Blog Archive

Thursday, July 16, 2015

What Happened?: Explained in Three Parts

Part 1:  Why Nazis, Imperial Japan and Confederates were the Last Heroes on Earth:

The answer is simple -- they were the last cultures, nations, powerful entities that could actually shape the world, that believed in the concept of superior and inferior.  They were not egalitarians.  They believed that some things were superior and other things were inferior, and that superior things had the right to supplant inferior ones.  This belief is not unique to the Nazis, Imperial Japanese or the Confederates, it's just that these were the last three groups to ever believe these things, before the belief system was completely wiped out from the modern world.  They were Earth's last chance to head in the right direction.  Before them, the world was heading in the right direction because virtually everyone believed in these things, instead of just a few reactionary outnumbered holdouts which had become the case by 1939.

At the very beginning of civilization, the Greeks took a survey of all the peoples and cultures surrounding their own, and made a concise calculation that they were more civilized, virtuous, and good people than anyone else in the world.  They were correct in this assertion.  Not only did they prove it in their literature, mathematics, philosophy and science, they even proved it on the battlefield with Alexander the Great conquering the whole known world.  After the Greeks came the Romans, who also realized that their way of life and culture was far superior to the barbarians who surrounded them.  As a result, they spread their empire freely without guilt, killing everyone and everything in their path, because they knew they were spreading the light of civilization across a world covered in darkness.  You can see a glimmer of this Roman self-assertion in the movie Gladiator, which makes it very much worth watching if only for that single line.

Across the globe in China, something very similar was happening, as more civilized Han Chinese displaced and conquered less civilized barbarians both to their south and their north.  They frequently described the customs and habits of the people they were fighting against as justification for their acts, as the people around them were so evil that simply narrating their history was cause enough to take up arms and go to war with them.  Chinese historians made painstakingly clear why their rivals or older dynasties had to go, documenting the corruption, wastefulness, and divine disfavor previous inferior groups had before they, the superior group, entered the scene.  China and Japan also understood the concept of the superior supplanting the inferior and took to it like a fish in water wherever their wars and migrations went.

When Rome fell, Christianity took to the fore, pronouncing Christian (European) culture to be superior to pagan barbarians (who lived outside of Rome and thus hadn't converted to Christianity yet) or heretical Mohammedans (another non Roman, non-European group of savages.)  Though ostensibly a war for the faith, Christendom was just a synonym for the previous civilized Roman culture and the spreading of its beliefs values and norms just like Rome did before it.  In fact, most early Christians were so wedded to Greek and Roman philosophy that they even melded the two, like Thomas Acquinas did in his writings.  This masculine Christianity that tamed even the fierce Vikings and launched the Crusades against the Turks and Saracens was still the exact same philosophy by just another name, of the superior, civilized group taking land and converts away from the inferior, barbarous groups.

In the 1400's Europe had flourished to the point that even travel across the open oceans was possible, which opened up the possibility of more superior cultures supplanting inferior ones to a scale never before heard or dreamed of in the annals of man.  Warring with Turks, Mongols and Arabs was tough hewing.  They were strong warriors, well organized, rich from the spice and silk trades and their many mighty rivers like the Nile and the Euphrates and valuable waterways like the Red Sea, the Black Sea, and the Gulf of Oman, and often fighting on home soil in desert climates the Europeans didn't understand and couldn't cope with.  It was very difficult for the superior to supplant the inferior when the margin of error was so thin between these two groups.  But suddenly we were talking about European culture and technology and disease resistance and population densities compared to stone age savages who were still living in the era prior to farming across most of the landmass of the world.

So began the biggest supplanting of the inferior by the superior in world history, the Age of Exploration, Colonialism, and Imperialism.  Note, the people who did these things were not evil Germans or Japanese (both of these nations were backwards and powerless at this time), they were the French, the British, the Spanish, the Portuguese, the Dutch, etc.  Today the people who claim to be the most tolerant, liberal, egalitarian, diverse, blah blah blah lovers.  But at the time they were all heroes who followed the Nietzschian creed of survival of the fittest and the will to power.  There is nothing about Nazis or Japanese or Confederates that makes them better than these early explorers and conquerors and settlers.  In fact, there are many things that make them worse than those original supplanters.  It's just that everyone else quit the business of spreading progress across the world except these last three outliers, so they ended up being the only heroes left on Earth by default.  Praising people like the Prime Ministers of Great Britain as they went about colonizing most of the world, from America to Africa to India to Singapore is perfectly in keeping with my point, more in keeping with my point than Nazi Germany.  The Confederates were just a continuation of that British policy, with a plan to conquer central and South America and stamp out its backwards Spanish culture with the superior British one, at the beginning of the Civil War.  Don't ask me why all the Spanish, Dutch, Unionists, French, and British suddenly disavowed their own deeds they'd been doing for centuries and became the polar opposite of everything they had believed in since their philosophical legacy began in Greece.  This is the greatest mystery known to man.  The only thing that does make sense is the actions of Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany and Confederate USA, which did not disavow this historical legacy but presumed it to just be common sense to continue it onwards all the way to its natural conclusion, with all the world conquered by the most civilized and powerful groups who would run it all better than the natives ever could.

The great whites of yesteryear who took over the world are the most admirable people in history, because they created the most value added the world has ever seen.  Taking Native American America, a stone age land of cannibals and human sacrifice and dogs as the only domesticated beasts and hunting as the only source of food, and turning it into the mightiest, freest, and healthiest nation on Earth under George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and other moral and intellectual luminaries, is the greatest act in the history of the world.  All the whites who participated in that transformation are heroes, titans that make Nazi Germany look like dwarfs (who were just trying to Germanize Eastern Europe, which was only slightly behind their own level of progress).  Or Imperial Japan (trying to conquer a China that was only slightly less modernized and industrialized than they were).  The whites who settled South Africa, Canada, and Australia likewise took complete wastelands of wasted space and pathetic tribal cultures and turned them into modern prosperous wonder lands.  New Zealand is an island paradise now, perfect for the filming of Lord of the Rings, but when we got there it was just full of cannibals chucking spears at each other.

