Recruits for the Misfit Army: Wise Words from Gustave Le Bon

“Among the most important characteristics of our age we must mention the presence, in the midst of society, of a number of individuals who, for one reason or another, have been unable to adapt themselves to the necessities of modern civilization, and are unable to find a place therein.  They form a superfluity which cannot be utilized. They are the unadapted.”

Gustave Le Bon, The Psychology of Socialism (1899)*

I am myself a superfluous man who is only barely adapted to modern civilization.  I am not unemployed, incarcerated, or a fugitive from justice, but I am conscious, sometimes acutely, of  my alienation, irritation and disgust.  I am, therefore, to some considerable degree a misfit.  It is only with effort, and then imperfectly, that I adapt myself to my environment.

I have the wit to understand that bureaucracies and societies follow the example of nature and select against the unadapted.  The unadapted are rejects, as my long-ago schoolmates said, and are therefore pushed into obscurity, poverty, ignominy, and, sooner or later, extinction.  Their sense of alienation, irritation and disgust is really their subjective awareness that a firm hand is guiding them towards the exit.  It is nature’s way of whispering  that they are slated for elimination.

I am not, I hasten to add, an utter reject.  I have a job, a wife and children, even one or two friends.  I am what you might call a minor misfit, a sort of amphibian on the slimy shore of the great lagoon of maladaptation.  As such my resentment is not great and my vandal hankerings are not strong.  And yet I feel the firm hand on my shoulder and therefore vandal-hanker just a bit.  Here is what Le Bon says about misfits and the vandal hankerings of the misfit army

“All societies have always possessed a certain number of these individuals, but never was their number so great as it is today [c. 1900]. . . . Notwithstanding their diversity of origin, they are united by one common sentiment—the hatred of the civilization in which they can find no place.  Every revolution, no matter what end it pursue, is certain to find them hasting to join it at the first signal.”

The misfits rejected by bureaucracy, society and nature are a dangerous fifth column of barbarians inside the city gates.  As Le Bon put it:

“Their immense numbers, and their presence in every strata of society, render them more dangerous to modern society than were the Barbarians to the Roman Empire.  Rome was for a long time able to defend herself against the invaders from without; but the modern barbarians are within our walls.”

Le Bon’s modern barbarians are the misfits, the sullen, angry, unadapted individuals who feel the firm hand, see the looming exit, but are not yet wholly pushed outside the door.  Le Bon tells us these modern barbarians come from three classes: the inefficient, the degenerate, and the miseducated.

* * * * *

The inefficient are unemployed or impoverished because they are unequal to modern competition.  The value of their labor has reached or is headed for zero because they are less efficient than a machine, or than “sweated” or foreign labor.  (The essence of “sweated” labor is that employees are competitors, not teammates.)  Thus Le Bon says,

“Today, in every branch of industry or of art, the most capable advance very quickly.  The less capable, finding the best places taken, and being able, by their very incapacity, to produce only inferior works, are obliged to offer this work, of very easy execution, at very low prices.”

Or even, as is the case with the content of this blog, for free.

* * * * *

Le Bon’s degenerates are those who suffer from congenital handicaps of body, mind, and soul.  They are the halt, the lame, the dim, the simple, and the repulsively unpleasant of every description.  Degenerates are what Nietzsche called “the botched” and they have exist in every society, in every age.  But owing to the sentimental solicitude of modern civilization, the number of degenerates (whom Richard Cocks has taught us to call “spiteful mutants”) has grown.  Indeed, viewing modern civilization more than a century after Le Bon, we must add that their power has grown as well.  Not all mutants are spiteful, but every sane person and society budgets for spitefulness of its mutants.

And does its best to keep their numbers low.

“There is . . . another category of Socialists . . . . They belong to the great family of the degenerates. Maintained by their hereditary taints, their physical or mental deficiencies, in inferior positions, from which they cannot escape, they are the natural enemies of a society to which they are prevented from adapting themselves by their incurable incapacity, by the morbid heredities of which they are the victims.”††

These are the “spiteful mutants” and their political organization is called bioleninism.

“They are the spontaneous defenders of doctrines which promise them, together with a happier future, a kind of regeneration.” ††

Doctrines that promise them that the day of their normality (not to mention their revenge) is at hand.  Modern civilization is in the grip of these doctrines, Le Bon tells us, and therefore a spontaneous and staunch defender of degenerates of every description (the “handicapped,” “marginalized” and “stigmatized).

“The part of our civilizations is precisely to create, and, by a sort of fantastic humanitarian irony, to conserve and protect, with the most short-sighted solicitude, an ever-increasing stock of social failures, under whose weight they will necessarily end by foundering.”††

Le Bon goes on to say that modern civilizations will eventually founder under the weight of its degenerates because it is “almost the only class that abandons itself without check to the most disturbing fecundity.”  To this must be added the melancholy fact that that many degenerates do not repay the solicitude of modern civilization with gratitude.  Many degenerates, which is to say mutants, repay this solicitude with spite.

“The danger of all these degenerates—rickety, epileptic, insane, etc.—lies in the fact that they multiply in excess and produce a crowd of individuals who are too inferior to adapt themselves to civilization, and who are consequently its enemies.”†††

Many degenerates are enemies of civilization because civilization cannot altogether counteract nature, cannot altogether remove the congenital disabilities that nature has bestowed.  Le Bon notes, incidentally, the degenerates grow more spiteful when there is no longer a religion to teach then “resignation.”

* * * * *

Le Bon’s miseducated misfits are the surplus output of universities that impart what he calls a “theoretical” education.  These misfits consequently labor under the “artificial incapacity” of acquired skills for which there is very little demand and an acquired prejudice against useful work.  They are the second and third rate intellectuals and artists who, had they been properly educated, might have enjoyed a modest competence (both senses) as, say, a plumber or a tender of swine.

“To the host of the unfit created by competition and degeneration must be added . . . the degenerates produced by artificial incapacity.  These artificial failures are made at great expense by our colleges and universities.  The host of licentiates, instructors, and professors without employment will one day, perhaps, constitute one of the most serious dangers against which society will have to defend itself.”∆

These artificial misfits are the most serious danger to civilization because their university miseducation has in many cases prepared them to concoct and propound revolutionary doctrines that convert other misfits into revolutionaries.  Le Bon was writing before the day when these grievance-mongers would be welcomed and feted in the universities, and as academics enabled to even more grievously miseducate their students.

The universities of Le Bon’s day were not trying to turn out revolutionaries.  But they did churn out aspiring academics and professionals for which there was no conceivable demand.  Most of these graduates of the universities were destined for unemployment or underemployment, and therefore for discontent.  Their university miseducation had rendered them useless and proud.  And this was how the universities of Le Bon’s day were creating

“an immense army of men who are incapable, useless, and, consequently rebels.” ∆

But the universities were not ultimately to blame.  The whole thrust of Le Bon’s sociologic thought was that institutions express the psychology of the people that made them, and that the psychology of a people is largely composed of vulgar errors and vain illusions.  And so Le Bon explains that the universities miseducate because doing so gratifies the vulgar errors and vain illusions of lower-class parents and children.

“Observing the lack of consideration from which manual labor suffers . . . the peasant and the workman finally get it into their heads that they belong to an inferior caste, from which they must at any price escape.  Then their one dream is to thrust their sons, by dint of privation, into the cast of graduates.  They succeed only in making outcasts of their sons; incapable of rising to the ranks of the bourgeoise through lack of money, and incapable on account of their education of following the trade of their father.”

Deluded parents thus made their sons (and later daughters) into misfits just as surely as if they had broken their legs or fed them whiskey from a young age.  Artificial misfits, to be sure, but misfits and recruits for the rebel army.

These outcasts will all their lives bear the weight of the lamentable error of which their parents have made them the victims.  They will be certain recruits for the Socialists.”

