Geopolitics

I’ll Have The Cancer Please, Sir – Is This How Western Civilisation Ends?

Self annihilation, that is.

We’re following the path of a plant.

Know more about Russia than your friends:

Get our free ebook on how the Soviet Union became Putin's Russia.

See 2017 Hedge Fund Letters.

Western Civilisation
skeeze / Pixabay

Recently I watched in amazement a neighbours plant. Agave franzosinii or “Majestic Agave”, they call it and here’s a picture. Not the real one. That one’s now dead.

Something like 6 months ago my neighbour’s plant began to grow a super impressive spike just like the one you see in the photo above, which is the exact same species. It was ridiculous!

This spike grew from nothing to a height of probably 8 or 9 metres… or about 30 feet. And it did this in the span of maybe 2 months tops.

Now, just running the math on that this would mean that each day it grew a whopping 15 cm… or half a foot per day, which sounds about right. We’d look at this monster each day and marvel at its growth wondering how high it would grow… and then what we’d ask ourselves?

As it turned out, the plant went literally “supernova”, flowered, and then died. Just like that. Not unlike fireworks, I suppose.

I’ve a habit of reading multiple books all at once. Well ok, not exactly at the same time, I’m not that good, but shifting between them as I go. I swear, I could tell you a story by the end of a day that involves ancient Greek philosophers, artificial intelligence, gene therapy, interest rate cycles, and human biochemistry. I just couldn’t guarantee it’d make any sense to you.

Fortunately or unfortunately, this is how I’m wired.

To look at the world from multiple angles and view it from multiple disciplines. And this is what got me thinking about this damned plant.

It’s not the only occurrence in nature where we see something become truly spectacular just before it dies. We see it in shooting stars or the good old butterfly, which spends most of its life in a cocoon and only a fraction of its life as a majestic beautiful creature… and then poof, it’s dead. It always strikes me as very sad.

Not Just Plants

And then we find it in societies, too.

Possibly the most profound example of this is evidence of China discovering America 70 years before Columbus set sail. Their ships, mapping equipment, and society’s dominance unparalleled at the time. (you can read the fascinating book 1421: The Year China Discovered America for the full story).

What or who, you may ask, conquered them?

Turns out, THEY did. Under what began as a long self imposed isolation the Emperor fell, causing political chaos, they then destroyed all the maps, let what was at the time the worlds greatest navy literally rot in the harbours, and descended into what was a truly horrible period of history.

Their sailing to the ends of the earth well before Europeans was, in hindsight, the equivalent of the Agave franzosinii flowering. It was amazing, spectacular, well beyond what any other civilisation could accomplish at the time. And it was also the end.

There are countless other examples of empires that essentially fell as a direct result of them castrating themselves — socially, politically, and even ethnically.

If we are to look at the most prosperous successful societies on earth today we don’t need to look much further than western civilisation.

Many of the good things we enjoy can be attributed to western civilisation. Relatively high living standards, healthcare, housing, safe societies, access to education, opportunity, and let’s not forget the string bikini — the greatest invention of the last century. All of them strongly influenced by western civilisation.

Now, I can already hear many yelling at me, “No, Chris you’re wrong. Shut up! The west’s living standards aren’t all they’re cracked up to be and our politicians are as corrupt as Mugabe.” and so on.

But consider this. If this wasn’t the case (that western civilisation is preferable), Europe’s self-imposed immigration fiasco would not involve North Africans and Middle Easterners flocking to Europe.

Indeed it’d be Germans, Dutch, French and Swedes flooding across borders into North Africa. Why isn’t that the case?

Well, the currently politically incorrect truth is that these societies are worse, much worse. But attend a university in the US, Canada, UK, or one in most any country in the EU and the social justice warriors don’t want to hear this. It’s “racist” to point out the obvious.

North America, Canada, Australia — these countries receive net immigrants year after year.

Why? Because compared to the alternatives they’re a jolly lot nicer to live than where many of the immigrants come from. The values built, the legal institutions, the political, social and economic infrastructure, while far from perfect are, and I can promise you this having lived in multiple different countries, waaaay better than most many of the alternatives.