When the British arrived in India, it was a land dominated by mystical fog headed Hindus and cruel fanatical Muslims.  The British took over all of it, they tamed the Muslims who in their savagery attempted to kill even all the British women and children in a surprise treacherous uprising (just like the savage Indians attempted to do at Jamestown), they banned the ridiculous Hindu customs of suttee and thuggee.  They built railroads and canals and telegraph lines and all the trappings of modernity into the infrastructure of a land that before had nothing.  They created a civilized and non-corrupt law code and bureaucracy, something never before seen or hence seen in South Asia.  When they left India, it was united, peaceful, well run and with modern infrastructure, the complete opposite of the India they had found when they arrived.  The same miraculous transformation of regions can be seen in Hong Kong, Singapore, Korea (a Japanese uplift project), Taiwan (again a Japanese uplift project), Israel (when the Jews took it from Palestinians in 1948), Angola (a Portuguese uplift project), etc.  Everywhere Europe or East Asia went, they spread civilization to regions that were laughable in their backwardness and more like monkeys than men.  All of these people believed in the concept of the superior supplanting the inferior.  All of these people believed in manifest destiny.  Everyone understood that they were creating progress and unlocking human potential by changing the cultures and racial demographics of the regions they visited.

In the late 1800's and the early 1900's, it was clear that Russia and Eastern Europe had surpassed their former masters, the turks and mongols, and they waged a series of wars to liberate themselves from the yolk of their Muslim conquerors, and then to bring the war back into the throats of these oppressors by taking land back away from them and restoring it to Mother Europe.  One of the most amazing wars in history was when the Greeks, Serbians, and Bulgarians allied together to wage a successful war on their previous conqueror the Ottoman Empire to mutually support their independence and land claims against the foe who had previously subjugated them all one by one.  The Ottoman empire receded and Europe grew, the superior was supplanting the inferior even in the region that had seemed most impervious to change.  World War I was a capstone on this event, when the entirety of the Ottoman empire was dismembered, when Attaturk took power in Turkey and modernized it along European lines, while all of the Middle East was divied up between the British and the French, all far more capable administrators than the Ottomans had ever been.

Even as stupid as World War I was, even with all the needless European deaths that occurred during said war, it was still in line with the march of progress because it handed the Ottoman Empire's lands over to Europe, which was the last land outside of European or Japanese/Chinese ownership at that time.  The whole world had been successfully divided up among the best, brightest, and strongest of the Earth.  As foolish as the Union had been in abolishing slavery, at least America still believed in white supremacy and kept their blacks carefully down with Jim Crow segregation laws.  America was a 90% white country which had virtually abolished the black race altogether and had not allowed anyone else but nordic whites into the country since 1920.  It was the high tide of the superior supplanting the inferior.  Even Ethiopia was eventually conquered by Italy, the last independent nation in Africa, in the 1930's.

Since the beginning of writing, since Homer walked the Earth, until the fall of Ethiopia, the world had embraced the concept of the superior supplanting the inferior, and had acted accordingly.  As a result, we went from a land of brave Spartans and sophisticated Athenians to the greatness of the Roman empire, the intrepid explorers like Cortez and Columbus, and finally the mighty steam engines and age of machinery, even airplanes, things undreamed of in the Greek philosopher's heads, by the beginning of the 20th century.  We had conquered the entire globe and had civilized most of it.  Farming had replaced hunter-gathering.  Literacy had replaced illiteracy.  Science had replaced superstition.  Everything was going great.  There were symphony orchestras by people like Beethoven and Dvorak.  Books by people like Jane Austen and Dostoevsky.  Sports had been invented, all the fun sports we are playing today were recent innovations that had just been thought up back then.  There were insane amounts of progress in all fields of human endeavor.  Everything was looking up.  We had already invented science fiction literature, which was already predicting eras of technological and political progress like unto infinity.  Everything was in our grasp.  By following the same philosophy as the Greeks had from the very start, of holding in contempt everything beneath us and laying waste to it, shattering it, driving it beneath our hooves and planting our own works on top of their ruins, we had come this far.  Sumpter's Creative Destruction writ large, and we had come to the very brink of the computer and space travel at the beginning of the 1940's, we had even learned how to split the atom and release destructive energies that only God could imagine up until this point, all following this one grand philosophical ideal.

And then we inscrutably, unimaginably, turned around and renounced that primordial concept we had been using since 5000 B.C. and decided on a new plan of egalitarianism, where we would not only cease trying to civilize and improve the outside world, but we would even import barbarism into our countries and relax our morals and strictures to the lowest common denominator.  Thereby, in a couple hundred years, undoing and destroying the work of ten thousand years of progress by all of our ancestors.  The only people who didn't turn around, who thought this was madness, who thought it was ridiculous nonsense befitting only of perplexed looks and laughter, were the Axis powers.  They thought, surely you must be kidding.  Surely you must just be saying this as some sort of political tactic.  Surely you can't actually mean what you are saying, right?  And so the Nazis and the Italian Fascists and the Imperial Japanese ignored all this crazy talk of respecting the rights of man and treating everyone like a special snowflake and continued their projects of uplifting the backwards regions of the globes -- and the British and French declared war on them for doing what the British and French had been doing since the age of the Crusades -- Hell, since the days they still belonged to the Roman Empire and were attempting to conquer the barbarous Germans!!!!

The last sane people in America were defeated in the Civil War -- it didn't look that way because the South was left alone for another century after that, but once their ability to launch an armed resistance had been shattered it all came tumbling down the moment the North chose to make its next move in 1960.  The last sane people in Europe and East Asia were taken out in 1945.  And now we have a new philosophy, completely different from the philosophy that drove all human progress, all global progress, since the dawn of civilized man.  This philosophy says we should quadruple the population of 70 IQ savages who by their own self admission are majority rapists and let them into every country on Earth, allow them to become the majority of all the world's democratic populations, and let them vote to decide how everything should be settled for the rest of world history.  This is their idea of progress.  This is what the Nazis died trying to stop at the Battle of Berlin and the Japanese died trying to stop at Iwo Jima.  Fanatically.  Frantically.  With all their hearts and all their souls.  But we toasted them anyway, and now -- we are realizing our new dream, a new world order of 5.4 billion blacks and muslims, who have never contributed one drop of progress to world history, but have always before been its most severe retardants across every era.

And like I said, the world had almost crystallized into its most perfect state in 1930.  Even Ethiopia had been colonized.  Everything was going perfectly.  There was nothing to complain about.  People's living standards were far better than ever before.  The fruits of their previous philosophy were apparent all around them.  The superior supplanting the inferior had gotten them London, Paris, Berlin, Rome, Athens, Moscow, New York City, and Tokyo.  They had no cause for complaint.  They had just learned to fly.  They were inventing rockets that could take them into space.  And yet they rebelled, they turned their back on this way of life, and they decided on Black World instead.