*) Gustave Le Bon, The Psychology of Socialism (New York: The Macmillan Co,, 1899), pp. 358.
**) Le Bon, Socialism, p. 359.
***) ibid.
†) Le Bon, Socialism, pp. 358-359.
††) Le Bon, Socialism, p. 98.
†††) Le Bon, Socialism, pp. 366-367.
∆) Le Bon, Socialism, pp. 370.
∆∆) Le Bon, Socialism, p. 373.

31 thoughts on “Recruits for the Misfit Army: Wise Words from Gustave Le Bon

  1. Excellent, sir. Several of my friends and I once had an unexpected encounter with a recent college-graduate son of a mutual friend who was, by his own admission, living in his parents’ basement and making no positive contribution through ‘gainful employment’ to society as a whole. When the question was asked of him (not by me) of what his plans were going forward, his answer was that he would never lower himself to working in a profession below his educational attainments. I then (facetiously) offered him a job under my employ; a job of which, I explained, would educate him *out of* the prejudices against honest labor and making an honest living, he had apparently learned to despise in college. He of course rejected my offer “out of hand,” as I fully expected he would do. To my knowledge, this overeducated nincompoop remains a complete and utter waste of space to this late date, fifteen years down the road. Meanwhile, the undereducated “dregs of society” he so much despised then, and so much despises to this day, keep churning out an honest living, and teaching their children ‘in the way they should go.’ I’m not sure there are any “winners” or “losers” in this game, when all is said and done. All’s I know, and that darkly, is what my duty is; and one aspect of my duty is to *never* raise a child (or grandchild) so fundamentally out of touch with reality that (s)he believes, or can be led to believe, that her only obligation in life on this mortal coil of ours is to satisfy and fulfill her own selfish desires to the fullest.

    • The world is full of such “overeducated nincompoops” and the universities are working overtime to make sure this never changes.

  2. Le Bon was writing before the day when these grievance-mongers would be welcomed and feted in the universities

    And the universities, in turn, produce the school teachers.

    Early one morning, I was working in the stables with two schoolgirls, (aged 16/17) who come to ride my horses and help out. They were studying the “Age of Revolutions,” (1789-1917) for their History special subject. I was quite interested and somehow we got onto the topic of Napoléon III.

    Yes, they knew all about Bonapartism & Napoléon III: “Stalemate in the class struggle” – “Bourgeoisie surrenders political power, in return for protection of its socio/economic power” – “Bourgeois ‘freedom’ is the freedom to exploit the labour of others for profit” – “The Independent Executive – Its instruments the déclassé Bohemians of all classes” – “Professional army made up of the Lumpenproletariat” &c, &c

    It was like listening to children saying their catechism.

    “And who were their opponents?” I asked

    “The proletariat, in alliance with the revolutionary intelligentsia,” they replied, in chorus.

    “And the peasants?” (The class to which they and I belong)

    “They had no community, no national bond and no political organization,” they intoned, as one.

    For their teachers, there is nothing to the right of the Labour party, except greed and eccentricity.

    I assume that the “déclassé Bohemians of all classes” and the “Lumpenproletariat” are included in Le Bon’s class of misfits.

    • I supposedly live in a conservative town in a conservative state, but many of my children’s teachers have been Red as a ripe tomato. And some don’t even know they are Red. I think déclassé Bohemians are mostly failed graduates and college dropouts. The Lumpenproletariat are really that portion of the inefficient who have yet to be radicalized. I just came up from the department’s usual Friday colloquium, where I was impressed, not for the first time, by the mutability and immortality of communist ideas. They never die but show up every few years in a new disguise.

      • “The Lumpenproletariat are really that portion of the inefficient who have yet to be radicalized

        I would say they are that portion of the working class who have adopted bourgeois/capitalist values: drug dealers, prostitutes and their pimps, loan-sharks, resetters, swindlers, street hustlers of all sorts. In short, entrepreneurs operating at the margins of society.