And now we find the recipients of this hard fought for freedom and quality of life screeching and wailing, and not only threatening to, but indeed actively and aggressively tearing it down. And those most responsible for creating it (white males) becoming vilified. Ayn Rand would not be shocked.

Are YOU Liberal?

Scanning daily the headlines across the western world, there lives the steady drumbeat from what is commonly referred to as “liberals”. Which is funny, because I’d consider myself liberal. Take a look, here’s what the word actually means:

liberal
ˈlɪb(ə)r(ə)l/
adjective
  1. willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one’s own; open to new ideas.
  2. (of education) concerned with broadening a person’s general knowledge and experience, rather than with technical or professional training.

Except those people describing themselves today with this word manage to fit the above description in the same way you and I’d still fit our underpants from when we were 4.

The drumbeat goes like this.

  • “White privilege” (whatever the hell that is) is the reason for the world’s problems
  • “Hate speech” must be obliterated at all costs (if you say something, I don’t like I’ll just call that hate speech. Ha, take that!)
  • And closely tied to the above one, freedom of speech does not extend should anyone be offended by what is being expressed. Which of course means that it’s impossible to discuss ANYTHING actually worthy of discussing because EVERYTHING that is actually worth discussing is contentious by its very nature.

Diversity, inclusivity, systemic racism, you know all the buzzwords by now. Because they’re being used subtly and not so subtly on you daily in order to create a narrative and that narrative is furthering a cause. The question is, what is the cause and where does it lead?

I’m reminded of Peter O’Rourke’s comment:

At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child – miserable as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of snivelling brats.

What strikes me as extremely dangerous, and I’m really serious about this, isn’t that these ideas exist.

Hell, all sorts of batshit crazy wishful, and completely loony ideas exist in the world all the time.

It is that they have managed to actually take over not only the institutions of education with “safe spaces” and “trigger warnings” etc., but increasingly they’re moving into legislature.

And I’ve had conversations with friends who’ve said, “Well, Chris nobody other than loons takes any of that seriously. What’s the problem?”

And to answer this I point you toward Nassim Taleb’s excellent chapter on this very topic in his book “Skin in the Game”. The chapter is called “The Most Intolerant Wins: The Dictatorship of the Small Minority”.

Here are some relevant points he makes:

It suffices for an intransigent minority –a certain type of intransigent minorities –to reach a minutely small level, say three or four percent of the total population, for the entire population to have to submit to their preferences. Further, an optical illusion comes with the dominance of the minority: a naive observer would be under the impression that the choices and preferences are those of the majority.

Taleb provides an example:

The Kosher population represents less than three tenth of a percent of the residents of the United States. Yet, it appears that almost all drinks are Kosher. Why? Simply because going full Kosher allows the producer, grocer, restaurant, to not have to distinguish between Kosher and nonkosher for liquids, with special markers, separate aisles, separate inventories, different stocking sub-facilities. And the simple rule that changes the total is as follows:

A Kosher (or halal) eater will never eat nonkosher (or nonhalal) food , but a nonkosher eater isn’t banned from eating kosher.

Or, rephrased in another domain:

A disabled person will not use the regular bathroom but a nondisabled person will use the bathroom for disabled people.

He goes on to provide present day evidence:

Now consider this manifestation of the dictatorship of the minority. In the United Kingdom, where the (practicing) Muslim population is only three to four percent, a very high number of the meat we find is halal. Close to seventy percent of lamb imports from New Zealand are halal. Close to ten percent of the chain Subway carry halal-only stores (meaning no pork), in spite of the high costs from the loss of business of nonpork stores. The same holds in South Africa where, with the same proportion of Muslims, a disproportionately higher number of chicken is Halal certified.

And from the headlines in the UK, a case in point:

The FA is preparing to take positive action to promote black, Asian and ethnic minority coaches by making it mandatory for all England teams to have an ethnic minority coach as a member of their staff.

Now, let me make this very very clear. I’ve nothing, NAH-THIIING, against anyone from any minority group anywhere, achieving anything. What is dangerous beyond belief though is categorising people and divvying up the spoils according to their categorisation. Let me remind you of this:

I’m all for equality of opportunity, but NOT equality of outcome.

They are very different things and they absolutely lead to entirely different outcomes.

I strongly encourage you to watch this video. This young lass, Lauren Southern, a journalist who’s had the gall to point out some of the absurdities in the western world was recently detained and denied entrance to the UK. Watch it.

And all this while hundreds of returning Jihadists fighting for ISIS are allowed to return to the UK after fighting in the Middle East.

You see we’re not allowed to “discriminate” against minorities. We couldn’t make this isht up. Oy vey! Remember Taleb’s work.

This is a deadly cocktail of political correctness stirred with a healthy dose of nihilism, topped with a naivety befitting a 4-year old.

This isn’t hard to understand. We have history as a guide. When it’s a crime to speak, it necessarily is a crime to think. Speech is, after all, simply verbalised thought.

This has been tried before and any student of history worth their salt will be appalled at what’s taking place under our very noses. The narrative is that we must be “inclusive”, “level out the playing field”, and if we’re white, you need to feel guilty for your “privilege”. What the hell?

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, equal opportunity? Absolutely, yes. Equality of outcome? No, thanks.

Every adventure that mankind has had with the naive, though often well meaning (in the initial stages at least), creation of some idyllic utopian society has descended into the very worst that humanity has to offer.

A Reminder: Utopian Society’s Track Record

  • 40-70 million killed. China under Chairman Mao. Single Party Socialism. 1958-61 “The Great Leap Forward”.
  • 20 million killed. USSR under Joseph “socialism in one country” Stalin. 1936-52 “The Great Purge”.
  • 40 million killed. USSR under all other leaders.
  • 4 million killed. Cambodia under Pol Pot. Communist. 1975-79.
  • 1.6 million murdered; 4 million killed in hard labor. North Korea under Kim Il Sung. Independent socialist State.
  • 1.15 million killed. Yugoslavia under Josip ” socialist federation President” Tito. 1945-65.
  • 1 million total killed. Ethiopia under Menghistu. Communist. 1975-1978 “The Red Terror.”
  • 1 million killed. Indonesia under Suharto. Communist. 1966.
  • 1 million killed from genocide; this does not include war casualties. Afghanistan under Brezhnev. Communist. 1979 – 1981.
  • 800,000 killed. Rwanda under Jean Kambanda. 1994. Socialist.

That this is being perpetrated not by some external group but by those we’d consider a product of western wealth, education, and legal protections is quit something to behold.

I find this all bloody depressing to be honest. But as a realist and viewing the entire world as I do, a massive laboratory with many moving parts, I’m struck by how very very different those in Asia view all of this mania that is sweeping the western world.

Asians in general, but Chinese in particular, find this totally absurd, and I promise you this. They don’t give a isht about gender laws, inclusiveness, privilege from or attributed to anyone. None of it.

They are, in fact, very racist, believing that they are quite simply much better than others. And not only that, they’re increasingly proving it. They’re proud of who they are, proud of where they’re going, and guilt is not something you’ll find in their vocabulary.

Now, you can weep and moan all you like about whether this is a good or bad thing. It IS, and that’s what matters.

From where I sit the longer term outcome looks inevitable since with every passing day one power works its ass off, rising relentlessly while the other humiliates itself, ignores where it’s come from, what it’s achieved, and instead proceeds to gleefully castrate itself.

I’ll leave you with two quotes today, both relevant:

“The great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation is no walk in the park or mere drum-beating and gong-clanging.” — Xi Jinping

Regarding “honour killings” in the Muslim faith…

Liberal MP Justin Trudeau said the government should not call honour killings “barbaric” in a study guide for would-be Canadian citizens.

“There’s nothing that the word ‘barbaric’ achieves that the words ‘absolutely unacceptable’ would not have achieved.”

– Chris

Article by Capitalist Exploits