to do the harm that you are, in encouraging mass immigration into Europe. On the contrary, you clearly mean well. But you know what they say about the way to hell being paved with good intentions . .?  

Like your colleagues on the Editorial Board, you sincerely believe that your attitude to race, multiculturalism and mass immigration is the morally correct one to have, and that anyone opposing it, like myself, is morally inferior, but you are, I believe, mistaken.  

Allow me to explain the method to the madness behind your "morally superior" attitude, which is this: 

Post-racial multicultural society and ideology, on which your morally superior attitude is based, serve the age-old strategy of “divide and rule”, dividing society into a morally superior, now supposedly "colour-blind", elite and the morally inferior, naturally (human nature being what it is) less colour-blind, masses, who must submit to the authority of and domination by their "moral superiors".

P.S. to my submitted comment:

What's in a name? Perhaps nothing. On the other hand, the name Cohen does, I believe, derive from the ancient Hebrew priesthood, which made a profession of its claim to moral authority. 

With moral authority comes POWER, which, as we know, corrupts, leading in this instance to "moral supremacism", which is what I consider your attitude towards mass immigration, race and multiculturalism to be an expression of.

Please, don't take offence, Roger, because that is not my intention. On the contrary, I want us to understand and like each other. When you call someone a "racist", presumably you want the person you are addressing or referring to to recognise their "racial supremacism" and to correct it. In the same way, I want you to recognise your "moral supremacism" and to correct it.

I know, recognising one's own faults is a lot easier said than done, and there is nothing worse than having them pointed out to you in public. So, you are bound to reject my criticism of you, as a "moral supremacist" out of hand, initially and in public, at least. However, if you are the genuine liberal (in the positive sense) I assume your are, you will recognise the need to be open to criticism, no matter how painful it might be. Thus, I ask you not to dismiss my criticism out of hand, but to consider it, in private, in the same spirit of good will that I offer it in.

America is a MYTH

Donald Trump’s Unstoppable Virality

By Emma Roller Dec. 29, 2015 (LINK to article)

 "we need him [Donald Trump], as his hat promises, to make America great again."

The important thing to recognise here is that Donald Trump's "America", like everyone else's, is a MYTH, tailored his own, and every other individual American's, personal world view.

This may seem trivial, but it's not, and it is vitally important that we develop a better, more realistic, understanding of what we mean and understand by "America", or whatever state you are a citizen of, because we are taught to identify with it as our NATION, which taps into our inherent and extremely powerful tribal nature, which the state's ruling elites manipulate and exploit in their own narrow and short-sighted self-interests, which they sell to the rest of us as the "national self-interest", when in reality it is no such thing.

Our tribal affiliations massively influence our perception of social and political reality, including that of academics, whom we look to as authorities, but who are no closer to a realistic view of social and political reality than anyone else.

The only way to get a handle on this is to view ourselves, our society and situation from a human-evolutionary perspective, which, however, in overreaction to the half-baked ideas of "social Darwinism", which the Nazis hijacked, abused and discredited, a previous generation of academics made a taboo of.

See BLOG in which I make a fresh attempt at developing such an evolutionary view of ourselves and our society and situation.

BLOG in which I elaborate on the West's overreaction of Nazism.

America is NOT a Nation

The Real Victims of Victimhood

By Arthur C. Brooks Dec. 26, 2015 (LINK to article)

"It is still in our hands to . .  cultivate a nation of strong individuals . . . "

This might make some sense if America were in fact a nation, but it is not, nor any other state I know of, but a mercenary "patron state" deceitfully posing as a nation, in order to legitimise itself, its ruling elites and the immense power they wield and abuse, to their own personal advantage and that of favoured (especially wealthy and academic) clients, at the expense of society at large.

What the state does is to conflate and confound very different aspects of the original tribal environment in which human nature evolved, long before the first states and civilisation emerged from it. It poses as our nation (intra- and inter-tribal environment), while at the same time facilitating society's self-exploitation (as an extra-tribal environment), which must ultimately lead to its self-destruction.

The academics we look to as authorities in understanding society and the state fail to recognise this profound truth, because they are themselves privileged clients (if not actual employees) of their respective "patron state", with a massive personal self-interest (subconscious more than conscious) in rationalising and defending its role, self-image (as our "nation") and ideologies (social, political, economic and racial, formerly religious), on which the state bases its claim to moral and knowledgeable authority (see BLOG in which I elaborate).

Time to Take Human Tribalism Seriously

For Many, Faith Comes at a High Price

By Nicholas Kristof, Dec. 19,2015 (LINK to article)


All these problems - which is an understatement, I know - relate to human tribal nature (tribalism) which it can be no coincidence we are taught to trivialise, ridicule or demonise, instead of giving it the attention and study it deserves.

The reason for this is simple: the state deceitfully poses as our tribe or nation itself and doesn't want too much light cast on how it manipulates and exploits our tribal nature by so doing.

Our tribal nature is clearly something that can only be understood from a human-evolutionary, i.e. Darwinian, perspective, which a previous generation of academics made a taboo of, in overreaction to initial attempts which (as first attempts at anything new and difficult often do) went horribly wrong, especially when the Nazis hijacked the half-baked ideas of social Darwinism to justify their insane racial ideology, eugenics and euthanasia programmes, and wars of aggression.

This was part of a much broader overreaction to Nazism which we urgently need to recognise, develop an understanding of, and correct: http://unapprovedcomments.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/the-wests-overreaction-to-nazism.html