Hitler warned them against it.  He shouted until his lungs were hoarse against it.  But in the end all he could do was commit suicide with his wife in despair at the stupidity of man.  And now here we are, living in the ashes of that defeat, as the world crumbles around us back into Africa.  Slouching towards gomorrah:

    William Butler Yeats (1865-1939)


    Turning and turning in the widening gyre
    The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
    Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
    Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
    The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
    The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
    The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity.
    Surely some revelation is at hand;
    Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
    The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
    When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
    Troubles my sight: a waste of desert sand;
    A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
    A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
    Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
    Wind shadows of the indignant desert birds.
    The darkness drops again but now I know
    That twenty centuries of stony sleep
    Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
    And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
    Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

What an appropriate lifespan for this most prophetic of prophets -- to be born on Western Civilization's first defeat, 1865, and to die at the beginning of its last defeat, 1939.  He must have been given to us by God to document the waning years of Earth's golden age.

What a terrible pity it all is.

Part 2:  Superior vs. Inferior is not Just About Conquering Foreigners:

It's obvious to anyone who the best nations are.  Just check corruption indexes, crime indexes, per capita gdp measures, median household income measures, average length of life, how many nobel prizes the countries win, what artistic and scientific and athletic accomplishments they've made in the World Cup and the Olymipcs, etc, etc, etc.  We have endless data compiled on all these issues.  The same top twenty or so countries keep appearing in every single data set, centered around Scandinavia, Australia, Canada, etc.  So it should be obvious to anyone who the 'superior' people on Earth are.  It's also obvious to anyone who the most inferior people are on Earth, due to the giant cesspool of the Earth known as Africa, the Middle East with its constant internecine purposeless violence, and South Asia with its insane population density plus poverty levels.  We know who the problem nations are too, because we have endless compiled data on their quality of life as well.

It isn't rocket science to realize these countries would be better off if people from Australia, Canada, Denmark, and Iceland conquered these regions and put into place their own law codes, institutions, regulations, education regimes, etc.  But liberals refuse to allow colonialism or imperialism to be reestablished over the world's worst human rights abusers and most backward countries.  Why?  They insist that we can civilize the third world just by asking them nicely to imitate what we do, and their brightest idea is to send charity over to make sure 'everyone has enough to eat,' never mind their population is currently in the process of quadrupling so there's never going to be enough food no matter how much we send.

Though liberals often spout bullshit like all cultures are equal and life as a spear chucker is just as noble and worthwhile as life in New York City, they don't actually believe that.  They also are bent on civilizing and uplifting the third world, but they're cowards who refuse to do the actual heavy lifting that actually accomplishes these facts.  Instead they shower trillions of dollars of foreign aid on corrupt dictators, give them all sorts of loans and bailout deals, hold parties in their honor, and hope through some sort of cultural osmosis that someday the third world will civilize itself, educate itself, and rise to our own level through an act of pure spontaneous generation.  This is despite the successful track record of colonialism leading to all the best parts of the world -- Australia, the USA, Canada, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan -- and free third world nations falling into nothing but corruption, civil war and superstition the moment they're left alone -- like South Sudan, Zimbabwe, Rwanda, Iraq, Syria, etc.  In fact, not a single country has ever been improved by the liberal leftist formula for nation building.  They still cling to this unscientific, unfounded formula, however, because it suits them.  It makes life easy to say 'oh we'll just wait until they civilize themselves,' despite the paradoxical nature of the statement, since part of being uncivilized is not recognizing why civilization is superior to barbarism, and therefore they have no motive or desire to civilize themselves in the first place, so waiting for them to do so will never occur even in a million years.

You can feel morally superior if you consign most of the world to poverty and ruin and oblivion, billions of people suffering on insufficient diets and soul crushing philosophies and mauling levels of arbitrary violence like 50% of women getting raped sometime in their lives, because you didn't pull the trigger.  Colonialism, Imperialism, conquered foes by force and required they obey the strictures of civilization by force.  They shot a lot of people who wouldn't get with the program.  But at the end of the day, we had cities in Africa that couldn't be distinguished from Boston or Miami.  Furthermore, if the country did not have a large enough smart fraction that could be brought over to work as the administrators in these Empires, they were simply sent by boat from the homeland to become the smart fraction themselves.  In India, we found plenty of smart strivers who wanted to improve India by working with the British administration, so there were virtually no British there ruling over one of the most populous nations on Earth.  Whites rule in Mexico as a live-in smart fraction, and the same is true over most of Latin America.  But when it comes to Africa, you'll never get anywhere unless you run the place yourself.  Rhodesia only had a small upper crust of white people in it, but even with that small administrative presence, they managed to make the place look no different from any other modern European state.  It was the breadbasket of Africa, peaceful, prosperous, with fine architecture and decent dress codes, etc.  It had all the trappings of a European state with a European way of life.

The same is true in the Middle East.  While we ran Iraq, things worked fine.  But the moment we left the Iraqi army fled like cowards and ISIS took over.  This is because there are no decent people in the Middle East, no smart fraction we can work through as puppet masters.  If you want to civilize the Middle East you have to provide that smart fraction yourself and the military to enforce its decisions.  You do not negotiate with the natives, you do not plead with them to change their minds, you point guns at them and tell them to obey or die.  Nor is this some sort of temporary measure until you get a new constitution passed and found a democracy.  There is no one in the Middle East capable of leading a civilized existence under their own initiative, except maybe the Kurds.  Everything must be done for them, permanently, because they will never, ever get it themselves.  And yet, if we think civilization is superior to barbarism, we cannot just leave them alone solely because they can't maintain civilization themselves.  For people without a smart fraction that can do it themselves once shown the ropes, your colonialism must become a permanent Empire, or else you're leaving most of the world's population into the abyss of anarchy that we find the Middle East currently is and always has been.

Most of the third world is so hot, dry and/or disease ridden that no first worlders want to inhabit it anyway.  Simply administering it, rather than completely eradicating and replacing the natives, is the most we can hope for.  There is little value in just straight land these days, as the knowledge economy has replaced the natural resources economy and provides the bulk of our GDP these days.  Even if we wanted to double the white population on Earth, just by administering Africa we could implement modern agricultural reforms on their farmland and reap the added value wheat or yams or whatever we want to plant there without ever actually having to live there and farm the fields ourselves.  We'd much rather live in Canada or Montana or other nice cool places that are still basically unsettled and empty to this day.  Colonialism doesn't equal genocide of the natives.  In fact, it never did, but that's another story.

