Why Should I Care: 1

This post is the first of a new and far more darker series of posts. I have long toyed with the idea of such a series, but thought that it might be a bit too much. However, frequent readers would have probably guessed that many posts often imply more without saying so explicitly. Consider this post as an introduction..

For reasons that will be explained below, young and old whites in western countries will soon have to become familiar with one question (whether it is asked explicitly or implied). That question is : Why should I care? Many might think that this is the question whites might ask to non-whites. However the converse is far more likely.

What would you say to a non-white asking you the question: Why should I care?

To understand this question, let us quickly go through how we got there..

For most of human history and prehistory, the majority of our interactions were with people who looked like us or lived near us. Therefore many beliefs that are now problematic, were never an issue. The world was much more fragmented and autonomous, not unlike various species of fungi growing on the forest floor. While these groups of fungi cooperated or fought at the peripheries, they were by and large autonomous. Smaller, unlucky and less aggressive fungal species often failed. However, by and large, things were in a dynamic equilibrium.

Even large empires expanded and collapsed for the same reasons one fungal species expands and displaces another, only to ultimately suffer by depleting natural resources and starving itself to death. This is a very good model for understanding pre-industrial mercantile economies, where one group stole form/ assimilated others until there was nothing left to steal and then started eat each other.

Industrialization changed that, and made the world non-zero sum. This process is similar to organ differentiation in animals/ plants. Differentiated organisms can achieve more than non-differentiated ones, if they can maintain such differentiation. However attitudes did not change as quickly, and for almost 100 years (1840s-1940s) people still tried to play the old games of neo-mercantilism. However their outcomes were starting to affect the viability of the whole system. It is only after ww2, that we saw the beginnings of non-zero sum thinking of any significance. All post-ww2 prosperity is the result of a reduction in zero-sum thinking (and I will explain it in future posts).

However a non-zero sum system of high complexity requires the willing long-term cooperation of individuals who constitute this network.

Coercion, lies, scams and distractions only work so far. The spread of literacy, media and technology have made it impossible to conceal that our “leaders” and “elites” are more corrupt, vain and stupid than your average individual. A stable hierarchy requires trust in “leaders” and “elites”. However the very technology that makes our world possible also makes it impossible for these scamsters to keep on playing their old games.

For a long time (1940s-2000s) an unstable status quo based on transitory demographic profiles and unequal industrialization was maintained wherein the west could play neo-mercantilism lite. While that system was not as bad as the ones it replaced, it still contained the seeds of its own demise.

A mammalian or reptilian physiology cannot operate by the same rule book as worms let alone fungi. While the basic components / cell signalling systems in organisms as diverse as yeasts and humans are similar. The manner in which they are “connected” is quite different in each organism. Moreover, the emergent ‘rule book’ that governs the overall functioning of these components and their interactions is very species specific.

A good way to visualize this: The same basic concepts, parts and methods are seen in structures ranging from dams, bunkers, highrises, houses, prisons and factories. Yet they are organised and operate based on their form and function.

As many of you know, the west and some asian countries are in for a demographic shift that is unprecedented in recorded history. Some may argue that past wars created similar demographic profiles. I would point out the following:

1. Wars change demography by killing people, not by making them old and unemployed. An abrupt loss in a certain age group has a very different impact than a gradual loss.

2. The level of top-loading of our demographic profile is unprecedented. The biggest improvements in human life expectancy are due to cheap and easy solutions, and are unlikely to go away.

3. Our economic system, in all its neo-mercantile lite glory operates on the assumption that growth is continuous and accelerating. It is the second assumption that is problematic.. as it the basis for all the economic BS, financial planning and wealth growth scams you have ever heard.

4. Most wealth comes from consumption and the multiplier effect of money flow, not production. The spread of industrialization and ever increasing levels of automation have made it unnecessary and unprofitable to employ humans for jobs that produce things or increasingly services.

The real question is: Where are your new consumers going to come from? and why would they care about you?

The next post in this series will be shorter..

  1. No comments yet.
  1. April 3, 2010 at 1:22 pm
  2. April 4, 2010 at 6:43 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: