Friday, April 4, 2008

How civilisation was not created.

Let's repeat what doesn't work?

by StFerdIII



Civilisation was not developed over tens of thousands of years by careless morons. It was not built by fascists, totalitarians, utopians, gangsters, brigands, cults or despots. It was not pushed forward by degenerates, ignoramuses, or regressives. It was created by an ethos, spirit and practicality that is almost entirely missing from vast parts of modern culture.

History's rapacious monsters, ranging from Ghenghis Khan, to Islam, to Napoleon and Hitler of course played their important roles in shaping the world. But these seminal figures were conduits, antagonists, or enablers of future developments – they were not part of the building of civilisation and were in fact, usually directly opposed to it.

Yet their import, message and 'spirit' still lives. Today remarkably, we are confronted by communal socialism; post-modern liberalism; and Islam – all of which in large measure utterly reject what has built civilisation, but hearken back to the tyrants and tyrannies of old and precisely what doesn't work in building a modern world. It is seemingly insane yet here we are, at yet another historical crossroads.

Which path will be taken? Is the path of Islamicisation, or extreme post modern liberalism the right direction? Is a post-Christian world in which standards, morals, and innovation are to be eradicated, in order to enforce conformity, bureaucracy, and submission to the state or umma, the true and only path? Is self-hatred, embarassment, cowardice or ignorance of Western civilisation and history the guideposts to a better future?

There is a major disconnect between reality and most political-academic and media belief systems. The reasons for this are reasonably simple and they center around experience in the real world. In the real world results are more important than pretentious theory. In the real world, service, innovation and skill are more important than style and ego.

In the real world, self-worth and value come from performance, not from postulating arcane theory or inventing rules which others must obey in order to satisfy a removed bureaucracy. In the real world experience and getting things done are more important than endless chatter resulting in inactivity, or the creation of macabre utopian theories which lead directly to conflict, blood and war.

The real world is the best teacher. It is there that one learns about parameters, limits, potential and real codes. It is only in the nether world of academics, 'intellectuals', or in the warped minds of absurdities like Nietzsche, Lenin, Napoleon, Louis the XIV, or today's Marxist toadies or those who advocate big government,-everywhere,-all the time, that philosophies of destruction are invented.

Are these the ideas to a better future?

1. More taxation and regulation
Show one historical example of a state which succeeded and pushed forward civilisation through higher taxes. Ancient Rome, Louis the Sun King's France, King John of England, the Ottoman and Turkish empires, Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia were all economic, political and culturally destructive regimes.

2. Socialist governance
Where is the annals of history has socialism ever worked, at any point in time? No market, industrial sector or area of life which has been socialised has ever succeeded.

3. Appeasement, anti-military attitudes
Military strength is the guarantor of civilisation. Name one single successful, progressive and open regime in history, which succeeded and survived without a strong military, secure borders and forward points of defence. Would Nazi Germany have made nice if the Russians had instead welcomed the fascist horders with multi-cultural programs of love instead of tanks, planes and guns?

4. Reduced trade
Are people sure that Walmart, trade with South Korea and the China-US link in production is negative? Why then are employment rates at a historically record level? Is it so terrible that the South Koreans and Chinese become richer to afford more imported product and enjoy a higher living standard? Is not the $9.000 per year cost reduction to the average Western family a fantastic benefit, not to mention the material gains from more product choice? What regime in history succeeded through economic autarchy? Sudan or Iran? Nazi Germany? Pre 1980 Communist China? Pre 1995 Mexico? Even the ancients knew that international trade was essential to national wealth creation.

5. Reduced capital
Which state in history succeeded by reducing capital flows, capital supply, and capital market creation? Why did the Netherlands become a world leader in the 17th century [hint capital creation leading to a robust navy and overseas trading and empire building]? Why should capital and income be subjected to ridiculous regulation and punishing taxation and government distortion? How does a state create economic vitality and innovation without pools of capital?

6. Church and state
Even the Romans and ancient Greeks knew enough to separate spirituality from worldly affairs. Christianity and the Torah institutionalised this demarcation. Islam, Nazism and Communism, do and did not. Why would anyone suggest that the West needs to tolerate Islam which is the perfect opposite of everything to do with Western ideals including that of keeping civilian and non-spiritual affairs completely separate from matters of faith.

7. Cultural self-loathing
Was Renaissance Italy self-hating? The ancient Romans and Greeks? Did they perceive themselves and their fantastic achievements as immoral, evil or unimportant? Did they bow down to inferior cultures and barbarians and plead for forgiveness? Is the post-Christian attitude of relativity a mark of 'intellectual flexibility' or just crass stupidity and mental laziness ?

History never repeats itself, but it does make a mockery of the claim that the human actually learns. Nothing is cyclical for the events, and facts constantly change, but it is clear that after one or two generations much hard bought knowledge is lost. In Britain a mere 60 years after the greatest of England's leaders successfully defended the free world against the barbaric Nazi hordes, there has been a multi-cultural induced destruction of the island and a takeover by radical Islam. England is near finished, and without a shot being fired.

So what path is best? The lying, craven, moronic path of the anti-real world utopians with their insane prophets and guides? Or the path that millions of humans – many of them far smarter than ourselves – have hewed out of history's rough steppes and thickly forested hills? Or are we so arrogant and ignorant to suppose that we know better and that this time, the policies of communalism, fascism or submission will actually work out for the best.

Good luck with that naive, bloody and destructive belief.