There are basic minimum floors to human behavior, which if gone below people become net negatives and are better off dead.  North Korea, for instance, is beneath this minimum floor.  It would be better for the world, and for North Koreans themselves, if they were all dead, instead of in the giant open air gulag under the maniacal dictator they live under today.  Large portions of India are beneath this minimum floor due to unbelievable levels of poverty.  The entire Muslim world is beneath this floor because they are a menace to the outside world and a continuously civil war terrorist bombing mess among each other.  Likewise, all of Africa is beneath this minimum floor due to their crime, poverty, and abuse of human rights.  Though it would be fine to just kill all of these groups off and be done with it, as one giant mercy killing, the examples of Rhodesia and Portuguese Angola and French Algeria, etc, show that this isn't necessary.  If run well, these countries can turn out all right.  Everything worked fine under colonialism.  There were no incessant wars or power struggles between dictators.  Crime was kept under control.  Muslim fanaticism was squelched out.  Corruption was put down, the freedom index was kept high, and people were allowed to prosper and thrive in commerce and industry.  We need to go back in there and run everything ourselves as one giant charity program.  Otherwise we end up with billions of children born into a world that offers nothing but pain, abuse, and misery until they die again, an affront against God if there ever were one.

Which leads to my next point.  Superior vs. inferior isn't just about colonialism.  It's about birth control and eugenics.  If we went in there, we could in one swoop require a 'one child law' in Africa, the Middle East and South Asia.  Just imagine how many impoverished hungry mouths could be stopped from entering the world with just that one law change.  There is absolutely no reason for these women in these regions to be having children; such children have no economic opportunity and no reason to live.  They will never be able to contribute anything to the world.  Currently we have this freak show that is Niger, one of the poorest places on Earth, with an average fertility rate of 7 children per woman.  This makes no sense.  We aren't talking about Ben Franklin's family born on a virgin frontier ripe for settlement here.  We're talking about a backwards wasteland with no prospects and no hope, and yet the women are still going at it like rabbits.  How much better could we make Africa just by stopping their reproduction?  And this isn't just a matter of academic curiosity, but a matter of life and death, because if we don't go in there and stop their reproduction, all those babies aren't going to be content to stay in Africa.  They will be immigrating here, demanding their welfare checks of $40,000 a piece a year, and they will vote for it and they will be the majority, because there's freaking 4 billion of them due to their freaking 7 children per woman average, and they will take over the world and then devour and destroy the world if we do nothing.

We can't just watch Africa's fertility rate as some sort of interesting sideshow.  It's a dagger held at our necks.  Just look at the flotillas of Africans pouring across the Mediterranean into Europe.  They're coming for us, and it won't be long before those thousands turn into millions and then billions.

People in the past understood the superior supplanting the inferior wasn't just about conquering foreign lands though.  It meant the nobility supplanting the peasantry and thereby improving the general intelligence and manners of your own country.  This effect is well documented in a recent book by Gregory Clark, "A Farewell to Alms", who showed that the entire British peasantry was effectively exterminated during the Medieval era and replaced with the descendants of the nobility.  As a result, they were eugenically suited to be the brave, smart, reliable and determined men who invented the Industrial Revolution and settled the New World.  This project of national self improvement was maintained by the Nazis last, but it wasn't originally a Nazi concept.  It was practiced by all the rational countries on Earth across all time.  They always favored the nobility over the peasantry, and fertility rates always favored the rich over the poor, until yet again that strange transition in the 1900's which reversed all previous habits across all time.

The smartest, most productive, and most virtuous people in every country form a natural aristocracy.  It is obvious that any state worth its salt would put into place a legal structure which allows this group to get ahead at the expense of all other groups.  This has a two fold purpose -- one, it encourages people who could go either way to shape up and belong to the superior group.  Two, it gives people who have made the effort to belong to the superior group better chances at affordable family formation and higher fertility, which will help out our nations in the long run to be descended from heroes instead of losers.

For thousands of years the state always supported the aristocracy over the rabble.  However, in the last century we instead have chosen to support the rabble at the expense of the aristocracy.  The result has been a general degradation in our overall intelligence, morals, and economy.  Most of this is masked over by rapid technological progress, but it can still be seen in books written by Theodore Dalrymple ("Life at the Bottom") and other basic facts like our 40% single motherhood rate.

There should be absolutely zero benefits for leading a bad life.  No rewards to single mothers.  No child support.  No welfare.  Nothing.  If you are a single mother I hope you and your child starve to death homeless on the streets.

Monogamous married couples are superior to single mothers.  This is well known for thousands of years across all civilized history, but inscrutably we turned our back on this well known truth in the 1900's as well.  Are you seeing a pattern here?  Even though all the studies, all the data, all the science shows that children are better off when raised by a married couple than a single mom, we continue to subsidize and support morally single motherhood as some sort of wonderful thing.  To make matters worse, we're even handing children over to be raised by two unrelated pedophile gay men, or one lesbian transgender and one normal mom, or God knows what the media will come up with next.  We have all the science in on perversion too.  It's physically unhealthy, it's mentally unhealthy, and it's spiritually unhealthy.  Gays, transgenders, and all that ilk have way higher poverty rates, crime rates, promiscuity rates, suicide rates, drug and alcohol abuse rates, etc, etc, etc.  They're just no good, and it used to be understood that social pressure should keep their type down, which would encourage them to imitate virtuous good people instead of chasing their wildest fantasy hedonist dreams of self destruction, another instance of the superior (monogamous married couples) supplanting the inferior (perverted freak shows), that has been overturned starting in the 1900's.

None of it makes any sense.  In the 1950's, crime was virtually non-existent.  Everyone had a married mother and father.  The schools churned out well educated, well behaved workers who all easily found a job.  Everything was great.  So why did we turn our backs on a successful, working formula and institute the exact opposite policy instead?  Why do we now prefer high crime and no policing because that's too brutal?  Why do we now prefer single motherhood and transgenders to Mitt Romney's family which is considered hideously white?  Why do white mothers feel the compulsive need to adopt black babies from abroad to prove how full of empathy they are?  Why do we give trillions of dollars of support to bottom feeders who just smoke crack and eat giant tubs of ice cream at home while shouting at their kids to shut up and hitting them if they ever give their parents any lip?

At the same time we gave up civilizing the outside world, we gave up civilizing our own domestic citizens.  We stopped trying to raise future generations, but just abandoned them to themselves while selfishly pursuing our own goals, like a new romance and a new sex partner every five years.