        Along with these, there are those in ununionised labour, who work in a range of jobs that cannot be done by machines, but could be done by any human at all – warehousemen, storekeepers, security guards, call-centre and assembly- line workers, seasonal workers, &c. This flexible, undifferentiated labour force, going from one task to the next and never stopping too long at any one company, can no longer gather itself into a force, since it is never at the heart of the production process. They have no trade, no profession.

        It is the class from which demagogues and fascists of all stripes recruit their mass base.

      • Yes, the lumpenproletariat is incapable of developing Marxist class consciousness. The concept is to some extent a face-saving device for the Marxists, since it explains their failure to revolutionize the masses. Religions have to invent similar concepts to explain the obtuse and obdurate.

      • In the past, the workers had the workshop and then the factory in which to find themselves. They had strikes, where they could stand up and be counted and unmask the cowards among themselves. They had the wage relationship, which pitted the party of Capital and the party of Labour against one another, to establish solidarity and draw up battle-lines.

        A post-industrial era means that many young people cannot find an opportunity to enter into the social organism as producers. Hence, the decline in organised labour and trade union militancy.

      • And this is the essence of the sweat shop system:converting coworkers and colleagues into competitors. It’s a return to Hobbes war of every man against every man.

  3. Thank you for both of your articles. They were certainly thought-provoking.

    I have a confession: I am a congenital “misfit”. I have struggled all of my life with poor health and the knock-on consequences; and also with my… lack of social graces. One of the comments in your previous article discussed under “intuition” the ability to look at someone and know what they are feeling; I don’t have that, and probably never will, so I have at least one easy example to remind me that others do not share the same intuitions I do, even those I think most obvious.

    It is honestly shameful how long it has taken me to learn that lesson.

    I can’t deny that, in an earlier time and place, I probably would have been miscarried, or died within six months of birth. Nor can I deny that – on the whole – “misfits” like myself are a social burden, even when we are not “spiteful”. Nor that even the smallest defect of the brain may render more difficult or, perhaps in some few cases, impossible, “moral” behavior. Even if one correctly recognizes moral duty, and after attempts to act morally.

    Why, then, does God permit us “misfits” to be born?

    On an earthly level, authority and original sin. Free Will is the great and undeserved honor and privilege of our decisions having consequences; not merely for ourselves, but for those within and without our communities, and especially our families. Of particular note is the “authority” of parents over their children. Parents make choices on behalf of their children; frequently, these are bad choices. Almost always, they are not perfect choices. The burdens laid on the “misfit”, mostly laid upon them by their parents, are not so different from the burden of original sin laid upon us all by our ultimate parents.

    On a heavenly level, God desires that we may have life, and have it more abundantly… even us undeserving “misfits”. Why He would grant some of us these crosses, and not others… I do not know His mind, except that He is Truth, and He is Virtue, and He is Love; so by default, everything He decides is automatically wiser, more righteous, and better for myself – and all others – than anything I might decide.

    If I consider my own “misfitism”, my own cross – all too heavy yet so undeservedly light! – I see some of His purpose. A rebuke for pride; a teacher of charity; an opportunity to inflame the charity of other hearts; a reminder of mortality; a refinement of wisdom; perhaps not least, a chance of glory. For God gives us trials that we may endure, and even sometimes overcome them, in and only in co-operation with Him; all for His greater glory, and, by reflection of that glory, ours as well.

    No-one, save perhaps Our Lord and Lady, have been “perfect” humans, even in the non-moral sense. To utterly mis-use a theological term – only between one and four people, depending on how you want to define it, have ever been born “kecharitomene”, gratia plena, with all the gifts and graces needed to perfectly fulfill the moral law without the aid of any save God. In that sense, we “misfits” are in no worse a state than all of humanity – man cannot be saved except by his own decision, but MUST be saved in a community. He cannot be saved by himself. That is why God created a Church.

    Yet I cannot deny the sad and pathetic state to which so many have devolved, especially in their utter rejection of Christ. And I cannot deny that we “misfits” are highly overrepresented in – highly vulnerable to – these anti-social, anti-Christ movements.

    One thing that all the evo-psych neglects, as useful as it may be, is the Supernatural. Man acts, but all the more does God act! Who knows what grace may be provided even a “misfit”? I don’t have all the answers; perhaps there is a correlation between “misfitism” and the population of Hell. Perhaps that correlation is the same as we might think, seeing the mob of “misfits” marching against good decent folk, and all of those “misfits” are hell-bound. Perhaps it is the opposite – the “misfits”, at least those afflicted physically, have a literal handicap, and God understands that and judges them less harshly; whereas the outwardly-respectable are merely better able to put on a mask of virtue, having little understanding of how much of their virtue was given to them, not cultivated themselves. Perhaps there is no correlation at all, and everything depends not on our actions, but the secret inclinations of the heart, and the story of a life lived known only to God.

    I know only a few things for certain.

    First, that it is never wrong to do Justice – an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life, a death for a death. Even if at times mercy may be preferable; but mercy is only permissiveness in the absence of repentance.

    Second, that it is a violation of justice to punish someone for what they are, rather than what they do, including the “misfits”. Even, unfortunately, faggots – at least those who have never been ACTIVE faggots. Understanding of course It is not wrong to remove or bar individuals from occasions of temptation; like one with a family history of alcoholism from the bar, or young men from unescorted young women, or faggots from the company of others in general, but especially little children.

    Third, that misfits DESERVE no special consideration, though they may be the OCCASION of charity. Although it must be charity, and not enablement.

    Fourth, that God desires all men to be saved, even if few are saved. He creates no man for the purpose of damning him; men damn themselves by their own acts.

    Fifth, following from the fourth, that while we know not all of God’s purposes in this life, we know that, before the end, he provides all the grace necessary for a man to save his soul. How exactly this looks or plays out in this life, we cannot be sure; but we can be sure that he has given all souls that live, even the misfits, everything necessary for salvation. Even if we all too often do not take advantage of it.

    I dread the coming civilizational collapse, for I know I am not fit – physically – to survive the loss of all the conveniences and supports of modern life. Yet, indubitably, I know that when the long-delayed sentence is executed against our corrupt and evil civilization, whose very cornerstones are the Four Sins that Cry to Heaven for Vengeance – well, that day will truly be a blessed one for “society” and the world. Even, perhaps especially, if it takes the form of fire from heaven.

    God bless you and keep you all. I pray for my salvation and yours, and especially for my fellow “misfits”. Especially the spiteful ones; there but for the grace of God go I.

    • Thanks for these thoughtful reflections. We used to have a deacon who had a fondness for homilies on the theme that “God doesn’t ever make junk.” His meant well to encourage those on whom God had not conspicuously lavished gifts, but he also avoided the real puzzle. You haven’t avoided the real puzzle, so honesty is clearly one of God’s gifts to you. I expect there are many times you would prefer health or popularity, but each of us has to work with what we are given. I have not solved the puzzle that deacon avoided, but my vague idea is that our Christian struggle is different than out Darwinian struggle because in our Christian struggle we struggle against our self. The Darwinian struggle is real and important, but it is ultimately background to the Christian struggle with what St. Paul called “the flesh.” This is too easily identified with sexual desire, I think. Sexual desire is part of carnality but is far from the whole thing.

      I think you are right to say the misfits deserve no special consideration. We should give them credit whenever they deserve credit but we should not fawn on them as if they were God’s chosen people. Christianity has a dangerous weakness in this direction, in pretending that the ungifted are, somehow, God’s special gift. And I think Christianity has a dangerous weakness in refusing to face the gravity of the Darwinian question. Civilization can only carry so many misfits and misfits will suffer most if civilization falls to pieces.

      • Is that not true of all evil? Evil is a parasite that destroys that which supports it. “Spiteful” is indeed the right word for it.

        And it is a hard path, to reconcile conformity with Truth to conformity with Love. One might even call it straight and narrow, as opposed to broad and swift. But it is ultimately the only path leading to survival, much less salvation!

