Posts Tagged ‘Decline’

Quote note (#304)

If given the slightest opportunity, the monkeys will ruin everything:

From the Restoration in 1660, to the end of World War II, the Royal society enforced the scientific method. If you wanted respect and esteem as a scientist, you had to tell us new and interesting things, and you had to show everyone how you knew these new and interesting things from what you saw with your eyes and touched with your hands. […] After World War II, Harvard got the upper hand over the Royal Society, and you no longer have to show your work. Instead, your work must be approved by the most holy synod of mother church – in other words, must pass peer review behind closed doors. Peer Review is new. Attempts to root it in the past of science before World War II are artificial and contrived. Somehow we obtained almost all of science that matters before we had peer review, and since we have had peer review, things have started to go terribly wrong with science. Peer Review is science by social consensus, and Galileo told us that that does not work.

November 18, 2016admin 38 Comments »

Quote note (#170)

Some sheer Gnon gospel from Captain Capitalism:

Understand that previous to democracy and even modern day civilizations, there were automatic punishments built into the world that people would pay should they make stupid decisions.

Did you poke a saber tooth tiger with a stick?
Did you spook a herd of mammoth into stampeding the village?
Did you eat berries that you saw no other animal eat?

If you did any one of these stupid things, you would die and your stupid genes along with it.

However, even within civilization stupid decisions were punished.

Did you breed without being married, thereby forcing the tribe or village to support your mistake?
Did you parasite off of society insisting on being a talentless bard instead of an industrious farmer?
Did you commit crimes, stealing from people precious food and items that were in short supply?

Well at best you’d be ostracized, and at worst, you’d be killed. Again, taking your inferior genes and decision making ability out of the gene pool.

The point is that yes, you had the personal freedom to do many things. But neither society nor nature was going to protect you from the costs and consequences of making bad decisions. In other words, yes you had maximum, 100% freedom, but you also had maximum, 100% responsibility.

Enter democracy. …

(Liberty without Social Darwinism is an abnomination in the eyes of Gnon.)

June 20, 2015admin 23 Comments »

Dependency Culture …

… proves yet again that it’s a reliable vote winner.

What the f...

What the f…

September 19, 2014admin 13 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Democracy
TAGGED WITH : , , , ,

Downton on down

Martin Hutchinson argues that — even after factoring in the crushing losses of WWI — the ‘Downton era’ did things better:

In certain respects — behavioral and otherwise — the “Downton Abbey economy” of 1920 was greatly preferable to the one we are experiencing today. […] A move to a “Downton Abbey economy” should not imply a sharp increase in inequality, rather the opposite. It is interesting to note that almost 100 years of progressive bloat of the public sector in both Britain and the U.S. — supposedly undertaken to reduce economic inequality — have in reality tended to increase it. […] Public spending (including local government) was around 25% of GDP in Britain in 1920 and about 15% of GDP in the U.S., compared to 40% plus in both countries today. It must be questioned what benefits the public has gained, either in greater equality or better services, from the massive rise in public spending since the Downton Abbey period, which itself was inflated from pre-World War I days.

Continue Reading

February 27, 2014admin 20 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Political economy

Quote notes (#50)

Some painful comparisons at the Real Clear World blog:

China has officially joined the “Moon Landing Club,” which, until Saturday, was the exclusive domain of the United States and the former Soviet Union. China’s rover will now putter around, doing what such missions are typically designed to do: taking lots of pictures and analyzing lunar dirt, more scientifically referred to as regolith.

It may be tempting for Americans to think, “Been there, done that.” However, China is now envisioning the very same sort of ambitious megaprojects that the U.S. once dreamt of more than 50 years ago, when President John F. Kennedy urged America to “commit itself to achieving the goal … of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth.” For instance, China hopes to mine the moon for natural resources and to use it as a staging ground for further space exploration, although some believe the former goal is unrealistic because the cost is likely to exceed the value of the materials.

Still, China’s wild-eyed aspirations are inspiring. It should make us yearn for the days when we, too, thought we could do anything. But those days now seem so long ago. Indeed, the latest Rasmussen poll finds that 52 percent of Americans think that our best days are behind us. What happened?

(This happened.)

ADDED: Glenn Reynolds on the potential for lunar property stakes (the 1967 Outer Space Treaty shouldn’t be much of a problem). “If, like me, you’d like to see a gold rush on the moon — or, at least, a Helium-3 rush — then a Chinese claim might be just the thing to get it started.”

December 17, 2013admin 23 Comments »
TAGGED WITH : , , , ,

The Wasteland

VDH: “[Obama’s] tenure will be known as the Wilderness Years — nothing gained, much lost.”

The diagnosis is highly persuasive, as far as it goes. The trouble with these PJMedia types, however, is that they still seem to think this is some kind of rough patch we are going through.

(Notably, though, there are definite signs that PJM’s Michael Walsh might be getting off the boat: “We used to think that changing Congress meant changing which party controlled it. Now we know better. Real change can’t begin until the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party is gone.”)

November 12, 2013admin 11 Comments »

A Thousand Words (plus)

Radish has earned a lot of appreciation for his Basic Guide to the Political Spectrum graphic. It is indeed superb.

(In fact, it’s so good I’ll put off quibbling for another occasion, and just steal the damn thing.)


Continue Reading

November 12, 2013admin 29 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Neoreaction

The Decline Frame

This point is important enough to restate well, as Foseti does:

The crux of [Scott Alexander’s] argument is that, “It is a staple of Reactionary thought that everything is getting gradually worse.” He then goes on to show that not everything is getting worse. […] It is not a staple of reactionary thought that everything is getting worse. To the contrary, I’ve never read that argument from any reactionary anywhere. […] Let’s correct his statement: It is a staple of Reactionary thought that massive improvements in technology have been very effective in masking massive declines in virtually all other aspects of society.

The progressive assumption, which neoreaction contests, is that it is natural and good to spend the advances of civilization on causes unrelated to civilizational advance. A more controversial formulation (supported here) is that the Cathedral spends capitalism on something other than capitalism, and ultimately on the destruction of capitalism. It tolerates a functional economy — to the extent that it does — only on the understanding that it will be used for something else.

Elementary cybernetics predicts that if productivity is recycled into productivity, the outcome is an explosive process of increasing returns. Insofar as history is not manifesting accelerating productivity, therefore, it can be assumed that social circuitry is being fed through non-productive, and anti-productive links. Techno-commercial Modernity is being squandered on (Neo-Puritan) Progressivism. In the West, at least, that is what is getting worse.

October 23, 2013admin 17 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Neoreaction