We gave up supplanting the inferior with the superior, and now we are ambitiously supplanting the superior with the inferior.  The same is true in our immigration policy.  From 1924-1965, we had in place an immigration policy that allowed in only the highest quality nordic whites into America.  You can tell nordic whites are higher quality by the fact that all human accomplishment was achieved by them, as documented in Charles Murray's book Human Accomplishment.  Nordic whites continue to have the best economies, the best athletes (guess who won the World Cup last year -- Germany), the best scientific achievements, the best run governments with the least corruption, and so on to this day.  Remember all those datasets that always put Scandinavia at the top of the best countries on Earth?  Yeah, those are the nordic whites our immigration policy was designed for.  In the past we collected all the Germans, Swedes, British and French we could get our hands on.  Now we collect Guatemalans and Salvadorans, Somalis and Ethiopians, and bunches and bunches of Muslims who openly want to kill or enslave us all and make our women into rape harems like they already have done to the blonde blue eyed women of Sweden.

Our immigration policy was deliberately changed to exclude high quality immigrants like Nordic whites or at least East Asians.  Instead we aimed for the very bottom of the barrel, intentionally, with things like refugee resettlement, diversity visa lotteries, and other products of sheer inverted madness.

We actively decided, in 1965, to supplant the superior native USA white population, a country that was 90% white at the time, to make it majority hispanic with a sprinkling of Africans and Muslims just to get us to maximal violence levels nation by 2065.  This obviously makes no sense, but then again what has ever since the beginning of the 1900's?  When have we made even a single decision that wasn't intentionally bent on destroying ourselves since then?

What we have done on a global level is the equivalent of what that drunkard in the Louvre did by punching a hole in a Monet.  We took the collected works of our ancestors and pissed all over them, set them on fire, and had a cavorting dance of ecstasy around the fact that we can destroy that which we ourselves could never manage to create ourselves, and are satisfied with the pleasure of spite and jealousy as opposed to real accomplishment and glory like all the previous generations managed to burnish themselves with.

All the previous generations managed to get by with monogamous marriage.  We are the first people too licentious to abide by Nature's system for having and raising the next generation.  All the previous generations made sure the rich, the intelligent and the powerful had pride of place in the determining of state affairs.  We are the first people who are trying to give felon convicts and illegal aliens the vote to determine our affairs for us.  All the previous generations used their military might to expand their borders and incorporate more land and people under their benevolent strictures.  We are the first to lose our empires and hand over large landmasses to our inveterate enemies, rain money down on terror organizations openly declaring their intent to kill us, and hand over trillions of dollars to corrupt dictators and 7 children per mother indigent African peasants.  We are the first to shove gays in the face of all our children and educate them to celebrate gayness and transgender freaks in school and the media.  We are the first people to ever call ramming a dick in someone's ass marriage.  Rather than trying to guide children towards productive and stable marriages with a single member of the opposite sex while remaining a virgin until that date, we encourage them to experiment, take drugs, and have a grand old time with their 11 sex partners on average and, if you're gay, 1,000 sex partners on average and your inevitable AIDS virus at the end of it all.

Nothing makes sense.  None of the liberal programs are trying to make people better, or make nations better, or make the world better.  All liberal programs are bent on championing the most broken, the poorest, the most vile people on Earth and giving them better lives instead.

It's like an immune system that doesn't get enough foreign shocks and challenges.  The immune system, if it doesn't have anything to fight, just grows more and more powerful until it starts attacking itself -- autoimmune disorders are rife among too healthy groups, which is why we have such high allergy and arthritis rates.  Precisely because the world was perfect in 1930, precisely because America was perfect in 1950, all of those healthy instincts and customs and practices that told us to just keep doing the same thing that was working became 'boring' and 'stilted' and the new generations demanded dramatic changes that could 'liven things up' and 'make things more vibrant.'

What's the use in just having a bunch of well behaved well educated well spoken ladies?  Shouldn't we smash it all and introduce a tattoo parlor instead?

Once you reach a certain level of complacency about the quality of your life and/or your civilization's progress, this sort of thinking actually starts to make sense to these sorts of people.  Wouldn't it be fun to just smash it all?  Wouldn't it be funny if I punched a hole in that Monet painting?  Having never experienced the horrors of a life without western civilization and loving parents, these selfish brats think imposing mere anarchy on the world has to be better than their current status because at least it's new and interesting and challenging again.  Even if they themselves stay in normal boring married couple life, they can at least get the vicarious thrill of championing the causes of the most outrageous and freakish behavior around them.  They get to participate vicariously in all of the sins and mistakes of others by letting them do it and arguing vociferously for it, while actually still living safely behind a gated community and a lily white school and a lily white neighborhood and a normal monogamous marriage themselves.  Isn't it all just so precious?

This isn't to say that all Americans or all Europeans think this way.  The problem is they have no opponents in the arts, media, or schools.  This is the one and only poisonous message actually spread to others.  This virulent epidemic of nihilism has taken over because no one argued anything back in places where they could actually have been heard.  I suspect the vast majority of Americans and Europeans don't want to destroy things just to liven the world up.  They aren't like the liberals who thrill in things precisely because they're forbidden, dangerous or destructive.  They aren't a bunch of freaking cutters who think the blood that drips from their arms is so very pretty.

The vast majority of people are ambitious strivers who want to, individually, get the girl, land the corner office, get the medal in their field of endeavor, win a sports meet, earn more than their neighbors, and so on.  They are completely apathetic about what happens to others.  In fact, the more people self destruct by acting like total freaks, the better, it just means less competition for them.  They tune out what the media and schools and everyone else is saying and doing, and shrug, saying 'it has nothing to do with my life.'  And of course it does have something to do with their lives, but they're just too myopic to see the connection, because they're just too damn dumb to look at the larger picture and see where this world is heading.

Imagine a kid looming over an ant hill.  Whenever the ants finish repairing the ant hill, the kid delights in kicking it down again, and then watching the ants scurry as they try to repair their homes once more.  Liberals are those obnoxious sadistic kids who just like destruction for the sake of destruction.  The ants are the vast majority of Americans, who continue working hard and striving ambitiously even though everything they ever do is destroyed every time they try to do it.  They never get it.  They never get that what they are working hard to accomplish is fruitless because everything they are building is being destroyed or will be destroyed in the near future anyway.  They just think that being a good ant means doing the same formulaic mechanical things that have always gotten ants ahead, and they'd rather not make waves by upsetting the rest of the ant community, etc.