      • For what it is worth, I would call reconciliation of truth and love a crooked path, since everything depends on circumstances. There are times when the claims of love outweigh those of truth, and times when its the other way round.

  4. We know from evolutionary psychology that the mentally and physically healthy are religious and conservative (i.e., far-right extremist in modern lingo). Specifically, they believe in a moral God (not Cthulhu), worship Him, are low in neuroticism, high in agreeableness and conscientiousness, and are ethnocentric – caring far more about the in-group than the out-group. They are not individualists, multi-culti (now, “diversity”), narcissistic, virtue signaling, out-group identifying with, Machiavellian schemers and traitors, with almost no concern for sanctity, loyalty, and obedience to authority. We know that even in chimpanzees, those who reach the top and become leaders must make alliances with other chimpanzees and act in a reasonable and acceptable manner, otherwise the disgruntled junior chimps will gang up on them and take them out – pulling them limb from limb and biting off their genitals. If only colleges were run on such a basis, unjust and unreasonable administrators, i.e., diversity officers and human resources staff for starters, would be eliminated from the gene pool.

    It is precisely the sane and healthy who are the misfits in degenerate society. (A banal observation, admittedly). The spiteful mutants are running the show, or at least emulating the mutants. This situation cannot last. So, it may seem adaptive in the short-term to give up morality, normalcy, and ethnocentrism in order to avoid being deemed “far-right,” but we know that anti-ethnocentrism means death to the group pretty much by definition. Plus, dysgenic breeding means we will be shortly too stupid to maintain the basics of civilization which requires high trust societies. Stupid people are low trust because they can’t tell who to trust and who not to trust, so they end up distrusting practically everyone and you get rampant corruption as seen in all but the few relatively civilized countries with higher IQs.

    So, though people like us are for the chopping block, if civilization were to ever rise again from this death spiral it is people with our proclivities for the normal and traditional who would have to populate it.

    • The George Floyd affair illustrates your point. A misfit of Le Bon’s first and second type was apotheosized by misfits of Le Bon’s third type.

    • I’m somewhere between non-believing respecter of Christianity Ed Dutton and a sincere, devout Catholic. I often wonder if my high neuroticism is what makes me such a poor Christian (have become very lax in my practice and am more a “cultural Christian” right now).

      It’s strange being a highly neurotic “far-righter.” Our existence is nothing but a never ending series of defeats as the spiteful mutants mop up the victory they achieved about the time I was born. This drives even more anxiety, despair…..

    • Students of heredity should examine the remarkable instances of success among Algerian immigrants in France. Here are a few examples:

      Claude Cohen-Tannoudji Nobel Prize in Physics 1997
      Serge Haroche Nobel Prize in Physics 2012
      Jacques Attali, 1st head of the European bank for Reconstruction & Development
      Jacques Derrida Post-Structuralist Philosopher
      Annie Cohen-Solal, the biographer of Sartre
      Bernard-Henri Lévy, usually known as BH, public intellectual and founder of the Nouveaux Philosophes
      Paul Joseph Salomon Benacerraf, Analytical Philosopher, who spent most of his career teaching at Princeton. His brother, Baruj Benacerraf, an immunologist, shared the 1980 Nobel Prize for Medicine & Physiology.
      Haïm Korsia, Chief Rabbi of France since 2014.

      I would also include the jurist, Nathan André Chouraqui, who fought with the Maquis (1942-1945). He emigrated to Israel in 1958, where he continued to promote French-Israeli relations and inter-faith dialogue.

      Speaking of the Resistance, there was José Aboulker, from one of the richest families in Oran, who served with the Free French forces in North Africa and undertook undercover missions in France. He became a Clinical Professor of Neurosurgery.

      All these were members of the tiny community of Haredi Jews, about 100,000, whose ancestors received French citizenship under Crémieux Decree of 26 October 1870, conferring French citizenship on « les israélites indigenes » [native Jews] of Algeria. It is also a community in which cousin-marriage was the norm.

      This furnishes an argument that not only is intelligence heritable, but so are the “passions” or dispositions that alone call it into play. As Hume teaches us, “Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them.” (A Treatise on Human Nature II 3). It is not intelligence alone, which is a mere tool, but intelligence employed in the service of intellectual curiosity, emulation, ambition that leads to success.

      • In the case of Derrida, it was intelligence driven by a passionate hatred of western civilization. Or, perhaps, by the Devil.

      • The value of Derrida is that in the act of exhibiting hissophistry one finds oneself noticing matters which deserve a lot of exploring: the obvious stands in need of investigations as a result of the points that Derrida pretends to have made.

        For that reason, he repays study

      • Yes. IQ must be coupled with the right personality traits which we know are also hereditary. In the case of culture changing geniuses, they need psychopathic traits immune to offending people. High IQ is not nearly enough.

      • [T]hey need psychopathic traits immune to offending people.

        Plutarch relates “To one who said, that none were happy, who were not above opinion, a Spartan replied, then none are happy but knaves and robbers (Plut. Lacon. Apophtheg.)

      • When someone tells me they do not care what other people think, I hope they are lying. I want to live among people with a healthy dread of shame.

      • The only opinions of me that I care about are ones held by people I respect, and there are only a few of those. Now that I think about it, I realize I have been excluding people from my circle of caring for a long time.

      • It’s probably good when a man’s circle of caring is small, but probably bad when it is so small only he fits inside it. A man should not trouble himself over the opinions of buffoons, but he should have someone he fears to disappoint. It keeps us on our toes.

  5. Our society is so wealthy (is it fake based on the U.S. Dollar’s status – all the economic stuff that bores me to tears?) that many excess college graduates receive useless Bullsh!t Jobs (read the book by this title). I’m one of them, pretending to do something necessary and productive (D-Fence contracting). At least I’m honest and self aware and don’t have narcissist delusions that make me seek status and I lack the inflated sense of importance. It’s middle-class welfare. I went to college like they said to (good at math and science) and I can so productive-looking things that are saving our nation because evil Russia, China and Iran are knocking on our front door. I hate it but it feeds the family. I admire the honest tradesman.

    Thanks be to God that He gave me high agreeableness and conscientiousness to go with my high neuroticism. So glad I’m “far right” and not a spiteful mutant.

    • [M]any excess college graduates receive useless Bullsh!t Jobs

      This actually contributes to the strength of a state.

      Hume reminds us that “Trade and industry are really nothing but a stock of labour, which, in times of peace and tranquillity, is employed for the ease and satisfaction of individuals; but in the exigencies of state, may, in part, be turned to public advantage.”

      Carnot’s Levée en masse, to say nothing of the mass conscriptions in the two World Wars, was possible only in a country, where a great many people were employed in furnishing unnecessary luxuries and could be conscripted without diminishing the production of food and manufactures necessary for the war effort.

      • Our secret plan for the next war is to mobilize the Human Resource departments and throw that irresistible weight against the enemy.

      • Perhaps, they could be used like the “Bevan Boys,” conscripted into the coal mines under the Directed Labour Directive or, possibly, the Land Army, ditching or picking potatoes.

  6. Yes, bioleninism. Pretty sure Spandrell is right on that, because I remember exactly how it was in Soviet times. It was basically a HR strategy, a hiring strategy. People were divided into good cadre and bad cadre. Good cadre was people who came from poor parents, were not much educated and were not much bright either. These were deemed politically reliable and got the big jobs, because they were loyal. They were loyal because they understood deep down they did not deserve those jobs, and if they showed any disloyalty and would be fired, they would never amount to much on their own effort.

    The innovation of bioleninism is that it is not only about jobs. It is a multidimensional game of status. For example, unmasculine men think they benefit from a world where feminism tells every man to be unmasculine. Which is exactly why every male feminist activist is a classic pencil-neck.

    Our strategy? We submerged and waited it out. Sure such a system cannot last forever, it either collapses as the Soviets did, or lets meritocracy back in, as indeed China did.


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.