lunes, 19 de diciembre de 2011

El papel de Rey

Tener un líder asentado y con una línea de continuidad es una señal al adversario de que el grupo está listo para la acción y lo estará en cualquier momento futuro, sea el grupo una banda de gamberros juveniles o una democracia parlamentaria. Es por eso por lo que los jefes de estado son los jefes supremos de las fuerzas armadas. En el contexto de la Pax Americana en que vivimos, esto no se aprecia suficientemente, ni espero que lo sea en el futuro. Pero en cualquier caso, los humanos, aún en ausencia de amenazas, seguimos teniendo la necesidad de un líder reconocible que coordine al grupo para afrontar posibles dificultades. La nación existe por el hecho de que tiene un líder y una continuidad en el liderazgo, y ese liderazgo, encarnado en la
figura del rey, la representa

martes, 13 de diciembre de 2011

Sorry. That is not the European Left

A response to this article in The Brussels Journal. The author recommend the political Right to emphasize its common vision with the Left about human rights in order to attract the latter against the Islamization of Europe. He argues that the left is based on christian values and therefore there is a common ground with the Right, and its support for islam is based on its emphasis on self criticism is and on the ignorance of what Islam really is. 

My point is that this may be true for the main part of American left, but not for the main part of European Left. And there is no way to agree with the main branch of European left on common grounds about Islamism. This is independent from what any terrorist like Blevilk promotes or leaves unpromoted.

Your considerations about the christian origin of the left are too coarse grained. The self-criticism in christianism is individual, personal, while the self criticism on the left is not against the  self, but against the own group to exhibit moral superiority and exonerate oneself from any critic. It is exactly the opposite. It is an exploitation of the concept of self criticism.

Moral superiority has an unprecedented role in the West. Thanks to the disqualification of violence that Christianism stablished in the first place, moral superiority became the foundation of political legitimacy. That did not happened anywhere else. Therefore the adquisition of moral superiority by devious means became a critical issue. The Christianism contains a well balanced collection of rules that have been tested for centuries. Every rule about good behaviour may have inherently some consequiences in terms of moral superiority that can be exploited (The devil lurks behind the cross).For that matter, christianism was very keen to impose additional sins to prevent exploitation of moral superiority .  That is the only way to maintain a love based society. For example, Against exploitations that try to gain moral superiority trough harsh criticism of others and against false exhibition of good behaviour, there is the "Do not judge, and you will not be judged" and the mandate to "not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing" (charity must be discrete). respectively.

As a set of rules for pacific convivence, it has these rights and duties of which the above are some examples. An order based of virtue is not profitable for ambitious people that want to climb to political power trough the shortest path. Violent alternatives have been used but have been defeated, How to gain the hearts of the people in a peaceful society with something better that christianism?. It may be said that the demagogues had a hard time in the West, but the solution is simple, because christianism only works as long as people accept the Christian tradition in full.

Fot that matter, the demagogues had an opportunity of exploit cristianism by asserting that rights come for free, while duties are just superfluous. So they start critizicing others, they exhibit his supposed "solidarity" in obscene ways. With this self exhibition runaway, the demagogues gain moral superiority, while make people think that, liberated from their duties, life is easier than it really is. If finally, the right to the heaven in the afterlife is substituted by a more inmediate heaven on heart, then the appeal of this demagogy is guaranteed. More for less. This is what we call "the Left".

I´m talking about the european left. This left is basically amoral. She believes that the duties are an artificial burden made by "The System" for the exploitation of the people, Since he is sincerely after the destruction of these moral duties, she is also after the destruction of the West. It can not be otherwise. So they are not, not they can be in the side of conservatives.  They freely transform themselves from socialists to ecologists, to multiculturalists to altermundists because the pivotal point  of his ideology is not a clear plan for the construction of something, but the destruction of the  Western "superstructure" in marxist terms. That is, the structure of intermpersonal dependencies ruled by traditional moral duties and historical institutions, both formal and informal.- That is no more, nor less than our identity. This is according with their faith, what keep them away from a heaven on Heart of infinite rights at the cost of no duties. Whoever read Voegelin, whould say that this is a Gnostic ideology. They consider islamism and christianism in the same way that they cosidered comunist nuclear warheads in East Europe, as basically equivalent to the american military bases in their own countries. This is not a conspiration of a group of masters of the Universe, This is the logical consequience in the strets, and in the parliaments, of a conflict of worlviews, also called ideologies, formerly called religious wars.

Perhaps your considerations apply more to other kind of left that is dominant in USA, not in Continental Europe. The left and right wing descendant of the puritan founders have less ideological differences. As descendants from apocalyptic religious sectarians, americans believe in the promise of a heaven on earth under God, for which his country is the beachhead.

Therefore both american Right and  most of the american Left are moral, they believe basically in the same principles. Yet, the american left has gone in the way of relaxation and secularization. There are radicals in the universities, but the situaiton is not as critical as in Europe. Maybe the americans would reach a consensus about what to do with this secondary infection called Islamism, but no doubt, the same in Europe is  definitively beyond reach.

domingo, 4 de diciembre de 2011

An Humanity seeking the Good and God, for the shake of evolution

From "I do good when someone is watching me" to "I must do good because Someone is watching me everytime". Discussion about the possible evolutionary break-even of morality and religion.

My theory supposes an evolutionary bottleneck caused by wathever environent pressure (The Toba supervolcano eruption). That is not dsputed that has happened. This pressure modified human natural morality from a primitive "do good when someone is watching you" to a God based morality "do good because Someone is watching you everytime" by selecting some mutations (see evolutuionary psychology) That permitted the survival of the group of mutants. Since then, we are religious. This is only a naturalistic explanation that does not precludes a wider supernatural explanation that could embrace these natural causes and effects.

The modification is small enough to have evolutionary sense.(It is parsimonious enough).  

This is a comentary in the excelent essay of Richard Cocks God Or Moral Nihilism: The Ending Of The Meno in which he righty demonstrates that, like Plato said in "The Meno, or the Virtue", Morality is, and only can be, a matter of Faith just like mathematics and, indeed all human knowledge has to be founded in axioms and unproved truths. Whoever says "ethics, is socially constructed but is useful", he starts from the notion that useful is good, so he invokes an unproved moral axiom . Whoever that says that morality is good for the survival and thus was selected by evolution is resorting to the notion that survival is good, another unfounded moral axiom. So moral can not be rationally asserted.

What rationally we can do is to bury the roots of morality from the scrutiny of the rational mind so we lie ourselves about our unexistent rationality which we confront morality.  But this happens with any human knowledge. being maths, phisics or anything, it is founded on unfounded truts. The reason why we doubt about morality more than about maths is because it is more nebulous and flexible, and because morality implies a tension of what is good in the long term for us with our selfish inmediately seeking pleasure self . This tension is released when we break with morality. This tension does not exist in mathematics, for example. But some people do. This is why breaking with ultimate truths can lead, in the case of rational, honest and sensible, but naive people, to paralisis and suicide.

But we have a natural sense of what is good and perhaps God and this good is naturally tied to God. Here is my comment about why this is so. Note that although this is a naturalistic explanation, that does not imply thr inexistence of God. It means that there are compelling natural reasons besides the supernatural ones for our seeking of Good and God:

I agree with Mr Cocks on that Darwinian explanations add nothing essential to the discussion of the foundations of morality, but it can help moral nihilist int embracing the  ultimate truth of value of human life. Not only Psychopaths are moral nihilists; Stalin was a loving grandfather, he was very goof with their familly, most of the time. To be good at someone does not proves to be good with others.

An evolutionary explanation, although it can not help into rationally demonstrate what is good and what is bad, it may help into accepting our impulses for Good and God, if he shows that these impulses are biologically inprinted in us.

My point start from the datum that humans are descendant from a very small population of less that a thousand peoples living in Africa 60.000 years ago. That was the only surviving people after  volcanic winter provoked by the eruption of the super-volcano Toba in Indonesia. So in a literal sense, we al humans are a family with more " blood" ties than a single group of chimpanzees ( the genetic variation between any two humans is less than what can be found bettwen two chimpanzees of a single group).