I'm smart, so I saw through the liberal program long ago.  I realized that marriage was pointless because the adultery and divorce rates were so high that inevitably any family you tried to produce would just be destroyed later anyway.  I realized reproduction was pointless because inevitably your kids would be taken from you by divorce, or they wouldn't even be your kids because your wife cheated on you and you're raising a freaking cuckoo bird, or even if all of that didn't happen your kids could be poisoned against you by the liberal schools and media to either turn into more liberals or degenerate druggees, or even if that didn't happen my kids would be born into a majority non-white America and a majority non-white world with living standards far below the acceptable minimum threshold for human life.  As such, I didn't become one of these myopic ambitious strivers who's building a personal ant hill just to watch the liberals smash it over and over again.

I realized that becoming rich was pointless because your money would just be taxed from you and given to the people you hate and despise, thus becoming a mockery of all your hard work which is now your own worst enemy.

I realized that getting a job was pointless because jobs are just a tool of social control used to scare people into submission via the threat of firing.  You can't tell the truth if you have a job.  Therefore, all jobs are worse than useless as a utility equation -- because life is meant to be for the production of Truth, and jobs are just the material production of money at Truth's expense.

It turns out that anything you strive for is pointless in the modern age and all ambition is pointless because nothing can be secured and nothing is safe from the anthill kicking liberals.  The whole world is about to go down the drain.  It's no different from if a meteor were inevitably barreling towards us and destined to hit in the year 2100.  What's the point of building anything up in the face of that death sentence set to tear it all back down again?

The ants are all so pitiful.  They invest so much emotion into fragile things which are all just shattered one after the other and die regretting all of their losses while having nothing permanent they can be proud of that they gained.

The only thing we control in this modern liberal age is the contents of our own interior brains.  Therefore, lay not up treasure in outward things, which will just be blackmailed or confiscated from you or will just run away while still suing you for child support.  Rather, lay up your treasures inside your own head, where only you can reach them, and they remain as rigid and permanent and fixed as your will desires them to be.  What are these treasures?

A sense of self worth because you don't bow down to anyone, don't humiliate yourself by repeating obvious falsehoods, and don't compromise on your positions just to get ahead.

A sense of wonder and marvel in all the good things of the past and present that you truly believe are good because you still have a firm sense of right and wrong, good and evil, superior and inferior at the root of your judgment system.

A jewelbox of artistic experiences because you have the leisure time to search them all out and experience them and the intellectual breadth and curiosity and wisdom to understand them.

Memories and hopes.

That moment where you get to say 'I told you so' with a sneer to the outside world every time it destroys itself for not following your advice.

The freedom and individuality to have a voice and be heard because you're willing to say things no one else ever has before.

Liberals can't tax these things.  Women can't divorce you and take half of them away.  Children can't become rebellious and refuse to listen to them anymore.  Your boss can't fire you and take them away from your desk.  This is the one thing liberals have not yet found a way to destroy, so it's the only thing left in the world that has any value, and the only thing enlightened people should bother pursuing anymore.

In the past the monastic life was alluring, the life of contemplation was always fruitful, but there were alternatives.  You could be a knight who battled the Saracens, and know you were productive.  You could be a farmer who tilled the land and raised a family, and know you were productive.  You could be an engineer who designed steam engines and know you were advancing the state of the world.  You could be many things and see visible progress as a result of your efforts.  In the past ambition and hard work were rewarded.  If you liked your family, you could keep it.  If you liked your country, you could keep it.  If you liked your culture, ethnicity, traditions, language, or race, you could keep it.  Ambition is not innately a bad idea, so long as it actually produces a return on investment.

But now?  Here?  In a world like this?  Give me a break.  The people who will suffer the most will be the ones who built up the most, because they're the ones with the most to lose.  And they're definitely going to lose it all.  No one's safe anymore.  The Black Death is coming for us all.

Part 3:  What Happened?:

As my previous parts pointed out, there was some strange transition in the early 1900's (in the Union's case it was the late 1800's, both groups were motivated by the same radical egalitarianism that was the substitute for all previous history's philosophy.) that inverted the world and changed everything for the worse.

Nietzsche discussed this in his 'Genaology of Morals', where previously morality was the belief in good and bad, where the powerful, effective, and aristocratic naturally considered themselves good and their inferiors they could bully and crush in battle as the contemptible bad people they opposed.  This was overturned by the onset of Christianity, which created a new, ridiculous moral system where simply believing random arcane supernatural things like 'bread is the flesh of Christ' and 'Jesus was both God and the Son of God' made you Good, whereas evil was anyone who didn't believe these things, therefore no longer requiring any level of virtue or competence or merit in the entire moral system.  Nietzsche complained about how this shift in morality made for a bunch of arrogant moral preeners who were good for nothing but thought the world of themselves, and had annulled the needed arrogance of the mighty who used to take pride in themselves and their abilities and strive to further their glory through great deeds.

Christianity was the first system that used this ridiculous alchemy to change Good and Bad, meritocratic categories, into 'Good' and 'Evil,' merely having the correct socially condoned beliefs.  But soon Christianity's dumb beliefs were thrown overboard for political correctness, which is currently the definition of 'Good' and 'Evil,' serving the exact same role as Christianity did during Nietzsche's time.

Again, 'Good' and 'Bad,' as defined as being powerful and successful in life versus incompetent losers, is no longer allowed.  That judgment system is not dared to be whispered anywhere in mainstream art, news media, political debates, schools, etc.  No one dares to say "I'm better than you because I'm smarter, richer, better looking and stronger than you'll ever be."  Instead it's always how politically correct you are -- how much you've bought into the P.C. creed, which is just as obviously ridiculous as 'bread is the flesh of Christ.'  In fact, the more ridiculous and humiliating the P.C. creed is, the better for modern man, because it deters others from swallowing the shit you're already sucking up like Gatorade on a hot Florida day.  If the only way to out-status your opponent is to say ever more ridiculous things than the next guy, the statements have to be truly ludicrous to get your opponent to back down and give in -- after all he wants status just as much as you do -- he also wants to be considered a 'Good' person and not an 'Evil' person, so the new shit tests have to get ever more ludicrous and demented each time to keep a filter system activated.

The moment gay marriage was allowed, one of the most Orwellian terms in history, they just turned the volume up louder and started up with transgenders.  Now we must learn to call 'he's' 'she's' because that is their stated preference.  Even more ludicrous, we now have 'she was the father of x and y.'  Or, "she was the male decathlon Olympic gold medal winner in 1976.'  IE, apparently, despite all our previous beliefs about Bruce Jenner, he was a she from the very beginning and was always named Caitlyn since birth!  And if you can't swallow that shit?  Guess what, you're no longer 'good,' you're officially 'evil' according to society, and lower status than them.

