You Can’t Be Serious

I started to write that I have lately entertained fantasies of living under autocratic rule of some kind so long as the despot retained some basic impulse towards avoiding system failure.  Preferably a monarchy reliant on the divine right of kings. But, of course, I already do live under such a regime, minus the basic impulse. Someone recently described the Republicans as the Washington Generals to the Democrats’ Harlem Globetrotters. At most, the former offer a temporary respite to the worst behavior before a return to the abnormal normal. This merely serves to give the population a chance to adjust to the new horribleness before a new round of horror begins again. The ship cannot be turned around, it can merely move faster or slower in its inevitable direction.

I know plenty of people who hate what is happening on campus and elsewhere who would never dream of voting for someone right of center. One woman was even fired for failing a black student by a black head of department. The student had simply not submitted any work, making even a gentleman’s “C” out of the question. Not long after, that same woman could be found writing Facebook posts complaining about the existence of the Right wrong-think.

When I was in my late twenties, my capacity to believe suddenly enlarged, such that if I did not believe in some religious topic, it was typically not because I couldn’t, but I find myself simply incredulous at the behavior of the global elite. The sheer pathological nature of it beggars belief. Ed Dutton and evolutionary psychology identifies the biologically archetypal man as conservative, tallish, good looking, moderately intelligent, and religious. Needless to say, he will also be heterosexual with no desire for cross-dressing. He will be interested in competing for social status and accomplishment as a way to attract an equally healthy-minded and bodied woman. These pro-social men and women will reproduce and engage in co-parenting within the once admired institution of the family. He will be ethnocentric and love his community, defending it from the predations of outsiders. He will not ally himself with those who hate his group and seek to undermine it with their help. All this requires, so it seems, “harsh Darwinian conditions” with high mortality salience. The latter fosters religious belief and a desire to have children. The weak, maladapted, and genetically mutated die mostly in infancy. With luxury comes decadence. Awareness of death fades into the background. Religious belief and having children decline. The distinction between men and women diminishes – with women no longer needing men as protectors and providers so that they take on more male characteristics while men become more effeminate. Mental health declines as a product of genetic unfitness and a general malaise and ennui. There is an evolutionary mismatch with our environment. Instead of worrying where our next meal is coming from and whether we will be killed or eaten by man or animal, we sit around wondering, “What’s it all for? Is this all there is?”

Desmond Morris wrote a book called The Human Zoo, comparing us to dysphoric and dislocated zoo animals that have been deprived of their natural environment. The animals live longer, but pace their cages with nothing to do and chew at their tails. Dutton points out that we put pictures of trees and natural landscapes on our walls because they make us happy – little reminders of life before the zoo.

Someone comments, “I used to like the books of Orson Scott Card (Ender’s Game being one) but then I found out that he is anti-gay.” My internal response is that anything that smacks of health, reproduction, vigor, family, versus, the crippled, dysphoric, resentful and neurotic cannot be all bad. A society populated by the former can function. A society consisting only of the latter would immediately collapse.

One would like to imagine that our irreligious and even anti-religious leaders while having no love for God might at least favor health, survival, and vitality. They would not, for instance, simply take away the life-blood of our energy-dependent modern society. They would not adopt open-border policies. They would not turn us against each other via identity politics. They are, it turns out, accidentally helping to weed out of the gene pool of lesbians, gays, and most especially “transexuals.” Liberals too are not reproducing much.

But, instead, the regime targets the few relatively strong, self-reliant working-class men, not beholden to the government and immune to their bribes. These men are not sick or scared enough. Some may not be smart enough to self-brainwash into progressive beliefs and some are simply too naturally vital and vigorous to adhere to pathological notions.

Human beings are naturally religious. A belief in God is connected to notions of eternity and the future, having children and regarding life as meaningful and good. According to this view, luxury and decadence bring out the worst in us. My incredulity at the regime’s lack of pragmatic self-preservation marks me out as the product of an earlier time. New Zealand used to be described as 50 years behind the time by the English and 30 years behind by Americans, hence my anachronism. But, thanks to modern communication methods, NZ prides itself on being cutting edge in its fidelity to all modern pathologies.

8 thoughts on “You Can’t Be Serious

  1. There are probably several causes, all of which come down to the decadence of a late-stage empire. Putting economic growth above all else, the enlarged influence of female compassion, an optimistic faith that the god in which they do not believe is somehow on their side. Sometimes I think its recklessness. At other times I think it is malice. I suppose it is really both. Their malice is by design, their recklessness is off the cuff.

  2. Yes, I have been analyzing this for years and I have some answers. JMSmith explains some of them. Don’t discount demonic influence either.
    But there is a point where the sheer madness of it really shocks me. I have a pessimistic personality and I have been convinced of the decadence and collapse of Western civilizations for decades while family and friends criticized me because I am the “Sky is failing” kind of guy.
    But, even in my worst nightmares, I would never have imagined that people would start mutilating children on the grounds that “they were born in the wrong body”. And that they would brag about it and defend it with passion. Not in a million years. What about the Covid fiasco? No, Mr. “The Apocalypse is upon us” (that is, I) could not imagine such a thing.
    I am the most pessimistic person about the future of the Western civilization that I know and I really get short. Reality is worse than my worst nightmares. I feel like the king of the tale. (

    • I tell my sister once and again: “The Romans decayed and disappeared without eating so much sh*t. We are not so fortunate”.
      The successive waves of the Industrial Revolution (including today’s technological revolution) produced an amount of wealth unknown in human history. Late Romans were insulated from the short-term consequences of their degeneracy by their wealth, but this wealth was tiny compared to ours. Since we have a huge wealth, we can allow ourselves to have lots of pathological behaviors.
      But, as I have said, mutilating kids? Yes, the religion of freedom and equality, economic and politic interests, virtue signaling, needing a cause after gay marriage, etc. But there is a limit where all the rational explanations fall short. Even demonic influence seems shorter than this.

  3. Makes one yearn for more civilised, simpler times when men were men and sheep batted their eyes at the clomping, squelching approach of a pair of capacious gumboots.

    The great tragedy of NZ woudlacouldashouldamighthavebeen is that your cannibal savages didn’t figure out how to canoe across the Bass Strait and eat all the Abos back when before the End of History (it is to laugh).

  4. “[W]e sit around wondering, ‘What’s it all for? Is this all there is?’”

    “Human life,” says Hume, “is more governed by fortune than by reason; is to be regarded more as a dull pastime than as a serious occupation; and is more influenced by particular humour, than by general principles… Even to reason so carefully concerning it, and to fix with accuracy its just idea, would be overvaluing it, were it not that, to some tempers, this occupation is one of the most amusing, in which life could possibly be employed.”

    And he notes that “The amusements, which are the most durable, have all a mixture of application and attention in them; such as gaming and hunting.” Philosophy demands an equal degree of “application and attention,” but without the risk to one’s fortune in the casino or to one’s neck in the hunting field


Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.