The reason for survival of this few hundred people form the great extinction is unknown, but one of the reasons for sure was an increased mutual help. What is known in evolution is that similarity in the genetic information maintains stable the collaboration. Perhaps many of these people had some fortunate mutations that imprinted in the subconscious the notion of the value of human life or the notion that Someone in the beyond (a God or many) is watching them (This is higuly plausible, as I explain below). These notions, as I will show, enhanced selfless help for others of non kin, in eternal struggle with other more  preexisting selfish impulses.  The enhanced collaboration that this group had permitted the survival. They were in a literal sense, almost a family. maybe this mutation  extended the notion of familly. and the familly notion has not abandoned us because we inherited this fortunate set-of mutations.

They must have  been strange people for the rest who died: They helped neighbours, instead of killing to dead for the very scarce resources. We know weird people  that have hallucinations, that have strange impulses, that do weird things. Imagine that a catastrophe changes the environment so that it makes some of them very successful because they are complementary. If they are the only survivors, their descendants will inherit these hallucinations and impulses. these phenomena will be part of human nature from this moment on, for the rest of the History.

In fact we hallucinate every second. We perceive a person as a person with all their moral implications. Instead, for a chicken, a person is something completely different. What we experience, our mind, is determined by our brain architecture, and this architecture depend on developmental genes, and these genes were selected depending on the success of our minds, that they produced, in the task of own survival in society.

Some genes are regulatory, so the change in a gene can make a great difference. I dont say that we are equal, We are very different. I said that other species are much more diverse (Except the cheetahs, that are almost clones)  Genetic similarity makes collaboration stable because if an individual collaborate by a genetic tendency , it is higly probable that other individuals of the specie are collaborative too. Moreover an evolutionary bottleneck makes the selection of a genetic tendency to collaboration more probable because if there is a prexhistent adaptation for detection of kin signals and kin collaboration (to increase inclusive fitness), such signals will be present in most of the surviving individuals because they are genetically similar. Then the kin collaboration is extended to all the specie. Cheetahs usually do not collaborate in the human sense, but their evolutionary bottleneck made them the most peaceful of the felines. That probably is the most that selection can do for making a feline collaborative. Collaboration includes many different strategies. One of them is to invest efforts into detecting and punishing free riders. If this does not exist, collaboration is unstable. This can be demonstrated by evolutionary game theory. There are evidences that we suffered a process of autodomestication.  So our leap-forward to modern moral and religion did not made us more peaceful guys, but different. Probably the size of the average group grew. Within the group,  individual violence where reduced by religious beliefs but also by violent punishment. And violence between different groups remained

So, if this is right, our higher sense of morality is inprinted in us. Maybe the sense that Someone in the Beyond is observing us is also an innate part of this moral sense.  This last is interesting, because being observed by another human impel a primitive sense of self image to do good things. But when nobody watch us, many people do bad things.  So the notion of Good and God did not evolved  entirely in the course of the extinction event, but it builds from a  more primitive notion of selfish “do good when yo are observed, do whatever you need when not”.  So most of the people befrore the extinction event steal food, kill neighbours etc but had a notion of primitive, selfish moral from which Moral evolved as a result of the brutal selection that operated during the extinction event.  Imagine some strange and crazy familly in the stone age that has the obsession that Someone is observing them every time. They would have been very unsuccessful in a normal environment. But when the Toba eruption began, they could have been very successful because their enhanced collaboration. After the volcanic winter, they give thanks to the someone that apparently helped them to survive. We are their descendants with the same inherited notion of Morality and Religion.

It is necessary to emphasize that if we accept thie existence of Good and an a vigilant Someone as part of our nature, this implies that it is part of our Reality, because Reality is what we experience with our minds.  There is no "alternative" mind, so there is no alternative experience of  Reality.   External reality apart of the mind exist, but it can not be conceived. But this would move us to other discussion. See a previous article.

However, the "Someone above which is watching" is colored with cultural contexts. from a religious god, to a political Leader, to a lost family member, to a renowned scientist or philosopher. This Someone must be extended to a Panteon of Someones. People believe in many entities. For example a monotheist believe a single god, but at the same time, if he loved the example of his father, it is influenced by the sensation that its father is watching him. For this reason altough there are gods that are not concerned directly with moral of the individal, moral it is an integral part of the religion in a way or another. Usually in politeistic religions there is a division of labor in moral matters. For example, althoug ancient religions like the Greek and Chinesse were not concerned with moral in the personal sense, they were moral in the group sense (their gods were immoral personally, but castigated men for bad political behaviors). In the personal,,  apart from the public gods, they had also  familiar gods that were concernet with individual moral.

martes, 29 de noviembre de 2011

Mensaje personal a los diputados europeos

 Hazte Oir me comunica que los diputados de la UE van a votar una resolución a favor del Aborto. Tienen una página para enviar un correo a los diputados españoles.  Al que se puede añadir un mensaje personal. Este es el mío.

Para complementar el muy deficiente sistema de representación política de nuestro país, le informo que usted no está autorizado a votar eso en mi nombre ninguna resolución a favor del Aborto.

Tómese en serio lo que dicen sus representados. Recuerde que la capacidad que tienen ustedes, la clase política de regir a su antojo un país con tan deficientes canales de representación, como el nuestro, tiene un limite que ahora mismo está a punto de sobrepasarse con resultados imprevisibles y dolorosos.

No piense que en la UE está usted, su nómina y su familia a salvo a costa de las nuestras. El hartazgo con la actitud ecofascista, antihumana y económicamente inoperante de la UE, como sabe está llegando tambien a su nivel máximo de tolerancia.

Earn money with Adobe! Create your own birth certificate and nominate yourself for the White House!

Learn the basics with our  free  introductory video tutorial:

Warning: Don´t get so excited. Don´t forget the last lesson about how to eliminate the layers!!!

One of our satisfied clients:

viernes, 25 de noviembre de 2011

Religión evolución y cognición. Una solución

Este  es mi comentario dejado en Metafísica de la materia (entrevista a Manuel Carreira) , un astrofísico y teólogo, en La nueva Ilustración Evolucionista:

La actividad del cerebro, la mente, crea una consciencia compartida. Lo que se comparten son símbolos con los que formamos parte de una sociedad. Algunos simbolos son innatos porque  han sido definidos por la evolucion: la noción de persona,de animal, de cosa etc. y simbolos culturales: mesa, coche, España, Alá. 

Sin esa simbología compartida y comunicable es imposible la supervivencia en sociedad. 

Pero esos simbolos existen fuera, en el mundo fisico ajeno a cualquier mente? No.  Una persona es un agregado de moleculas que para una gallina es simplemente un depredador y para un León es una fuente de proteinas. No hay nada inherente a una persona que no dependa de un cerebro-mente que lo perciba y procese, y dependiendo de la arquitectura cerebral, fruto de la evolución, una persona será una cosa, otra o nada.

Una persona entonces como cualquier otro objeto material es un agregado de atomos ¿Y que es un atomo? siguiendo asi llegamos a los objetos matematicos de la teoría M de las supercuerdas.

Por tanto el mundo objetivo, la objetividad tan cacareada de la ciencia no se puede remitir mas que a un mundo ciego y frio inhabitable de matematicas, que no tiene ningún sentido para la vida de las personas. Todo lo demás, incluidos los átomos, no son mas que simbolos mentales, cuya realidad última en el mundo exterio es solo matemática, como mucho. No existe esa realidad externa, en un sentido literal. si por existencia nos referimos a lo que cada dia tocamos y de acuerdo con lo cual actuamos. Lo que existe realmente de esa realidad externa son los simbolos mentales que procesamos y comunicamos, mas otros simbolos que inherentemente mentales que no tienen reflejo, en último término "matemático" en el mundo fisico : la felicidad, el enfado, una teoría etc. O mitad y mitad. España, un personaje histórico etc.

 Es Dios un simbolo innato con coloraciones culturales o es cultural? ¿Tiene reflejo último en esa realidad externa? que importa. Lo que importa es que existe, o no existe, lo mismo que existe, o no existe España, o una mesa. La mente vive en ese mundo social de simbolos y se organiza con los demás para que el cuerpo material pueda sobrevivir en  ese mundo de ahi afuera frio y matemático.

Respetemos esos simbolos, porque han sido diseñados por la evolución biocultural para que sobrevivamos. Estudiemos su utilidad y su sentido y respetemoslos. Y lo mas importante, lo que desconocemos es mucho mas de lo que sabemos. Dios es lo incognoscible. un respeto a lo desconocido quizá es muy parecido a un culto a Dios. Eso nos libra de un culto al Lider que lo sabe todo. El que conoce de verdad la evolución sabe que ésta es un proceso holista, que opera a muchos niveles y a muchos plazos, por tanto es imposible saberlo todo sobre la organización de la realidad. En concreto los productos mas refinados, El ser Humano y la sociedad humana, son cosas imposibles de abarcar con el conocimiento.

Si es verdad que por naturaleza tenemos una tendencia al  culto a algo, como asi parece, entonces el culto a ese Dios lejano de lo desconocido nos mantiene esa tendencia a cerrarnos en el culto ocupada y por tanto nos mantiene en busca de la verdad y nos libra de caer en lo que el increyente cae continuamente: en el culto al estado, a la nación, el culto a la ciencia, el culto al deporte o cualquier otra tontería. Todos los simbolos sirven para algo. Quizá por eso en el religioso cristiano hay una búsqueda de la verdad insaciable, pero no por conocer si descendemos de los cynodontes o el mecanismo de articulación de las patas de las moscas, sino sobre aquello que es mas elevado, sobre las preguntas últimas acerca del ser humano la sociedad y su finalidad  y sentido, siguiendo las palabras de San Agustín, que aplica muy bien a esos que se creen que el saber consiste en conocer un monton de curiosidades: "En el estudio de lo creado, uno no debe ejercer una vana y perecedera curiosidad, sino ascender hacia lo que es inmortal y eterno".  Y precisamente el desprecio de los simbolos filosóficos y religiosos. El desprecio del mundo del Espiritu, en resumen está detrás de la infantilización y la crisis de la sociedad.

Otra cosa: El enfoque neurológico puede ser una ayuda pero, como ya le he dicho a Germánico muchas veces, me parece inadecuado para entender cualquier cosa referente a cuestiones humanas. Una cosa es el nivel cerebral y otra cosa es el nivel mental. La actividad del cerebro, la mente es una cosa distinta las activaciones de las neuronas del cerebro. 

La analogia es completa cuando lo comparamos con aprender informática: cuando alguien aprende a usar un ordenador, lo que aprende son los programas que tiene y como usarlos, no se dedica a colocar un medidor de voltaje en cada conexión del ordenador y teclea combinaciones de teclas y programas para intentar extraer información sobre que es un ordenador.

martes, 22 de noviembre de 2011

¿Por qué las mujeres sufren depresión cuando abortan?

Declarado de utilidad pública para combatir la progreza: ¿Por qué las mujeres sufren depresión si abortan?

En Libertad Digital

... Si perder a un cliente puede llevar a una pequeña empresa a un cambio de estrategia o a cerrar el negocio para no dañar el patrimonio familiar, entonces la muerte de un hijo aun no nacido puede llevar a una profunda depresión, al arrepentimiento o al suicidio, que son las estrategias equivalentes para preservar el capital genético-social que maneja, en lo más profundo, la mente humana.



viernes, 18 de noviembre de 2011

Why women like bags and shoes but only eurasian girls like horses? An evolutionary hypothesis

Why  girls, at least the European girls, like horses?. Horses were domesticated in central Asia 4000 years ago.  My hypothesis is that horse domestication was such a great improvement in the well being of these ancient tribes that the girls that were attracted to horses and thus to live with men who used domesticated horses had  far more offspring, so whatever genetic inclination to perceive horses as beautiful were selected. This selection may have occurred in the few thousand years from horse domestication up to now because the selection was strong enough. This fast selection requires that the locus of this horse inclination must be codified in one or two alleles, This case is similar to the lactose tolerance. Although the former is a psychological tendency rather than a physiological one, like the latter, this does not make any significant difference, in the light of Evolutionary psychology, that postulates that behavioral tendencies have also a genetic basis. (although EP is interested in universal  (species-specific) tendencies rather that differential ones like this).

Then, why men do not enjoy horses so much? Men enjoy horses in a different way. My hypothesys is that boys enjoyed horses more as if they were tools. The enjoyment that a young boy had 2000 years ago with a domesticated horse was the same that a modern boy could have with the ability to handle a car, a videogame or a programming language.  Tools are everywhere and playing with tools is an instinct with no defined target (variation of tools in ancient times may have forced  such instinct generality) . In the other side, Girls have no such inclination for tools, so natural  selection operated with other inclinations: Aestethics. Aesthetics is salient in women.

The aesthetic selection  is perhaps responsible also for the universal aesthetic pleasure in woman for bags and shoes. Bags and shoes have an evident usefulness for the gathering activities that women have carried out for millions of years. Humankind lived from the beginning in groups of  meat hunting men and vegetable gathering women. Usefulness of bags for gathering is evident. And  shoes were necessary because grass may hide dangerous small animals. So while all women like bags and shoes,  only Indo-european girls suffered the selection for horse aestetic enjoyment. So the explanation predict that neither black nor native american neither Austronesians girls like horses in an statistically significant way. Far Oriental and african arabic girls must be half way, while all of them enjoy bags and shoes.

Enjoyment of horses may peak at pubescence and decay after because this age was the right for stable couple formation in the past.

Are you a pretty native non eurasian girl?  Did you liked horses at childhood?.

Some considerations  as consequence of a discussion in the facebook site of the Online Evolutionary Psychology Magazine

0 - Remark about the innate horse taste hipotesis in women

1- the adaptive advantage in woman preference for horses

2- Possible experiment design to refute the hypothesis

3- summary of hypotesis involved

4 - some evolutionary reasoning about why the sexual specialization for tool enjoyinh/playing/investment in males versus aesthetic enjoyment in females.

5 - About the evolutionary reason behind fashion psychology in women

0 - Remark about the innate horse taste hipotesis in women:

The adaptive adavantage in woman preference for horses when some men had domesticated horses and others do not is evident for me. Moreover, this does not imply the evolution of a new "like horses instinct" but the modulation of an already aestetic instinc in woman that make them being attracted to bags, shoes and maybe equally dressed (uniformed) men and other expression of personal and/or collective masculine power that are invariants across (at least) primitive cultures (see justification below). This "modulation for horse taste in women must involve a single gene mutation, just like the lactosa tolerance. Cattle domestication for milk production is as new as horse domestication (early neolithic), and still lactosa tolerance has evolved two or three times independently in eurasia.

1- the adaptive advantage in woman innate preference for horses

Not only horse men would have choose woman who like horses, but the women will choose these men, simply making themselves visible to these men. Also, mothers will choose these men as couples for their dauthters and so on. The advantages of having domesticated horses must have been very high.

2- Possible experiment design to refute the conjecture

The best way to test the differences of innate taste for horses between eurasian/non eurasian girls can be tested asking non eurasian girls educated in an eurasian culture for their taste for horses, and the oposite, asking eurasian girls living in cultures with no horses. That way the cultural bias can be discarded.

3- summary of hypotesis involved

 The hypothesis implies that there is an evolutionary explanation for the women's taste of bags, shoes and perhaps other things. And also that horses were added to the list by a single mutation a few thousand years ago. It implies that men like horses as they would like any tool, for the pleasure of achieving things with them. All of them are very strong hypothesis. I find some support for the aesthetic versus tool use in women/men from informal gathering of opinions about horses in both sexes. (And also the fact that men enjoy tools, while woman enjoy aesthetics) . Evolutionary justification below:

4 - some evolutionary reasoning about why the sexual specialization for tool enjoyinh/playing/investment in males versus aesthetic enjoyment in females.

This is perhaps the deeper hipothesis and the basis for all the rest. The fact that it explain some facts about the different psichology of men and women, this need a justification. In my opinion, EP lacks theoretical research about social human adaptations that has payments in the long term.  Like chimpanzees,  along the evolutionary history boys stayed in their society while girls moved, as consequence of pacific or violent encounters with other human groups.  As a consequence, selection in men for behaviours that inprove his own group at an individual cost may be stronger. Because men stay in their society, cultural transmission is in the hands and shoulders of them. Therefore, long term, even costy activities with multigeneration-wide payment could be selected. tool research, such are animal domestication (that may be dangerous and not necessary sucessful) may imply a big payment because the potential benefit may be huge across many descendants that may inherit the cultural advantage.

While men could have transmited a capital of adquired knowledge to their descendants such are knowledge, tools and political institutions , women could not. They must have been adapted to different groups, so if they needed the way to select invariants across groups that helped them to survive in their activities such is gathering, rearing children and before that, to choose (or be receptive to) the most resourceful men. I conjecture that this is the precise role of the aestetic instinct or set of instincts. This instinct by its own function must be stable enough to fix invatiants, like the universal utility od bags and shoes for gathering, but flexible enough to make use of local chages, being them  climatic specificities or innovations such is horse domestication.

5 - About the evolutionary reason behind fashion psychology in women

 This aestethic instinct includes also rapid adaptations however: fashion in women is an obvious adaptation to moving from group to group in ancestral times. This habit has a peack at adolescence, the age where primitive women switched groups.

miércoles, 9 de noviembre de 2011

¿Es esta gran crisis producida por Internet?

Si fuera Enrique Dans, diría que esta es la Gran Crisis de la era de Internet, donde la rapidez de las comunicaciones han llevado a la deslocalización y el consiguente abaratamiento de bienes mueble y servicios tan enorme que los bienes inmuebles han absorbido el capital sobrante resultado de ese abaratamiento y de los bajísimos tipos de los bancos centrales en el Primer Mundo sin aumento aparente en la ioflación.

Como consecuencia, se ha creado una euforia por la subida de los inmuebles (en poder de los occidentales en Occidente) y el coste irrisorio de los muebles, fabricados en Asia. El primero es una burbuja, el segundo, el mercado de los bienes muebles y los servicios, está aqui para quedarse: Es el imperio Low Cost, con bajos beneficios, bajo coste de reproducción y transporte de mercancias una vez diseñadas. Pero tiambien un alto valor añadido y altos beneficios de bienes unicos y poco repetibles o innovadores. Un ejemplo es el auge del teatro y el hundimiento del cine. O los altos beneficios de un nuevo modelo de telefono cuya ventaja competitiva desaparece solo en un año. O también el auge y caida de redes sociales. Todo ello producido por Internet.y el desmadre crediticio de los bancos centrales.

jueves, 3 de noviembre de 2011

Ornitologia para Progres

Que tiene que aprender  Perez Reverte de la conducta reproductiva de las aves voladoras? Mucho.  Por estos dias se enciende por le hecho de que muchas mujeres en el Islam quieran llevar velo voluntariamente.

 Las hembras de las aves voladoras, por restricciones adaptativa son incapaces de criar sin la ayuda de un macho lo cual fuerza por seleccion natural unas estrategias de conducta selectiva y sumisa en el caso de las hembras y una estrategia vigilante de la hembra  en los machos.

Por extraño que parezca, esas estrategias, son esquemáticamente, las  mismas en las mujeres y hombres respectivamente, ya que en el caso del ser humano, las mujeres tampoco pueden criar hijos sin ayuda. Seres humanos y aves voladoras (no las gallinas, por ejemplo) son de las pocas especies que forman parejas duraderas por la necesidad de colaborar para sacar adelante sus vástagos, que son demasiado débiles.

Como resultado,  en este articulo se explica no solo que las mujeres musulmanas quieran de buen grado llevar un velo, sino incluso practicar la ablación del clitoris cuando ser juntan el Islam, la poligamia y el nomadismo.

en Libertad Digital  Ahí dentro se explica todo esto.

martes, 1 de noviembre de 2011

Multicultural re-engineering in Catalonia

I read here this:

As in the Republic, the figure of the informer is back to the forefront of Catalan life. Barcelona City Council has trained 436 volunteer "anti rumors" citizens  to combat negative stereotypes about immigrants in the framework of the Barcelona "Red antrumores" (anti-rumors network).

The initiative is part of the consistory Intercultural Plan to combat "negative and baseless rumors that hinder coexistence in diversity," from the task of a network of social institutions that promote the figure of anti-rumors agent.

The notice continues: "There have been 150 hours of training to 18 different groups, where there has been a total of 600 people registered. Of these, 436 have already been certified antirumores agent. The volunteers always use rigorous and objective information to clear misperceptions that immigrants and monopolize social benefits do not pay taxes, receive grants to open shops, collapse or abuse the emergency health services. With official statistics, trying to invalidate every one of the rumors"

Strategy Agency antirumores BCN edited much of the material for dissemination to the public, in addition to a website and a YouTube channel.

An example of "rigurous and objective information" against the rumor "Inmigrants make us lose identity" is answered with the eart-shaking fact that some food and musical traditions of Catalonia are not born in Catalonia. It seems that the identity horizont of these localist, but objective, idiots do not go farther than what can be enclosed in a bar. In any case not farter than the hills of Montserrat.

The modern idiot take official data as if it were word of Jeovah, but in fact it is propaganda. So, using data from official propaganda, the ruling class tries to import voters and indoctrinate the natives to accept the destruction of the only thing that prevents the ruling class to achieve absolute power: the native indentity, that includes institutions like the Rule of Law, Justice, Christian moral compassion (not state-regulated compassion), Christian appeal to the individual responsability, equality of opportunities (not of outcomes), Christian dignity of the individual (not state-granted dignity). Reason (not consensual lies). And our history, an european history of resistance, although not ever sucessful, against internal and external despotic rulers. Still may you wonder why they want to erase our History?. These, and many others, are the parts of our identity that matters. These things keep our humanity, our prosperity and the freedom that we have managed to achieve. Without the former ones we are loosing the latter ones, as you can see day by day. They are being erased by the ruling class, not only by importing their voters, but by active destruction and/or distortion of our institutions and rewriting our history.

The destruction of our identity is a necessary step for the construction o f the new dictatorship of the global elite and their local branches. In the case of the EU, The multicultural socialist republic of Europe. In the case of Catalonia, the multicultural-monolingual Great Catalonia.

While they neutralize our institutions, the ruling class imports apparently docile Africans and Asians. These kind of immigrants are accustomed to live under despots that come and go, so our rulers think they could domesticate them easier than us. In their immense hatred of our true culture of individual autonomy, they use the submissive culture of Islam to diminish ours. Any resistance is beforehand labeled as racism and ignorance, as the above anti-rumor brigade loudly suggest.

Any direct proof of this? Yes. While in Catalonia every third word immigrant is welcomed and its traditions respected and protected by even this kind of fifth column, in the other side, the immigrants of the rest of Spain are attacked. while spanish is one of the two official language in Catalonia by constitutional law, they can not label their businesses in Spanish. They have no school where its children can learn in their native language. Anything resembling Spanish culture is debased.  "Official" may be a very elastic word. It may mean "whatever is of interest for the ruling class". 

Spanish culture is attacked not because it is against Catalan culture because the latter is a little branch of the former.  A little branch of european culture in any case. Spanish culture is attacked because it represent the past traditions and institutions, including the ones of Catalonia. Attacking Spanish culture they also erase the Catalonian culture (except the language) and construct its new multicultural society without the native Catalonians taking notice of it.

jueves, 27 de octubre de 2011

¿Por qué escribo en Inglés?

 No me gusta la moda del Inglés. Cuando veo una marca o el nombre de una empresa en Inglés pienso en paletos horteras o en gente resignada que no tiene mas remedio que adaptarse al cutrerío ambiente.

Pero el Inglés es el Latin moderno, una lingua franca. Si escribo en ingles, llego a mas gente. Por otro lado, los paletos de aqui se creen que dices algo más importante de lo que sería si lo dijeras en Español..

Ademas los problemas de aqu que a mi me interesan son los mismos que en toda Europà y todo Occidente en general. 

viernes, 21 de octubre de 2011

Crisis, falta de confianza, cohesión y otras cosas

la falta de confianza es una protección ante la crisis, no es el detonante de la misma

En Libertad Digital

Del "Sin compromisos" de la burbuja, al "Juntos la vida es mas" de la crisis. Este cambio de eslóganes de las compañías telefónicas ilustra un cambio real en la sociedad. Si durante la burbuja hay menos compromisos y más riesgos, durante la crisis los lazos familiares se refuerzan y las compañías se concentran en retener a los clientes actuales en lugar de buscar otros nuevos. Existen razones de sentido común que lo explican: cuando no hay dinero los hijos regresan a casa, hay menos divorcios y las compañías aseguran el mercado que ya tienen. Pero eso solo explica el aspecto económico del caso. No explica por qué la familia se quiere más y las empresas "quieren" más a los clientes. Ese efecto psicológico se puede explicar si se piensa que la mente del ser humano activa distintas estrategias dependiendo de cómo le va la vida


domingo, 16 de octubre de 2011

Las elecciones ya han tenido lugar

Estamos a  la espera de que los llamados "cuiadanos" elijan en Noviembre el 10% de los asientos de las cámaras entre los candidatos a la cola de las listas electorales. Por supuesto las listas de candidatos son elaboradas por la clase dirigente, con lo que desde ya, se aseguran de haber sentado por el procedimiento digital ya en sus escaños al 90% de los representantes, a  un mes de las elecciones.

Pero muchos idiotas estomagantes hablarán de Democracia y de "Nosotros los Demócratas". No se pierdan el espectáculo cutre y de mal gusto, que es lo que se lleva en este fangal.

sábado, 15 de octubre de 2011

More on the Feminization of the West

There are many authors that speculate about the feminization of the West. The mention of this topic is a sure guaranty of deserving the label of right wing extremist, that very fact is, indeed,  no more no less than a hint about the deep feminization of our societies.

However the feminization phenomenon is treated tangentially, among other traits in the contemporary West. There is no focus and no deep analysis of what feminization means. Here I will speculate based on the insights given by Evolutionary Psychology (EP) to asses what the predominance of femenine psychology in our society , what are their effects, and why.

With the exception of the hardworking ideologues of the ruling class, every one know that men and woman are different. This is universal across cultures and times. Because the human child is born defenseless and women invest 9 months in giving it birth, women are the ones that loose disproportionately more invested effort than men when a son die. This makes women to focus on child care. child care imposes strong requirements and determines the rest of the woman psychology. Due to the very long time that child rearing requires upto the puberty, the age at which the child naturally detach from the mother, woman must avoid their own death at all costs. This makes  risk avoidance an universal trait of woman in relation with men. This is true even if she does not have children, since she must be alive to have them in the future. In the other side, a man can have children even 9 months after its own death. A risky man can have many children in a short period of time before dying. A woman could have at most a dozen children in its entire reproductive period. In the primitive conditions this number would be much less. Risk avoidance is the most importan trait in woman psychology determined by child rearing, other minor traits are associated with rish avoidance: Dirt is a serious risk for humans because it spread illnesses. This is specially true for children. Dirt avoidance and cleaning in women is a consequence of child rearing and risk avoidance.  Gathering of vegetables instead of hunting is the feeding strategy preferred by ancient women, imposed by risk avoidance. Gathering imposes other trait as well: discrimination of colors and other visual system specializations. Orientation based on hints in the terrain is another trait.  Men in the other side has lower risk avoidance. A good hunter and/or warrior can have many women that would give birth to many children even if in the course of his live it is wounded many times and die. Men run along larguer territories for hunting and war. There are other traits in men that help them to secure its kin and it is politics. A good organizer would have more women and children. But this is not the only thing.  Preservation of the group is the main purpose of the political instincts. Selection operates across generations. There's no success in a man who have many children but these children do not survive to be parents or if their sons or if so, they don't survive to be parents as well.  The group is the safe haven where future generations of kin will live: sons, small brothers, nieces, grandsons and so on. The strength of the group is the purpose of the political-religious instinct. And this is a very strong instinct. This is rather a trait of men rather than of women.  Men are in disposition to give its live for the group. Women not so much . The reason is simple.

 War among primitive people is about obtaining women and territory. And is abut keeping its own woman and territory from the attack of other men. kidnapping is no the only reason why women move from its home group; genetic variability gives stronger children. This is is also a reason why women move to other groups. For this reason women prefer foreign people over the locals. Finally alliances of groups is another reason why women abandon their home group. All these reasons are present in chimpanzees. In the other side, men are not kindnapped but killed in war. The net effect are two very different political psichologies in men and woman:  Men are very long term oriented when thinking about its group. Their biological investment, that is, their masculine kin and most of the femenine, stay in the group where it has born. The current and future strength of their group is a guarantee for current and future strengh of their biológical investment. Most of their concerns are about politics, ideology and/or religion, all related with their group present and future. They will risk their lives in actions that would preserve the group.

Women are not political animals. When Aristoteles said its famous phrase, he was talking about males. Woman are not group oriented. Specially in the early years after puberty. As I said, the femenine psychology was shaped in a primitive past where they were born in a group but probably they moved to other group with other culture probably other religious rites. Even today, she will marry with a man with different religion/ideology. So they must  absorb and accommodate fast and acritically. Fashion-sensibility is the psychological mechanism that woman have to assimilate a change in culture. Under fashion-sesibility, only external signs of sucessful people are imitated. Modern commercial centers are an exploitation of femenine traits of risk avidance (indoor), gathering behaviour (supermarket style stores, colors) and fashion sensibility. It can be observed that  the fashion sensibility in women declines not with age exactly but more so with the number of children while their political awareness increase at the same time. This may be due to the increased biológical investment that the woman deposit in the group with each new family member.  The more kin the woman have, the more the long term interests of women will be similar to men. Even in these circunstances, Men invest more in the big group. They are more prone to fanaticism in one side or rational criticism of the organization of the group, while women are more shallow supporters. Both sexes have a division of labor in managing goals: Men usually are very shot and very long term goal managers, but they are very bad with medium term goals. Men, when alone, live in risk, disorder dirt and improvisation, while at the same time invest a great effort in group activities such are football club, politics and  philosophy. Women excel at what men lack. they invest more in practical short to medium term goals in the care for their men and kin.  For this reason the human couple and the human family is itself a adaptive unity.

Now, let´s return to the question of feminization . The feminization happens via two main mechanism, first the increased political power of woman trough universal sufrage and due to the feminist ideology in power. The Feminism is a consequence of the marxist mindset that put the concept of liberation of the forefront of the western trough. As I have show this concept of liberation is a perverted vision of society, since society is a consequence of human nature and the natural differences between men and women. It is not an artificial enslavement of anyone. Liberation mindset aims naturally at the destruction of the current society, and feminism is, among others, its stronger tool.

The other mechanism is the increased buying power of childless working woman that buy mainly for themselves with its compulsory gathering behaviour. The market reinforces these femenine lifestyles trough advertising. This reach all the society. The marketing amplifies whatever mainstream mindset, in this case, Cultural Marxism and feminism. The consequences of the advent of women to power in a context of low birth rate are the traits of childless woman: risk avoidance, lack of awareness for the future of the society, unwillingnes to protect it, shallow minded living, triumph of aesthetics, random changes in attitudes, open borders, multiculturality Rejection of long term political and religious ideals. All of this makes us an easy target for the predation of men dominated groups.

La civilización contra los instintos tribales

en Libertad Digital

La civilización se ha construido en contra de la tribu. Es fundamental que la lealtad a la Sociedad esté muy por encima de la lealtad a las tribus. Para comprender ese peligro, solo hace falta pensar en un juez que ponga los intereses de su partido, clan o casta por encima de su lealtad al cumplimiento de la Ley. Seguramente este ejemplo no suena muy lejano al lector. El dominar las tribus es el obstáculo con que se topa todo intento de establecer el Estado de Derecho en países tercermundistas. La mentalidad tribal siempre tiende a corromper y fragmentar la civilización cuando la lealtad a una idea política o religiosa por encima de las tribus se debilita.


jueves, 6 de octubre de 2011

The shape of things to come

Obama wants Europe to manufacture no-repayable money to help Greece because, if this is so, Bernarke can accelerate its fabrications of dollars without being noticed. I think that there is a massive devaluation of currencies coming. The purchasing power of households and productive companies are moving to failed countries and irresponsible financial institutions. All of this happens now without the need to make laws or create new taxes. It is a on-going full-scale theft. But, because all countries do with their currencies, the effect is that the relative currency exchange does not change much.

As this new money is being used to fill holes that where created with the collapse of housing prices in the banks (but the holes in the households and businesses have been left aside).  this freshmoney has not entered the market and does not generate much domestic inflation. But sooner or later come out and display the huge loss of purchasing power via hyperinflation.

The final effect is a massive withdrawal of wealth from the productive economy into intervened unproductive sectors in the hands of bureaucracies. This is something that even Alex Jones would have dared to imagine. The natural consequence will be an increase of socialism, condemned, once more, to failure in the middle term. There is nothing  unknown here for a survivor of the previous Great Crisis.

The resulting turmoil can not be good for the stability of the democratic regimes. There is no perspective of classical war in the early XX century after-crisis style. That war will not occur because the loyalties of politicians and bankers are class oriented, not nationally oriented;  In the global age, bankers or politicians have more ties to colleges of other countries than with his fellow citizens. Specially if they are on the left. Whathever they do will be for the perpetuation of themselves, and war is not in their interests. The proof is that now there is no competitive devaluation of currencies, but a coordination to inflate the currencies, except for some temporary disagreements.

Instead of war I see calls for an accelerated globalism. And the claims for more centralized economic power in Europe is the beginning. Apart from the financial dictatorship, we already have, this trend must have no other end than a dictatorship. This is very good for the multicultural elite in its efforts in the obliteration of national democracies.

Right now I think that Greece is not rescued for economic reasons, but for political ones. It is for the continuation of the globalist agenda of the global elite. Whenever the withdrawal of power or money to the central EU institution where consulted to the citizens, they have said no. This never stopped the politicians. The latest move has been in the German parliament, which has voted for the increase of the un-repayable rescue package for Greece, against public German opinion. Global elites instincts know that having a mechanism for the international redistribution of wealt in a socialist-populist EU with grateful beggars in the South is the best for its interests.

If the evolution of the current crisis is parallel to that of 29's, the perspective is for civil wars instead of wars between nations. Don´t discard the worst.

jueves, 22 de septiembre de 2011

La evolución de los abuelos

Un artículo en Libertad Digital de ese gran articulista que tanto queremos. De rabiosa actualidad desde hace 50.000 años

 A raíz de un articulo publicado en Investigación y Ciencia., La pregunta que se responde es:: ¿Es la existencia de abuelos una adaptación biológico-cultural que permtió la acumulación de conocimientos, la cohesión socual y la sofisticación cultural. Y si es así, cuales son sus consecuencias en la actualidad y por qué?

--- Al parecer, hace 40.000 años hubo un aumento enorme de la proporción de humanos modernos que llegaran a vivir el doble de la edad de la pubertad y, por tanto, podían ser abuelos potenciales. Aunque los humanos con anatomía moderna existen desde hace 200.000 años, el cambio es reciente y abrupto y la longevidad aumentó en ambientes especialmente duros, como la edad del hielo europea, mientras que entre los neardentales ocurría lo contrario. Al mismo tiempo, hubo un salto en la sofisticación cultural en esos mismos lugares en la misma época. Es tentador pensar que la abuelitud fue la adaptación que permitió la transferencia de información compleja de generación en generación necesaria para ese salto cultural hacia adelante.

Y esto exige adaptaciones mentales. Esto puede explicar cosas extrañas, como la memoria selectiva que los abuelos tienen para hechos memorables y mitificados del pasado, en contraste con su escasa memoria para el presente. Todo ello no puede ser una casualidad. En todas las culturas tradicionales, los abuelos ocupan el lugar más alto en la tribu. Sus historias son escuchadas ávidamente por los jóvenes. Su memoria de hechos y su imaginación transmiten información práctica y modelos heroicos a imitar para las generaciones futuras. Sin eso no se entiende la sociedad humana y su rastro se advierte en el legado de todas las civilizaciones conocidas. Hasta ahora.

domingo, 18 de septiembre de 2011

viernes, 2 de septiembre de 2011

The return of the class struggle (third version)

I write this in modern Latin because we have to be aware that now we live in a transnational Europe where our elites are basically committing treason against us. For this reason, we have to communicate and collaborate at the transnational level to success in the preservation of our liberties.

What History shows at the time where Marx lived was a succession of peoples with strict class structures and little or no social mobility. The Capitalist age introduced the idea of free within-society economical competition and inspired Darwin for a theory about the origin of species, suggested to Marx the idea of the class struggle. Paradoxically, for the Marxist, was the capitalism indeed the system that dissolved the strict class structures thanks to the nature of the markets that encumbered entrepreneurs that created whatever that others considered worth to pay for. This created massive, peaceful social permeability for the first time in history.  Rather than exacerbating class differences as Marxians though, Capitalism dissolved them. The declining noble families had to marry up with wealthy hardworking bourgeoisie, Some of which were entrepreneurs from artisan and working class origins.

The combination of free markets, property rights, the rule of law and a pacific way to change government trough elections, together with the sacred respect for the individual and its autonomy, gave Europe a way to prosper and innovate. The violent conflicts were confined to the international relations were nations contended for the supremacy in the continent.

Comparing the post-industrial intermediately after revolution with the early Modern Age shows striking differences. Before the capitalist revolution, Europe were dominated by empires with stratified class structures, were the way of life is defined at birth and innovation was slow or absent. But time after the Industrial revolution specially during the XX century, Europe  changes again for the worst. The ambient that an entrepreneur desires is a free market with no artificial entry barriers and equal opportunities. Once he becomes a wealty capitalist, what he desires is a closed, regulated market with entry barriers and privileges that keep it away from the competition of other potential entrepreneurs. Since wealty capitalists marry with the other upper class members resulting from the other ways of social promotion: politics, magistrates  and so on (the religious class in Europe stayed unmmarried), The result was the formation of an homogeneous higuer class with strong interest in closing the paths for upper class promotion. Once a person has reachec the upper classes, the very mechanisms of promotion becomes dangerous, because these mechanism are inherently two way. Therefore the upper class tend to severe the brides that permits social mobility.  In the capitalist era, the upper classes, by basic instinct of conservation, start to generate sclerotic tissues around their positions of privilege.

The tissue at hand in the early capitalistic-democratic nation-state were the growth of bureaucracy and regulations with the ideological plausible excuses of the common good and the protection of poor people. Not only the market and industrial activities were scleroyized, but also any other mechanism of promotion. The political class stablish its own barriers for the creation of political parties and the access to independent political candidates. They establish alliances with modern mass media to influence public opinion. Legistators and Lawyers create its own labyrinthine jurisprudence. As Cicero said, “more laws, less Justice”.

The sclerotization stopped innovation and prosperity. Moreover the positions of practically unchallenged privileges without moral restraints favours collusion of interests, unjust exactions and corruption. Society stagnated.The entire society enters in a phase of paranoia. Minorities are declared guiilty of everything. Of course, uncontrolled foreigners and foreign imports becomes  a threat for the status quo. Mercantiñinst trade barriers and personal barries rare stablished between european countries. Their respective exports sectors fall and are subsidized. New regulations are created to overcome the problems created by the previous ones. political foreign policies becomes more and more hostile.  Under increased poverty, populist leaders aired sentiments of hatred and victimism against real or supposed enemies. Political blocks and militar alliances appear. War is the logical consequence.

After the defeat of the hitlerian empire, Europe was exhaust. Their elites were trown off and everything started again. A new era of growth and optimism started but this time the sclerotizing activity started again soon. This time, the excuse was the reconstruction and the peace in Europe. The European Union was created by Jean Monnet and other as a political union from the beginning rather that as a mere economic union. This latter was the initial form that adopted because that was the easiest first step towards the final goal of political union. The EU, in essence, was a local and more ambitious attempt of the same idea for which the ONU was created for, as result of the two world wars. Of course due to these horrendous conflicts, the values that aimed both institutions were the exact opposite of the values that -suppossedly- were the causes of the former conflicts: racism, clash of cultures, nationalism. The political drives of these antivalues were imperalism, Nazism and Fascism, the regimes of the three defeated superpowers: Japan, Germany and Italy. Of course, these ideologies were not the ultimate causes of the conflict. Internal sclerotization , corruption and the consequent international animosity were the ultimate causations of the rise of these ideologies.

Anyway, Both EU and ONU where created with imperialism, nazism, racism and fascism as core antivalues in a world where values were relative and personal, but antivalues were sacred and enforced.  Since then, this emphasis on relativism and antivalues is characteristic of European politics.

In an sclerotized society,  the upper-level people confiscate the centers of thinking. The search of Truth is substituted by the defense of the upper class interests. The universities were created by the Church, as such, they were separated from direct imperial power. during the XX century, universities were progressively absorbed by government and were devoted to contribute to the international nationalist competition. Hard sciences stayed away of manipulation thanks to the unchangeable nature of their hard facts and theories. However, soft and human sciences and humanities: Psichology, anthropology, Sociology, History,  where the best tools that the elite classes needed for unchallenged power. An elite gain legitimate power when he has the support of the great majory of the people. To do so, It has to present a long term plan and a way of life. Any plan  must be based on an clear picture of the terrain. A political plan must be based on ultimate conceptions of History, the World, his society and Human Nature itself. Additionally, it has to surpass the promises of the traditional religion and the previous regime.

For an elite class that need unchallenged power, the christian religion does not bring the tools for the realization of his political plans, among other things, because the christian conception of the fallen nature of man. For this reason the elites have to present alternative views of the core concepts that religion provided before. The only way to obtain absolute power is to promise an utopia of absolute happiness for the majority of the people in a convincing way and thist was only convincing if the human nature is capable of achieving it.  Thus, the elite has to reject the fallen nature of man and proclain that this was a construction of the current ideological conditions. All of this sound marxist. In fact the philisopher Eric Voegelin would say, this is the core idea of the gnostic religions.  The process that produces a ideological or religious atmosphere is not consciously conspirative; It is mostly unconscious. It is what I call the psychology of Social Capital. I will write about this soon. In the interwar period, this process of elite formation produced Nazism and Fascism. In the context of Europe the after WWII dictatorship agenda evolved with its own institutional and ideological materials:

The soft sciences shared the prestige of the hard sciences since, before the utopianist ideologies because soft sciences also shared with the hard sciences their honest quest for Truth. The soft nature of the latter were due more to the complexity of the facts that they studied than the weak nature of their inquiry. However under utopianist odeologies all this changed, and soft sciences were abduced by the elite political system as a substitute of the core concepts of Religion, for the purpose of political propaganda. That happened before, but never like in the XX century , elite state ideology and University were in so deep collaboration.

The university scholars soon became sources of ideologies for the upper class domination. Depending on the needs of the elites, they sanctified state regulation of Economy. They justified barriers for the entry in politics. They justified dictatorship, mass deportations, a police state, the extermination of the Jews etc. University education became a formal requirement for working in any major activity in the administration of Justice. Universitary education became a formal requirement stablished by regulations for highly paid jobs. The universitaries became themselves part of the elite. This does not have to be that way nor ever did before.

After WWII the elite universitary scholars selected the ideas that did not damage and, if possible, enhance the efforts of the upper class for its own perpetuation  from the  surviiving ideologies, as a natural effect of its unconscious social capital psychology. Their own class people included big capitalists, politicians, Periodist, magistrates etc with which they merry and marry. Among these ideologies were keynessanism, that promoted regulations and State intervention, good for the interests of big capitalists and politiciens. Cultural determinism by the american school of Franz Boas and Margaret Mead, that supported social engineering and relativism. That was good to undermine the influence of the Christian Churches, and, specialy, the Catholic Church. That was the institution that did not summed up to the big blood-coalition of university, big enterprise, politics ad mass media. The Cultural marxism ideology had all the Messianic and Utopian appeal of Marxism, but with the advantage that the ate of the dominant class, -their own class-, had been substituted by the ate to the dominant culture (the Western Culture). It added the bonus of sanctifiying the role of social and cultural engineers which justified massive intervention in Society. Cultural marxism that was formulated by the Frankfurt School was made from the ground up to exploit the defeated ideologies in the WWII for the advanance of Comunism. It simply states that nazism, racism and imperialism were the natural outcomes of  free Capitalism and Christianism. That was perfect for the purpose of the post WWII elites because it implies state regulations and Church demonisation. It also explained the core antivalues of their preferred creations: The EU and the ONU. Consecuently, It also re-targetted both institutions against their enemy institutions :  The Church -that was an obstacle for unlimited power- and free capitalism that makes social mobility unavoidable. Cultural Marxism promotes, briefly, the destruction of all Western institutions, from nuclear familly up. The  comunists designed it in order to undermine demoralize and conquest the West. These were also ideal for an elite with unlimited power that not even the Pharaons dreamed with. Instead of the comunist elites, was the european elites who intended to profit from cultural marxism.  Of course, the elites  applied the most destructive elements of the doctrine to others families and groups, not of course to their own, so many corrupt, selfish conservatives also feel happy with the idea, in its social capital psichology.

Last but not least, Cultural Marxism was the worldview upon which stablish strong  relations with the elites of the enemies: the former soviet union and later, the Islamic rulers. Never in history, but marginally, the elites of a country or an empire did confraternizate with the enemy. In a peace period, the elites happily intermix, make business, interchange ideas and genes. All of this build transnational interests. But in periods of conflict, the normal way of relations between the elites of different countries, not to mention civilizations, were broadly the sane as the relations between middle classes.  They instinctively knew that in case of conflict their interests were aligned with the interests of its own country as a whole, contrary to marxist beliefs. This is rather true when the country has been, via regulations and sclerotization, a property of their own for generations.

What is different in the after WWII situation is the existence od the Cold War, where  a protective militar umbrella over Europe was provided by the first superpower, USA, to protect us from the other superpower, the URSS.  De-responsabilized from the duty of self defense and knowing that USA could not afford to fall Western Europe in comunist hands, the European elites had free hands to advance its own interests in foreigh hostile powers as if there were in a period of peace, feeling that its status and in-country posessions were in no more danger than the ones of the Nort-Americans.

Nurtured in the university with the  ate ideologies against its own culture, the politiciens and the bussinesmen happily collaborated with the elites of hostile Comunist and the third world countries. Most of the third world countries were educated in the same elite universities of Europe, where they received the same ate ideology agains the West. Most of the Western Left did anything to collaborate with the Communist countries. If not for the defeat of its own countries, it was for the advance of its own personal internal power agendas, aided by Russians in exchange for support of soviet propaganda.  In excange, not only did they silenced the atrocities in the comunist countries and the support in whatever international cause in favor of the URSS and against USA; The archives of the Kremlim store a gigantic list of meeting minutes and spy reports where visiting elected left politiciens of western countries show clearly their disposition for betrayal and collaboration with the USSR if that represented a personal advantage. Among the conservative Western politiciens, the desire to undermine the sphere of influence of USA in third world countries and the conrresponding weight of american companies in favor of big European capitalists produced a similar foreign policy. The De Gaulle foreign politics  exemplifies this consensus between left and right elites in the French Republic to undermine USA and feed its own class interests.  Of course little has been published about that, since the same elites govern us today.

The fall of Comunism produced a revivlval of free capitalism in all the world. It seemed the End of History, but this seemed also the end of the european elites. No economical intervention means less barriers for elite. New political and social intervention should be created. To opportunity to strengthen and reinforce even to completely severe the barriers between ordinary Europeans and the elites. For this purpose, a tool was added to the arsenal that wrapped up all the antivalues of the elite. He leaves ouside nothing but an untransitable moral desert where social death is for sure: Political Correctness. A new destructive offensive was launched against the ordinary European citizens themselves, with the aim to deprive them from the sources of their very notion of self history, to cruch its self reliance, the worth of self defense and to eradicate the right to self government, because anything that elevates happy cattle psychology up to the conscience of citizenship is a threat for an elite that see the opportunity of perpetuating itself by means of a perfect closed ideology.

Bat Ye'or details how the idea of a cooperation of Euro-islamic collaboration to undermine USA was launched by De Gaulle in the 70's  -after the first oil crisis- of the past century.  In the XIX century, the repeated defeats of the Ottoman Empire drove England and later Germany to form an alliance with Turks against Russia for the protection of their own interest. being a minor threat since Napoleon, Islam played for the European powers the game of good boys that where with us for the contention of the Russian big boy, despite the contemporaneous atrocities that Ottoman islamist committed in the Balcans and the extraordinary genocides committed against Armenians, Greek, Albanians etc. Deaths sumed up millions for each nationality. Ottomans slaves were true ethnic Slavs. They invented the term.  Anyway, the history of Islam was whithered to encompass the new role assigned to Islam among the European powers. In this period the mith of a tolerant Islam was born in Europe. Of course the medieval history of Europa had to be changed to accomodate this mitth, but it was worth the pain for the Western European powers. They shaped the cultural landscape of the nineteen century. Soon  European crusaders that defended, by demand, Europe and the founding locations of Christendom, then part of the Roman Empire -and thus part of Occident- were depicted as barbarians and aggressors. Even the Spanish christians that simply recovered their lands from islamic domination.

The Euro-islamic cooperation started by France simply build on that and deepened what was done before. This time the cooperation was "oiled" by different mundane reasons. Some arabs elites were inmensely rich, The european elites were in good disposition to make business with wathever enemy following their post WWII tradition and, finally, big oil reserves were an strategic motive easy to sell among european citizens, who had suffered the first oil crisis after many years of economic paralysis, aggravated by abusive economic regulations and a welfare state that saw its inmense financial holes. To fill these holes,  Keynessian policies of inflation and taxes grew to abusive and economically paralyzing levels. Above these mundane reasons were the deep ideological motives, closely chosen  for the perpetuation of the European elites.  For the elites, there were no objection in the ideological space to say no to the two main demands of Islamic countries: mass inmigration of Islamic people to european countries and a 180 degree turn in the european support for Israel. At last, Europe was growing (really not so much) and cheap workers were needed for jobs that booming southern portugueese, italian and spanish could have done. Israel as Europe, had the support of USA against comunist-islamic hostility. if The ruling european elites culld'nt care less for Europe and learned to deeply ate what Europe represented, then why they should care for Israel?.  A first effect of the euro-arab dialog was the freedom of movement of PLO on some euripean countries, even the rigth to train themselves in exchange for no local terrorist actions. Inmense amounts of money flows from europe to Islamic countries under the concept of foreigh aid, specially to Palestinians that are converted rapidly into arms.

Mass inmigration of arabs probably started  from the beginning by purpose and was covered up with the excuse of worker industry demand. The demand was there obviousle, but also were the offer from booming less developped Western European countries, certainly at a higuer price, and thus not good for the elite sector of big business capitalists.  A more strict cultural separation with inherent racist connotation posibly made preferable foreigh culture workers that can be kept easily apart than could be european southerns with the danger of mixing with the natives. What we certainly know are some left politiciens expressing frankly the idea of enforcing mas inmigration and multiculturalism with the cover up of job demand. See references below.


It is supposed that the urge of elites for women to enter the labor market with the excuse of elevating what was called "the active population" was also a trick of the feminist agenda supported by the same upper class ideologies. As usual, this was also a two birds with a shoot kill: The extra femenine workers provided higuer tax incomes for the elite run welfare state necessary for the advance in the destruction of the nuclear family.

Among he agreements result of the "euro-arab dialogue" were a (new) revision of european school texts about  Islam and the financing the research of european universities with islamic petrodolars for "studying" the islamic culture. Since then almost any study about Islam produced by Universities is ,almost for sure, crap.

Multiculturalism is the application of  cultural relativism and cultural determinism to the political life with the addition that cultural europeism has been supressed as a consequence of Cultural Marxism, since europeism is, according with the latter, the cause of all the bad things in the World. With multiculturalism the elites are the final and unchallengeable arbiters between different cultures that govern themselves with their own laws. This of course is not possible, since power can not be exerted out of the vacuum. For this reason multiculturalism needs a superelite, a mundial gobernment and a super-army composed of mixed origins with no other ideological or religious identification but with the governing superelite. The ideal people for this purpose should be a brainwashed, deculturalized and submitted minority. Guess who could be? Suppossedly, the rest of us. Democracy will be imposible, and it should be so, since elections gives promotions, and social mobility is deletereous for the superelite. How to supress  Democracy? As Fjordman said abut Swedish politics:

“The more suffocating the censorship becomes regarding the problems created by Muslims, the more discussion there is of ways to get rid of the straitjackets of heterosexuality. This is clearly done in order to give the citizens the sense of living in an open, free and tolerant society. Diversity of sex is used as a substitute for diversity of political opinions.”

Diversity is used as a substitute for political freedom whereever it is being restricted. It is supposed that the Multicultural elite will permit and protect all lifestyles. They will care for your needs and your freedom. Then, why you have to molest yourself doing politics? Only Fascist that want to restrict freedom could do it.  The global multiculturalist dictatorship will guaratee your freedom.

Strauss Khans

How an elite could do such gigantic betrayal?. What, in the end, they want?. They want power. Raw power like any of us. The reason because no Western European  had the absolute power of an oriental despot with its harems, eunucs, slaves, with the righ to kill at will etc is because other europeans did not permit it in the light of our traditions of human dignity, love of freedom and many other precepts that we can not even identify. They were in us and we passed to our descendants. The reason why we are sure that they work is our differential history of achievements with respecto to other civlizations.  By Importing non european people, and destroying our freedom-giving traditions, they can behave like oriental despots; Besides their regular Harems they, like the ottoman Janisaires, they could pottentialy slave people and violate women at the light of the day without fear of justice. This must be the oriental sensuality that they so deeply praise. Totalitarian elites did it along history until today and will do it in the future.

Despite their atrocities, the Ottoman rulers feel deeeply religious when slaying or violating. The multicultural elite has the presumption of being commisioned for an high mission: To extend peace of eco-multicultiralism to the entire earth, something that is a religious undertaking for which it must be praised and every obstacle must be removed. Just like Ottomans feel about themselves in its empire. Raw power supported by unlimited moral excuses is what attract these illuminated ambitious psychopaths and their followers. In part because raw power also atract women. For those that think that this is a fantasy, it is worth to remember that only a generation ago, Illuminated ambitious psychopaths, that departed from European roots and traditions of civility provoked the Second World War.

Raw power is also the halmark of islamic elite, that only submits to Alla. it also was the halmark of comunists elites who only responded to the Laws of History. All of them are very close. why it isn´t strange that they  confraternize?  By the way, Hitler lamented in Mein Kamp that Germans did not have been conquered by Islamist and converted, because with islamic religion germans would have already conquered the world.

Let´s hope that this were an unfounded speculation. But completing this picture, at the end what will be the future ideology for such a people and such totalitarian world?  I do not know. What I can for sure know is what in their dreams the elite aggresive islamist will demand to any world superelite: the total implantation of islam in exchange for peace with islamic agressors. In this way both elites can achieve the goals they are after.  Has this agreement already ben reached? Is Europe the first step in the process?.