Donald Trump isn't just a billionaire, he's got 10 billion dollars, and he started basically from scratch in childhood, so he made all ten of those billions himself.  This ten billionaire is lower status than every little munchkin in America though, because he called immigrants rapists, which is a no-no, and they, the enlightened P.C. crowd, know better than to say those naughty things, and therefore they are better than Donald Trump.  They could be working at Starbucks, they could have a drug habit, they could be single mothers, they could have a long history of breaking boy's hearts by pumping them for money and then dumping them when they run out, and yet still they are better than the 10 billion dollar owning Donald Trump, who's now a 'clown' according to the powers that be.  Do you see how wonderfully alluring Good and Evil are compared to Good and Bad?

You don't have to do anything but swallow the shit the professors and media men tell you to swallow every day and you can become the most moral and highest status person who ever lived.  You don't need to aspire for glory or hone any skills.  You can even be fat and ugly and dress in sweat pants all day.  You don't have to do a damned thing to be the best person on Earth anymore.

Of course, it is difficult for genuinely good people to be 'good' under the new system, because it requires they suspend all sense of self worth and all sentient reasoning in order to join the high status crowd.  As a result, the better you are as a real person, someone of honesty, integrity, and honor, the worse you become in the current world's social status ladder.

I would say about 50% of modern philosophy is lazy losers who don't want to live well latching onto a moral system that gives them a free pass with no moral strictures and no meritocratic contests, just like Nietzsche complained about.  But that still leaves the original 50%, which is,' how the hell did these particular beliefs become the terra firma for what you should conform to?'

What happened to make egalitarianism and individualism the pinnacles of political correctness?  Egalitarianism is the claim that all people start as exactly equally worthwhile babies in the womb but then end up separated only by bad life circumstances which accounts for all differences known to man.  The Reki Kawahara creed, as you will.  If you say anything diverging from this creed you will be crucified and ostracized by the vast majority of people living today.  Therefore, to an egalitarian, all you have to do is correct people's environments from birth onwards and everyone will end up as successful and brilliant as Einstein or Donald Trump.  Therefore, there's nothing to fear about allowing in millions of African or Hispanic immigrants into the country, because the magic fairy dust of the American Environment will fix them all up to equal standards soon enough.  The same for the magic fairy Sweden dust that is sprayed on Muslim immigrants to that country, their crime statistics notwithstanding, it will all auto-correct soon enough because everyone is equal under the skin.

There are several plans on how to correct people's environments, like making girls play with trucks instead of dolls, reading to kids out loud all day, 'fixing' the schools, whatever that means, providing more good role models in art for minorities to emulate, and on and on and on.  Not a single one of these plans has ever actually worked, but the answer to this is just 'we haven't tried hard enough,' a non-falsifiable statement because you could always try harder until, I suppose, every last person on earth has died trying to accomplish your goal, at which point none would be left to say "I guess you were wrong after all."

Why is egalitarianism so popular?  The answer is because a) losers like to feel equal to their betters.  They would hate to learn that they're nothing compared to the people around them and morally speaking just a bunch of negatives and zeroes who ought to be eliminated.  b)  winners like to feel that it was their own choices and effort that got them to the pinnacle of their fields, and don't want credit snatched away from them by people saying genetics is responsible for most differences between men.  When both sides like how the philosophy sounds on a question, it's very rare for the other side of the story to be given a fair hearing.

In other words, Wizard's First Rule -- people are stupid.  They believe what they want to believe, or fear is true.  Logic and facts never even enters into the picture.

Individualism is the last leg in this tripod of 'social status preening,' 'self-esteem aggrandizement,' and 'hedonism.'  Around the turn of the century, when machines started doing all the work on Earth and people found themselves with very little left to do of worth every day, pleasure seeking became the norm.  It started with sugar in people's tea and coffee, moved on to opiates, tobacco, hard drugs, sexual license, and then ever more perverted and destructive things.  It's hard to believe but in the medieval era even putting spice on your food like pepper was considered a deadly sin.  Frankly speaking, pleasure seeking was simply not in the normal horizon of human thought at the time.  I doubt even sex was very pleasurable in an era without basic hygiene.  Food was generally black bread and watered down beer (in order to avoid water borne diseases).  Life was full of drudgery, with very little art or music to spice things up.  In fact, there is a revealing scene of what life was like for serfs in Russia, where if they got home with daylight hours still left over from all their hard physical labor, the married couple literally just sat and stared blankly at each other across the table, not even finding anything to say or do until bedtime.

I'm very pleased that machines gave humans the leisure time and energy to pursue bolder and more innovative things than sitting and staring until bedtime.  It's frightful to imagine just how bad life really was in the past -- it's hard to understand why they didn't all just off themselves long ago.  But this liberty is full of pitfalls and snares for the weak willed.  "Idle hands are the devil's work."  Of course, not for everyone, which is why Christianity is stupid.  For Pascal, idle hands were his chance to figure out the mathematics of probability and argue philosophy with the Pope.  He also became a fine mountaineer.  For Thomas Jefferson, idle hands allowed him to write the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and found a college in Virginia.  Thomas Paine had idle hands while he sat around in a dungeon waiting to be executed in France for questioning the bloodthirstiness of the French Revolutionaries (after originally going there to support and encourage them).  He used the time to write his greatest philosophical work, the Age of Reason, all of which he composed with the certainty of his own death approaching by the minute.

Leisure time is the greatest gift God ever gave man, it is the springtime of our youth, the chance to innovate and contemplate and discover and enjoy the world around us to its fullest.  But that's only for the great souled.  For others, it's just too much for them, and they cannot find a way through it, and they fall into vice instead.  There truly are people who are deathly afraid of unscheduled time periods because they are terminally bored and cannot find anything to do with themselves anymore.  These are the people who turn to ever more ludicrous external stimulants to keep themselves distracted from their own emptiness.

Just imagine if that Russian couple which came home from farming to just sit silently and stare at each other until bedtime were given access to sugar.  Tea.  Coffee.  Opium.  Marijuana.  Heroin.  Gambling.  Promiscuous sex.  Deviant sex.  Endless chips and dip.  Ice cream.  Plastic surgery.  And on and on and on.  What do you think they would end up doing?  Do you really think they would muster the will to resist it all and gallantly go on staring at a wall?

The more free time machines made for us, the more stupid diversions mankind came up with to entertain ourselves.  The good ones, like sports and card games and video games, stimulated people's minds and bodies and souls and made them better people at the end of their efforts.  The worse ones degraded your mind, body and soul into the depths of depravity, but were easier to do than the more difficult ones and thus more popular among the lower sorts.

