Part 1
This is a rewrite of an essay I did on Urban Scoop, Tommy Robinson’s website. I have had it confirmed that I can recycle it by one of his administrators. Stand by… essays incoming!
=+=+=
“The curse of every ancient civilization was that its men in the end became unable to fight. Materialism, luxury, safety, even sometimes an almost modern sentimentality, weakened the fibre of each civilized race in turn; each became in the end a nation of pacifists, and then each was trodden under foot by some ruder people that had kept the virile fighting power the lack of which makes all other virtues useless and sometimes even harmful.”
— President Theodore “Teddy” Roosevelt
THE CIVILIZATIONAL HEARTBEAT
I have posted this video (1 hour, 44 minutes) by Bill Whittle before in multiple essays; if you’ve already seen it, I do recommend watching it again. If you haven’t seen it before, I implore you to make time for it in a place where you can really pay attention. It is time well spent. At about 53 minutes in he discusses the heartbeat of civilizations, and how civilizations start, rise slowly in the beginning, accelerate, and then the collapse happens almost overnight. The pattern is very clear time and again.
Bill offers an explanation in the course of the rest of the lecture, and I agree with every word. But we must ask why and why and why. In a discussion between Bill and Stefan Molyneux, which has been “cancelled” since I originally viewed it, Bill made an excellent observation (my transcription): “As resources become more abundant… peoples’ behavior changes in the presence of [that] abundance…” And a little later: “… it is success that kills a culture, it’s wealth and abundance that kills a culture from within.”
Others have noted this too. One such quotation:
“Adversity makes men, and prosperity makes monsters.”
— Victor Hugo
The r/K division, I suspect, plays a lot in this. Faced with low threats and high resources, even normally predator species like humans can slip from one side, K, to the other, r.
A LACK OF FEAR
My ex-wife is from the former USSR; a separate country now, but in the past, between 1 and 1.5 million of her people were starved by Stalin; a smaller genocide than the Holodomor in Ukraine, it was a significant fraction of her people nonetheless (something like 40%). More recently, from living memory, she described how, during the breakup of the USSR, there were weeks at a time when they didn’t know where their next meal would come from. And yet the first time her mother and aunt visited together, they were laughing at my prepper “grocery store” in the basement, and when I inquired about their laughter at the need to have food, etc., stored away, in light of their own experiences and their people’s past plight, the reply was plain: “That can’t happen in America”. This view defies their own living experience that things can change fast – far faster than imaginable:
Try to remember that Sarajevo once hosted an Olympics. Remember that Beirut used to be called “The Paris of the Middle East.” Remember that women used to wear lipstick and miniskirts in Tehran. Most of all…remember that it CAN happen anywhere. It can happen here.
I watch people who have child-like trust in government and its “unshakable” permanence & goodness (full disclosure, I am now hard-core anti-vax now), and ritually intone “Oh, that’s just not possible” to when I attempt to warn them on multiple topics. Most especially, I lament this attitude amongst my fellow Jews who, out of all peoples on earth, should be most distrustful of government. For example, despite warnings from history – our own Jewish history as well as the history of others…
… American Jews are overwhelmingly anti-gun even with the increase in antisemitism and open attacks on us after Israel’s response to the monstrous horrors Hamas did (One, Two, Three – ALL content warning!), and I firmly believe the Shtetl Mentality informs the anti-gun nature of the majority of Jews, at least American Jews for sure.
- My mother, a brilliant and subtle woman, thought for a moment and said, “The bad Germans called Nazis killed them.” Remarkably even in 1947 she made the distinction between the group “Germans” and the subgroup “Nazis.”
- Of course, I asked, “Why did the Nazis kill them?”
- She replied, “They killed them because they were Jews.”
- Although I was only six and not yet sure of my identity or its meaning, I asked, “We’re Jews, aren’t we?”
- “Yes,” answered my mother.
- Almost without missing a beat I asked, “Mommy, do you and Daddy have a gun so we can protect ourselves if the Nazis come for us?”
- My mother sought to reassure me of my security by answering, “This is America. That can’t happen here.”
More importantly, I fully believe that it’s not simple denial here – for denial at least acknowledges the fact (e.g., when my ex’s father passed away, she was definitely in that phase of the grief process), but rather a literal inability to see threats. Yuri B. was right – people can be shown clear evidence and completely ignore it – for to see such threats means recognizing a world that is far closer to the edge of stability than comfortable. Far easier to dismiss and/or deny than accept the reality of the real world.
You cannot change their mind even if you expose them to authentic information. Even if you prove that white is white and black is black, you still can not change the basic perception and the logic of behavior.
As an aside, but a critical one: I truly believe the vast majority of people form their view of themselves as “good, noble, educated, etc.” people on the basis of specific beliefs… e.g., DEIversity is good, all people are good and all cultures are equal, Western Civilization cannot crumble, we must rally to fight climate change, Socialism is good, all wars are bad, the Jab was “safe and effective”, and so on. Threaten those beliefs with facts, evidence, logic, and history – you know, standard debate format – you are not attacking the belief alone, but you are attacking their perception of themselves as good, noble, and educated. That’s a row most people do not have the intellectual strength to hoe.
A PEEK INTO THE SLAUGHTERHOUSE
So consider this example to set the stage – sorry for the length of the excerpt, but it paints a picture typical of today’s reality denialist (underlining added), regardless of the specific threat:
Anyway, our new friend was busy singing the praises of these Turkish beaux when something came in over her cell phone, which was sitting on the table in front of her. She picked it up, punched a few keys, saw something, reacted, and then – to our astonishment – leaped out of her chair, called a number, and began pacing back and forth in front of the bar screaming loudly and furiously into the phone in what turned out to be Turkish.
This screaming went on for several minutes. Finally, shaking with rage, she ended the conversation, returned to her seat, and, holding the cell phone up to us so that we could see the screen, explained to us what had happened.
On the screen was a close-up photo of a woman whose face had been beaten to a pulp. This, she told us, was a Finnish friend of hers who, like her, has a second home in Turkey, apparently in the same town as our friend. The Finnish woman had just now taken the selfie and sent it to her, along with a note identifying the assailant. The individual in question was a local fellow with whom both women were acquainted.
It was he whom our new friend had phoned and screamed at. Of course, neither she nor her Finnish friend had phoned the Turkish police, because in such jurisdictions the physical abuse of infidel women – also known as “whores” – by their Muslim paramours are of no concern to the authorities. Instead, our friend had told the perpetrator that she has connections with gangsters and had warned him that if he didn’t keep his hands off the Finnish women, she, our friend, would see to it that he got what he had coming to him.
After that dramatic little interlude, it was surprising how quickly our friend resumed being her previous cheery self. We gathered that this was not the first time she had been involved in such an incident. She was used to such difficulties. They were an integral part of the culture. It appeared, in fact, that for her they were part and parcel of what made life in that corner of the world – so far from her homeland, with its bland, well-behaved men, its responsible policing and courts and equality of the sexes – so wonderfully colorful.
Four things come to mind on this.
First, channeling Whittle’s video above, how people need danger in their lives to feel alive… and how, absent that sense of danger in their own spaces, immersed in safety and civility, they venture to places where they get that danger and uncertainty. Or import it – to the detriment of their own population, especially women, as highlighted in Tommy’s The Rape of Britain documentary and, more recently, the recent report on the UK’s 250,000+ grooming victims. (What’s fascinating is the deluge of “debunking” sites I found looking for a useable citation; there’s a desperation to show this is wrong.)
Second, doubtless, this Turk, who had just beaten the Finnish woman to a pulp, was just trembling in his boots. /sarcasm Seriously, he was probably laughing his ass off after the end of the call.
Third, the utter naivete of thinking her screaming and bluff threat had “handled it”.
But the final point – ah! – that’s the key point. To wit, the total lack of fear on the part of this woman who, with zero doubt in my mind, planned to continuing her sexual adventures in Turkey despite what should be an obvious threat to her own continued well-being, if not life itself, by going there… as exemplified by what had just happened to a friend at the hands of one of the boy-toys with whom she, inferentially, also couples ruts.
“It’s said that a wise person learns from his mistakes. A wiser one learns from others’ mistakes…”
― John C. Maxwell
THE ATROPHY OF FEAR
I believe that fear is one of the oldest emotions, perhaps the oldest emotion as it is intimately linked to survival and reproduction; animals that do not react to threats do not pass their genes onward (e.g., talking with my late mother years ago about her constant worrying about everything, I remarked, “We’re Jewish; worrying is genetic!”). Residing in the oldest part of the brain there are twin, symmetrical, structures called the amygdala – to which Bill has referred repeatedly in multiple video pieces – which have been shown to be intimately related to threat recognition (and the associated fight-flight response from the adrenal system).
But one does not need to have actual brain damage to this region to not be able to recognize actual threats. I’ve been referred to the book The Brain that Changes Itself on the basis of an inquiry into what I remember from my one Psychology course many years ago. In that class, and going from memory, I read about several experiments in which animals were raised from birth in environments devoid of specific stimuli that occur in nature, e.g., specific colors or patterns, etc. Then, as adults, these animals were then exposed to reality, which contains these varied stimuli. These animals were initially confused and confounded by these selected stimuli to which their brains had never been previously exposed during their development. My recollection, too, is that these animals truly never rose to the level of handling these things that their fellows, exposed from birth, possessed.
MY HYPOTHESIS
In today’s society of plenty, where food is available virtually 24/7/365, where for most people true fear is a passing thing at most, where helicopter parents insulate children from even slight boo-boos and rush to administer sprays filled with pain killers and antibiotics within seconds… I propose that our amygdala structures have been so deprived of stimulation early on that people now, having been raised in an environment free of genuine dangers since birth and for multiple generations, quite literally cannot recognize actual threats when faced with them.
It certainly would explain a lot. The philia for Middle Eastern and African refugees, whose depredations are documented extensively by what is happening in Europe. And not just philia, but outright protection of these thugs by individuals in the wider European society even as assaults, robberies, rapes, and murders rise due to these migrants, never mind the explicit shunning of those who point out the clearly-causal link between mass migration and these rising crime stats.
A similar philia for illegal immigrants exists in America whose similar crime sprees are dismissed with those who point it out excoriated as racists. And gays, for example, take the side of the “Palestinians” whose treatment of homosexuals in their society is… well, here:
“Queers for Palestine”. Taking the side of people who would, if given a chance, kill you? In the Gazans’ own words:
The very personification of a lack of survival instinct.
Lesson: Our safe & secure advanced civilization, without actually significant dangers for decades, has bred a population that, with a few exceptions, is biologically handicapped in seeing real threats. The threat recognition response never developed.
And, perhaps, a corollary: Because of the lack of experience with actual danger, and the filtering process experienced people have in grading levels of danger, the over-the-top reaction to the much-overhyped Covid threat also makes sense. I discuss this in Part 2.