Alcohol, smoking, drugs, all of these things are very easy to use and can distract you all day long without ever thinking of tomorrow.  Art, playing a musical instrument, becoming skilled at soccer, reading Aristotle and discussing it with your friends -- much, much harder.  Is it any wonder that free time became a cliff for vast swathes of the public to fall off ever since the 1900's took us off our farms and put in tractors in our places?

Now here's the thing.  Vast swathes of the population, probably around 90%, rely on bad habits and hedonism to get them through their otherwise boring and pointless days.  Romantic relationships are just one more game they play to keep their lives interesting.  Dalrymple documents in his "Life at the Bottom" how soap operas were the most fun part of janitors' lives, and doubly so if the soap opera was occurring in their own lives.  A boy physically abusing them because he was jealous because you slept with his friend Joe last night was just 'spice' to the relationship and proof that he cared.  They actually welcomed these events as highlights.  As a result, getting stuck in a marriage where nothing changes day to day and you simply bask in someone's eternal love like a flower in the sun is the most boring state imaginable for these people and they'll do anything to break it and keep things changing again.  Low IQ people basically never marry or if they do, they quickly cheat and divorce, finding the relationship stifling and boring and constantly itching to move on.  High IQ people rarely divorce and find the relationship suits them perfectly as they share intellectual hobbies and interests with each other and brighten each other's day with their wit and humor.  Marriage isn't boring to good people, but it is boring to bad people, and thus the wide disparity in conduct between the two classes.

Individualism is the creed that says you should be allowed to do anything you want so long as it doesn't directly harm someone else.  For instance, it's okay to spray paint stuff with graffiti even though it inconveniences vast numbers of people because there is no major sufferer of the damage.  The same is true for why it's okay to tax people to subsidize your own health care needed as a result of your own bad habits, etc.  There's no direct victim so you should be allowed to do it, even though you're obviously a huge burden to society all the same.  Individualism would be looked at with contempt by people in the past, who were in a desperate struggle for survival and needed everyone to carry their own weight and aid in the defense and maintenance of the tribe/nation.  Any weakening of a single link in the chain could mean disaster for everyone involved, like a dike keeping the water out of the lowlands of Holland.  People would literally starve and die if you neglected your family and took to drink, so no one did it.  Wars would be lost if you didn't keep your cool and discipline, so people stayed courageous and disciplined to the last.  The virtues were necessities of daily life, not just adornments you could decorate yourself with like some sort of fairy twinkle goddess.  Anyone who wasn't virtuous in the past, whether as an individual or a nation, quickly went extinct.

Individualism was the demonic product of machines doing all our labor so that people weren't needed anymore.  Even without your best efforts, even if you're just a giant nuisance and menace to society, we can still afford to carry on and ignore you because machines will replace you anyway.  In addition, because of machines people needed the liberty of licentiousness guaranteed by individualism to fill in the giant void of their leisure hours.  It's like the problem squared itself in one leap.

Hedonism possesses around 90% of people as they do clearly detrimental deeds to themselves and others just to keep the pleasure circuits firing in their brains around the clock.  Any philosophy that goes against hedonism, anyone who dares ban hedonism and return to a culture of honor and duty, sees a tremendous revolt of the masses against any such plan to take away their toys.  Intelligent people don't need hedonism to keep their days interesting, which is why they live healthier, thinner, and more virtuous lives, but they go along with it as a sort of bribe to the masses to keep them placid, and in addition, they use it as a status symbol amid their peers.  Look how tolerant and permissive I am, I can uphold society even with all these sins ongoing because I'm so competent and so strong that I can bear the whole load myself without any help from all those losers.  What's the use of building a mighty bridge without giving it a giant stress test to prove its mettle?

So that's why we allow gay marriage and adultery and all the rest of the nonsense, which was previously all illegal in the past as a clear wrecker of society.  Individualism, which says 'let me do as I please no matter the consequences,' and egalitarianism, which says 'everything is always someone else's fault,' fit hand and glove together and please the vast majority of people.  With the wizard's first rule in mind, people believe what they want to believe.  A license to sin suits them very, very much.

So that's how we arrived at the creed of political correctness.  It states that everyone should have fun and do whatever they want, and at the end of the day they can just blame someone else if anything goes wrong.  Anyone who disagrees with this assessment, points out their failings as individuals or as groups, and demands they shape up, is the 'enemy' and to be shouted down and flung poo at like monkeys do to their hated foes.  Who wants to hear the truth when all of it hurts?

Once political correctness became popular, it became like a katamari damachi that kept getting bigger and bigger the more stuff it ran over, because it pays to conform to the majority opinion and not find yourself ostracized and demonized by your peers.  And so the whole demonic brew came together and here we are.

What happened to reverse everything on Earth?  A variety of selfish, self serving circumstances that societally leads to nothing but utter ruin.  Myopic fools choosing the ideas that best suited them without any concern for the future or the well being of others.  And the technological growth that allowed the world to keep on turning even as this philosophy spread like a malignant cancer across the world.

We now have the best technology and the worst philosophy the world has ever known.  As such, our living circumstances are strangely still good, and will even get better.  Computers are still getting better by the day.  Genetic engineering is on its way.  Space travel is being opened up by Space X's self-landing rockets.  And so on.  We can keep pushing this self destructive philosophy a lot, lot further, because we keep producing more wealth to waste by the moment.

But just because we can afford to do it doesn't mean we should.  Because living in such a disgraceful manner is demeaning to the very nature of Man, an affront to the God who made us with the noble capacities we bear inside our hearts.  We may be able to go on living without honor, but it isn't a life worth living when we do so.

Therefore we must overturn the transformation and transform everything back again.  This time not out of necessity, but because we genuinely embrace the good and noble in man and reject the selfish vices opportunity has put in our path.  What happened was a horrible series of self serving ideologies covering up a vast change in mankind's way of life.  What must now happen is a glorious sequence of forward thinking ideals that match our newfound power with a newfound grace (like those of figure skaters and gymnasts show at the Olympics or anime characters show in their heartwarming relationships like Joukamachi no Dandelion's family, etc) that does service and honor to our names.

One of my favorite lines in Lord of the Rings was Theoden, King of Rohan's last dying words:

"I go to my fathers, in whose mighty company, I shall not now feel ashamed."

This is what needs to animate us, so that our own souls can be just as brilliant as the mighty inventions we've brought to life.  So that we do not fall short of our own rockets, trains, and airplanes, but are still the most beautiful objects in the world.

No comments: