OT Thread - Unified Theory of Politics Edition [WeirdDave]

OK, here's the final piece in the puzzle in my series of posts leading up to the unified theory of politics. If you recall, I first wrote about Freemen vs Serfs, followed that up with a post musing about the left's elevation of emotion over logic, and two weeks ago I pointed out Evan Sayet's excellent "regurgitating the apple" theory, which is simply an extension of Alan Bloom's "The Closing of the American Mind". Bloom undoubtedly owes a great deal to C.S. Lewis' "Abolition of Man", and all of it flows back to C.K. Chesterton's Orthodoxy.

As excellent and seminal to conservative thinking as all of these works are (not my blathering, the other stuff. One commenter, no doubt in a fit of drunken "I love you man" pathos called me a "national treasure". Well, so is Washington's bedpan, and we have one thing in comm on what we contain.), it still leaves one feeling like the blind men describing the elephant. They are all little pieces of the whole, but what's the big picture? Is there a grand unified theory that explains all of this?

There is, actually, and that's what I want to discuss today. It's not something that I came up with, and I can't even tell you who it actually was because s/he published under the name of Anonymous Conservative. Its a shame we don't have a name, because what Anonymous Conservative (for simplicity I'm going to refer to AC as "he" because I just don't know which sex AC is) came up with is damn brilliant. He published a book called "The Evolutionary Psychology Behind Politics: How Conservatism and Liberalism Evolved Within Humans", and it he goes right down to the roots. AC looks at the whole political question from an evolutionary perspective called r/K theory. Here's what he says:

Groups of animals have two basic strategies that they can adopt to ensure species survival. In an environment where resources are abundant, the classic example is rabbits living in a huge meadow, the correct approach for the species to adopt is r. r-selected populations demonstrate certain characteristics:
The r-strategy entails 5 main psychological traits. Each trait is designed to help an organism out-compete peers in the r-selected environment of free resource availability. The psychology exhibits a psychological aversion to both, competition with peers and the competitive environment. It also exhibits a tolerance for, or embrace of, promiscuity, low-investment single parenting, and early onset sexual behavior among offspring. It will also tend to not exhibit any group-centric urges, such as loyalty to in-group or hostility to out-group.
Contrast this with a K population, one that lives in a highly competitive environment with scarce resources, think wolves on the tundra:
The K-strategy entails an embrace of 5 opposite psychological traits. K- selection favors an aggressive embrace of competition and the competitive environment, where some individuals succeed and others fail, based upon their inherent abilities and merits. It tends to reject promiscuity in favor of sexual selectivity and monogamy, and it will strongly favor high-investment, two-parent offspring-rearing. The K-strategy also favors delaying sexual activity among offspring until later in life, when maximally fit. Finally, in it's most evolved form, K-selection will tend to imbue individuals with a fierce loyalty to their in-group, to facilitate success in group competitions. Danger, conflict and shortage are the evolutionary origins of the pack mentality, and they are ever present in the K-selected environment.
-Anonymous Conservative

What is important to note is that neither of these survival strategies is wrong. A K selected species would be at an extreme disadvantage in an r environment. While a lone wolf was carefully selecting it's mate and carefully raising it's one supremely fit offspring, its competing r species would be pumping out offspring by the dozens. The reverse is true as well. In an environment of scarce resources rabbits would soon starve en mass, while the capable few wolves would thrive. As I said, neither strategy is wrong, they're just solutions to different realities. AC then takes this basic premise and applies it to politics:

Of these five traits, (competition aversion, promiscuity, single parenting, early onset sexuality, and aversion to group-centrism/ethnocentrism), political leftists exhibit a tolerance of, or an embrace of, all five. Indeed, as we will show, these five urges explain the entire liberal platform of issue positions.
Liberalism seeks to quash competitions between men (from capitalism, to war, to citizens killing criminal attackers with privately owned firearms). Liberalism also adopts a lax attitude towards rampant promiscuity if it is not actively embracing it. Liberals tend to support single parenting... Liberalism exhibits a tolerance for, or an embrace of, ever earlier sexual education for children as well as an even more sexualized media environment, to which children are exposed. Liberals tend to reject ethnocentrism, and view any tendency towards a pack mentality as an odd and foolish evolutionary throwback.
Clearly, conservatives favor competition, from capitalism, to war, to armed citizens fighting off criminals with personally owned firearms. Conservatives accept that such competitions will produce disparate outcomes which will be based on inherent ability and effort. Conservatives favor a culture of monogamy over promiscuity, and they tend to desire a culture which favors high-investment, two-parent child- rearing.... Conservatives also tend to want to see children protected from sexually stimulating themes or sexual education until later in life, so they will be likely to delay the onset of sexual activity until they are mature. Of course, conservatives have always viewed liberals as exhibiting diminished loyalty to their nation and it's people, because to a conservative, patriotism, and a support for "one's own," is a vital moral quality in peers, and it's expression can never be too exaggerated.
-Anonymous Conservative

Here's the depressing thing. Human beings are naturally K selected. Competition is the one constant in human history, and we are designed to thrive in a competitive environment. Indeed, look at all the great civilizations throughout history. All of them rose to greatness by out competing other civilizations or hostile environments. The depressing part is that the seeds of their downfall were sown by their success, because as they grew great, they created a society of abundance, which demands an r-selected strategy for success. Remember, neither strategy is wrong, they are just different answers to different environments. A successful K-selected society invariably creates a world where r becomes the appropriate strategy, and thus it collapses, and the cycle begins anew. We are conservatives because we recognize that however nice things are in the US, however rich we are, however free, the trials and tribulations that we had to surmount to achieve the success are still out there, and they still demand the same response. Progressives look at the prosperity of America and assume that it was ever thus and ever will be thus, and so they adopt an r selected lifestyle. Sadly, I don't know how to break this cycle, or even if it can be broken, another conservative realization is that human nature doesn't change. I do know one thing, however. If this great and glorious American society does come crashing down, there is another, even older, even more primitive term that will describe to our r-selected brethren.

Prey.

* The quotes herein come only from the introduction to Anonymous Conservative's book. I recommend reading the whole thing, he gets deep into the implications of his theory, all I can do here is scratch the surface.

Posted by: Open Blogger at 11:15 AM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 Hello.....

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:11 AM (VsPux)

2 We make men without chests and expect from them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst.

CS Lewis

Posted by: MikeH at August 23, 2014 11:14 AM (bRL1M)

3 Deep, yet very true.

"The depressing part is that the seeds of their downfall were sown by
their success, because as they grew great, they created a society of
abundance, which demands an r-selected strategy for success."

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:14 AM (VsPux)

4 The Closing of the American Mind should be the substance of a course in every school in America.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at August 23, 2014 11:15 AM (F2IAQ)

5 It is upon the Trunk that a gentleman works.

Analects of Confucius, 1.2

Posted by: MikeH at August 23, 2014 11:15 AM (bRL1M)

6 It came burning hot into my mind, whatever he said and however he flattered, when he
got me home to his house, he would sell me for a slave.

John Bunyan

Posted by: MikeH at August 23, 2014 11:16 AM (bRL1M)

7 Only ten bucks on Kindle.

http://tinyurl.com/on6k3ty

Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at August 23, 2014 11:17 AM (6fyGz)

8 R-Abundance leads to free time. Free time leads to ill-doing primarily for pleasure.

Idle hands are the Devil's playground............?

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:17 AM (VsPux)

9 Speaking of r selected bullshit. My 4 year old was watching YouTube clips of Chuggington. Dorvthosevwho don't know this is basically Thomas the Tank Engine set I'm a more modern time. Target audience? 4 year old boys

So imagine my shock when an ad for some gay show pops up, complete with a gay sex scene.

No, there's no grooming going on at all. No sir.

Posted by: Lauren at August 23, 2014 11:18 AM (BPMYx)

10 Somehow, this movie has never made it to my local cinema.

Mutant Ninja Turtles, on the other hand, is opening soon.

Posted by: MrScribbler at August 23, 2014 11:18 AM (dDzOj)

11 Abundance leads to free time. Free time leads to ill-doing primarily for pleasure.
-------------

What are you trying to say?

Posted by: Caligula at August 23, 2014 11:19 AM (F2IAQ)

12 "Idle hands are the Devil's playground............?"

Oh the devil will find work for idle hands to do

Posted by: Morrissey at August 23, 2014 11:20 AM (BPMYx)

13 So imagine my shock when an ad for some gay show pops up, complete with a gay sex scene.

No, there's no grooming going on at all. No sir.
Posted by: Lauren at August 23, 2014 11:18 AM (BPMYx)

Got to grow our 2% base...

Posted by: NAMBLA at August 23, 2014 11:21 AM (bRL1M)

14 "Oh the devil will find work for idle hands to do"

Ed Zachary.

But not necessarily "good" work.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:21 AM (VsPux)

15 Posted by: Lauren at August 23,2014 11:18 AM(BPMYx)

Horrible commercials during decent shows was the final straw for us.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette, assault Hobbit at August 23, 2014 11:24 AM (GDulk)

16

And, then there is salmon, mightily swimming upstream, by trying to stay clear of the bear that is loose.

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at August 23, 2014 11:25 AM (IXrOn)

17 Multiple copies of The Closing of the American Mind are available at ABE Books. $3.45 and FREE shipping.

Just search "ABE free shipping", then title.

Here's one: https://tinyurl.com/n53mlxx

Posted by: Caligula at August 23, 2014 11:25 AM (F2IAQ)

18 "Sadly, I don't know how to break this cycle, or even if it can be
broken, another conservative realization is that human nature doesn't
change."

History has taught us that this is cycles of growth and collapse, growth and collapse. Human nature is Hell to change.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:25 AM (VsPux)

19 "Horrible commercials during decent shows was the final straw for us. "

We usually watch shows on Netflix or Amazon so we don't get commercials, but this show wasn't on either so I let him look on YouTube. Lesson learned.

Posted by: Morrissey at August 23, 2014 11:26 AM (BPMYx)

20

You know this is could be construed as an argument for low populations/population control.

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at August 23, 2014 11:26 AM (IXrOn)

21 OT Thread? That's a lot of content for an off-topic thread.

Posted by: rickl at August 23, 2014 11:26 AM (sdi6R)

22 I'm not a wabbit....I need some westttt.....!!

Posted by: Lilly von Schtupp at August 23, 2014 11:26 AM (sYUHT)

23 "That Hideous Strength" by CS Lewis is a great read if you want to understand where the seeds were sown for modern progressives movement.

Transhumanist, scientific materialism versus Christianity

Posted by: MikeH at August 23, 2014 11:26 AM (bRL1M)

24 /sock

Posted by: Lauren at August 23, 2014 11:27 AM (BPMYx)

25

This book highlighted today over at The FreeBeacon sounds like the perfect reading companion to this.

Review: 'Conservative Insurgency' by Kurt Schlicter

A 'Looking Backward' For Conservatives

It looks good.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/review-conservative-insurgency-by-kurt-schlicter/

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at August 23, 2014 11:28 AM (IXrOn)

26 History has taught us that this is cycles of growth and collapse, growth and collapse. Human nature is Hell to change.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:25 AM
=======
Enter The Robot

Posted by: mrp at August 23, 2014 11:28 AM (JBggj)

27 Kurt Schlicter?! he barely KNEW her!

Posted by: Lilly von Schtupp at August 23, 2014 11:28 AM (sYUHT)

28 On this day in 1989 the citizens in Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania joined hands in a chain that went hundreds of miles and was a protest against Soviet aggression.
I just thought it was quite amazing thing and the website,"Legal Insurrection" just reminded me of it:

http://legalinsurrection.com

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at August 23, 2014 11:29 AM (PNzXb)

29 Human nature is Hell to change.

Posted by: Ricardo
--
The Liberal/Left do not recognize that there is any such thing as human nature.

Posted by: Caligula at August 23, 2014 11:30 AM (F2IAQ)

30 "No, there's no grooming going on at all. No sir."

Heh.

Earlier this week I was searching the channels and found "Airplane!" on a channel. Thought "fuck, haven't watched that in while" and switched over. Watched for a bit and then I see this Hotels.com advertisement that is overtly homo-friendly. I think "WTF?" Hit my channel guide. It's LOGO that I'm watching. LOGO is playing "Airplane!"

And so I see the flaw in my actions.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:30 AM (VsPux)

31 OT to the OT, but I was recently in email contact with our good friend baldilocks. She says hi to the Horde.

Posted by: Insomniac at August 23, 2014 11:30 AM (DrWcr)

32 Begone Caligula sock..

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at August 23, 2014 11:30 AM (F2IAQ)

33 The moral of the story is no matter how you wanna twist it and turn it, if the pack of wolves want, they can slaughter all the rabbits and their multiple offspring.

Posted by: fromabroad at August 23, 2014 11:31 AM (rnV3B)

34 Human nature is Hell ~~to change~~.

Posted by: Ricardo
--

FTFY

Posted by: Insomniac at August 23, 2014 11:31 AM (DrWcr)

35 Hi to Goldilocks. Hope she is doing o.k. and she is missed here. Thx for letting us know, Insomniac.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at August 23, 2014 11:32 AM (PNzXb)

36 Human Nature - The one thing that has not changed in 10,000 (or so) years of historic record. The Constant.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at August 23, 2014 11:33 AM (F2IAQ)

37 The Liberal/Left do not recognize that there is any such thing as human nature.
Posted by: Caligula at August 23, 2014 11:30 AM (F2IAQ)

Agreed, they believe that somehow "society" can perfected by applying technology and scientific behavior modification (whatever that means)...

Posted by: MikeH at August 23, 2014 11:33 AM (bRL1M)

38 35 Hi to Goldilocks. Hope she is doing o.k. and she is missed here. Thx for letting us know, Insomniac.
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at August 23, 2014 11:32 AM (PNzXb)

You bet. She was definitely one of my favorite commenters.

Posted by: Insomniac at August 23, 2014 11:33 AM (DrWcr)

39 No time (or heart) to offer any analysis or commentary, just want to say thanks to weirddave for the excellent work.

Posted by: LadyS at August 23, 2014 11:34 AM (5dip8)

40 Yeah, sorry. This is "OT" to the Garden Thread, which I'm still finishing. Some technical issues at home. It'll be up as soon as I can tackle those issues.

Posted by: Y-not at August 23, 2014 11:34 AM (zDsvJ)

41 @31

As well.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:34 AM (VsPux)

42 Agreed, they believe that somehow "society" can perfected by applying technology and scientific behavior modification (whatever that means)...
Posted by: MikeH
---------------

Hugs. Hugs will do the job. And funding.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at August 23, 2014 11:34 AM (F2IAQ)

43 Blood For Blood - Ain't Like You/Wasted Youth

Listening to it now. Pretty much sums up how I feel a great deal of the time. NSFW language. http://tinyurl.com/nl47ywz

Posted by: Insomniac at August 23, 2014 11:34 AM (DrWcr)

44 I'm assuming LOGO is a gay network?

Lesbians Or Gay Ogres?

Posted by: Lauren at August 23, 2014 11:35 AM (BPMYx)

45 I'm tired of cutting and pasting.

Just google "Alasdair MacIntyre Waiting for Benedict" and read it yourself

While this theory does make sense, I am of course, leery of putting to much weight on evolutionary theory.

Indeed, part of what separates humans from the animals is our sense of morality (that is, the ability to do philosophy.)

But clearly our moral compass has collapsed entirely. And while that may due to in part to abundance (as AC seems to be saying) I suggest there's more in there too. (Which is why I recommend a book

)

Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) And father to be in 5 months! at August 23, 2014 11:35 AM (HDwDg)

46 "Agreed, they believe that somehow "society" can perfected by applying
technology and scientific behavior modification (whatever that means)..."

By which you mean Socialism...

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:36 AM (VsPux)

47 Agreed, they believe that somehow "society" can perfected by applying technology and scientific behavior modification (whatever that means)...
Posted by: MikeH at August 23, 2014 11:33 AM (bRL1M)

It's utopianism, and usually involves planting millions of people who are viewed as standing in the way of "progress."

Posted by: Insomniac at August 23, 2014 11:37 AM (DrWcr)

48 You think we've got it bad, Iceland is under constant threat of intrusive dykes....

Posted by: Lincolntf at August 23, 2014 11:37 AM (2cS/G)

49 OK, I went back and finished reading the post. Great job as usual, WeirdDave.

So America was founded in a K environment, and thanks to those traits our ancestors developed, they created an r environment of prosperity and abundance.

The Burning Times will take us back to a K environment.

Oddly, that gives me a measure of hope. Doesn't mean the transition will be easy or painless, though.

Posted by: rickl at August 23, 2014 11:37 AM (sdi6R)

50 "
I'm assuming LOGO is a gay network?"

Yes it is. On DirecTV.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:38 AM (VsPux)

51 It's always an r-world for cockroaches.

Posted by: t-bird at August 23, 2014 11:38 AM (FcR7P)

52 Honoring virtue is missing from civic life, except for the celebrity aspects. Students aren't expected to learn and understand the documentary origins of our country, or the circumstances of our founding. Work is not honored among young people, and we even make it difficult for kids to get jobs (my kids had to get written permission from the local public high school for their school year jobs, even though they went to private schools!!). The history of American ideals are not taught any more, in favor of teaching Democrat identity orthodoxy.

Our local public library has chiseled on its exterior walls "Question authority!" instead of "Liberty!", and though I definitely believe in questioning authority its a pretty limited principle.

Posted by: MTF at August 23, 2014 11:39 AM (6um35)

53 50 "
I'm assuming LOGO is a gay network?"

Yes it is. On DirecTV.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:38 AM (VsPux)

And BrightHouse. All ghey, all day.

Posted by: Insomniac at August 23, 2014 11:39 AM (DrWcr)

54 Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) And father to be in 5 months! at August 23, 2014 11:35 AM (HDwDg)

Agreed. There are powerful arguments that support this (the "selfish gene" comes to mind), but unless one accepts that all altruism is ultimately self-serving, there are limits to the evolutionary argument.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at August 23, 2014 11:40 AM (QFxY5)

55 So the K's conquer the environment, tame the environment, and sooner or later they start to see a whole lotta r's moving in and getting comfortable.

Posted by: Mike in the Hinterlands at August 23, 2014 11:41 AM (DNpio)

56 By which you mean Socialism...
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:36 AM (VsPux)

The pox of the Fabian society has infected every corner of the globe

--The shadow of that hyddeous strength, sax myle and more it is of length

Posted by: MikeH at August 23, 2014 11:41 AM (bRL1M)

57 And because EVERY day in the meadow is the same, r enviros totally reject that the environment has undergone changes, evolving from K to r. History started this morning, and they reject the characteristics that got them there. Geo Washington owned slaves, so he is BAD!

Posted by: goatexchange at August 23, 2014 11:41 AM (sYUHT)

58 2 We make men without chests and expect from them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst.

CS Lewis
Posted by: MikeH at August 23, 2014 11:14 AM (bRL1M)

We castrate, and bid the geldings be fruitful.

Posted by: Insomniac at August 23, 2014 11:41 AM (DrWcr)

59 Yeah, it's fascinating to me that the libtards don't realize their r-strateginess,

and that they are best tolerated and best fulfilled in their desires and life-style within a K-strategy human environment.

A wealthy, capitalistic society can tolerate a lot of variation within it and a lot of let's-face-it cultural and societal dead weight because there's plenty.

Hollywood is one of the best examples:

they spend huge amounts of time and money getting Dims elected, who immediately put in place policies that destroy disposable income or outright take it away

Attention Hollywood Dumbasses! Your entire industry flourishes only because of middle class disposable income.

Wonder why gross receipts are declining? Wonder why DVD/Blu-ray sales have bottomed out?

No middle class disposable income.

Good luck cutting your own throats, jackasses.

(apply above sentiment to any and all members of the Dim Party, FSA, and LiVs. Oh, and middle class retards who vote Dim)

Posted by: naturalfake at August 23, 2014 11:42 AM (KBvAm)

60 And the ad I saw was hotels.com, so, FUCK THEM.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:43 AM (VsPux)

61 60 And the ad I saw was hotels.com, so, FUCK THEM.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:43 AM (VsPux)

Were they pimping great deals in the Castro District, or what?

Posted by: Insomniac at August 23, 2014 11:44 AM (DrWcr)

62 Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at August 23, 2014 11:40 AM (QFxY5)

Indeed.
I'd note that in a sense, MacIntyre concedes the same cycle, but finds it's origins in a different (perhaps related?) place.

Saying the world is nothing but competition and death strikes me as just but to Nietzsche. Plus there are plenty of places that still are just competition and death, and they don't seem to be heading in the direction of the pinnacle of society.

Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) And father to be in 5 months! at August 23, 2014 11:44 AM (HDwDg)

63 Hotels.com. Come for the overpriced hotels, stay for the gay sex.

Posted by: Lauren at August 23, 2014 11:45 AM (BPMYx)

64 We make men without chests and expect from them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst.

CS Lewis

Hey, check out my moons!

Posted by: Gaylord Momjeans at August 23, 2014 11:45 AM (FcR7P)

65 63 Hotels.com. Come for the overpriced hotels, stay for the gay sex.
Posted by: Lauren at August 23, 2014 11:45 AM (BPMYx)

And whatever you do, NEVER scan your room with a UV light...

Posted by: MikeH at August 23, 2014 11:45 AM (bRL1M)

66 And whatever you do, NEVER scan your room with a UV light...
Posted by: MikeH at August 23, 2014 11:45 AM (bRL1M)

It'll look like a Jackson Pollack painting.

Posted by: Insomniac at August 23, 2014 11:46 AM (DrWcr)

67 "A wealthy, capitalistic society can tolerate a lot of variation within
it and a lot of let's-face-it cultural and societal dead weight because
there's plenty.
"

Yes, up to and until sizable parts of that population say "screw it, I'm living off of everyone else." Then shit starts collapsing.

I will never retire. Can't afford it. Work 'til I drop dead.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:47 AM (VsPux)

68 Posted by: Morrissey at August 23, 2014 11:26 AM (BPMYx)

Thanks for the you-Tube warning Lauren. We've been doing "Project Free TV" for a lot of shows since we dropped Netflix due to everyone (including me) spending *way* too much time watching stuff.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at August 23, 2014 11:47 AM (GDulk)

69 59 Yeah, it's fascinating to me that the libtards don't realize their r-strateginess,

and that they are best tolerated and best fulfilled in their desires and life-style within a K-strategy human environment.

Posted by: naturalfake at August 23, 2014 11:42 AM (KBvAm)

Actually, the way I read it is that we are now living in an r environment. America used to be K, but transitioned to r during the late 20th Century, in the post-WWII era.

That is why r behavior is now dominant. Present-day America selects for r traits, but that kind of foolishness and hedonism is about to come to an end. The r's have squandered the abundance the K's left them.

Posted by: rickl at August 23, 2014 11:48 AM (sdi6R)

70 "Were they pimping great deals in the Castro District, or what?"

Vegas actually. The whole "what happens here, stays here" shit.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:49 AM (VsPux)

71 More OT - I'm at my office working on a project for Monday. I'm trying to find something in our system that I need, but our computer search architecture blows blue whale.

Posted by: Insomniac at August 23, 2014 11:49 AM (DrWcr)

72 The problem with modern politics of all stripes is hubris. The idea that perfection and consistency is possible and desirable in societies. What we should be striving for is not consistent and perfect national politics but rather self-government at the lowest level. Communities, just like people, have the right to be wrong. The trick is to limit their geographic reach. If my town, or county, or state has laws intolerable to me, I have the right to persuade my fellow citizens to change them. If I can't, I have the right to move.

Posted by: Theodore Rex at August 23, 2014 11:49 AM (jGJv8)

73 70 "Were they pimping great deals in the Castro District, or what?"

Vegas actually. The whole "what happens here, stays here" shit.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:49 AM (VsPux)

Great.

Posted by: Insomniac at August 23, 2014 11:50 AM (DrWcr)

74 Good enough is good enough.

Posted by: Theodore Rex at August 23, 2014 11:50 AM (jGJv8)

75 "I'm at my office working on a project for Monday. I'm trying to find
something in our system that I need, but our computer search
architecture blows blue whale."

Call your boss. Tell him this shit sucks. Can't be done and that he's full of shit.

Should solve the problem.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:51 AM (VsPux)

76 "Vegas actually. The whole "what happens here, stays here" shit. "

Except the AIDS

Posted by: Lauren at August 23, 2014 11:52 AM (BPMYx)

77 "Great."

You like that stuff?

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:53 AM (VsPux)

78 77 "Great."

You like that stuff?
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:53 AM (VsPux)

I was being sarcastic. Or ironic.

Posted by: Insomniac at August 23, 2014 11:54 AM (DrWcr)

79 Call your boss. Tell him this shit sucks. Can't be done and that he's full of shit.

Should solve the problem.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:51 AM (VsPux)

Well, that's certainly one way to go...

Posted by: Insomniac at August 23, 2014 11:54 AM (DrWcr)

80 "Except the AIDS"

Yeah, the AIDS stays with you.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:55 AM (VsPux)

81 WWII ended when we nuked our head-chopping enemy - Japan. American prosperity followed.

Ergo, to return to American prosperity we need to nuke our current head-chopping enemy - ISIS.
And possibly Mexican drug cartels.

QED

Posted by: votermom at August 23, 2014 11:55 AM (GSIDW)

82 79
Was baldilocks banned ?

Posted by: prophet enchilada at August 23, 2014 11:54 AM (qQk+U)

Apparently you are.

Posted by: Theodore Rex at August 23, 2014 11:55 AM (jGJv8)

83 "I was being sarcastic. Or ironic."

Gotcha.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:56 AM (VsPux)

84 Posted by: Lauren at August 23, 2014 11:52 AM (BPMYx)

A bit like the old(ish) Las Vegas commercial about the cougar quickie-marrying some young stud who doesn't speak English. Pretty sure she'd find out quickly that she's married *everywhere* if she ever trird to get "married for real".

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at August 23, 2014 11:56 AM (GDulk)

85 Disagree, in part. Great nations rise to power and success by being hard-driving k-selected folks. But then once atop the power-heap, it's not that they need to r-selected to survive, it's that they get soft and take a hybrid r+k approach that lowers their competitiveness and in-group support, and the adoption of single-parenting child-raising leads to to a toxic self-centeredness. The sudden relative abundance of resources leads to short-term thinking, a classic r-selected trait. In short, the hybrid plan, in humans, is self-destructive to the "tribe" in power.

Posted by: Rolf at August 23, 2014 11:57 AM (be0G3)

86 "Well, that's certainly one way to go..."

Fixes the problem. One way or the either.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:59 AM (VsPux)

87 86 "Well, that's certainly one way to go..."

Fixes the problem. One way or the either.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 11:59 AM (VsPux)

Heh. Can't disagree.

Posted by: Insomniac at August 23, 2014 11:59 AM (DrWcr)

88 " Pretty sure she'd find out quickly that she's married *everywhere* if she ever trird to get "married for real".

Didn't that happen to Brittany Spears? *denounces self for having this knowledge*

Posted by: Lauren at August 23, 2014 11:59 AM (BPMYx)

89 I can't emphasize enough that what I've referenced above is just the briefest summary of r/K theory. If you read the book AC gets into a great deal of detail and addresses most of the arguments against r/K.

As for evolution, even though I am a Christian, that question has never bothered me in the least. Micro-evolution is a given and provable, Macro...well to me that's always been the most likely answer to "how" God created all of this, which is an academic intellectual question at best. "Why" is much more important and fundamental. I have a motorcycle in the garage. How it was built is interesting but not important. Why it was built? Why, to make me feel like the star of The Wild One of course!

Posted by: Weirddave at August 23, 2014 11:59 AM (N/cFh)

90 The history of American ideals are not taught any more, in favor of teaching Democrat identity orthodoxy.
------------------------

Indoctrination- "To instruct in a doctrine, principle, ideology, etc., especially to imbue with a specific partisan or biased belief or point of view."

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at August 23, 2014 12:00 PM (F2IAQ)

91 mmmmm, long pork.

Posted by: SpongeBobSaget at August 23, 2014 12:01 PM (jtgkZ)

92 Mannnn.....deep, heavy reading when I'm drunk.

Game over, man. Game over.

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Suntanning in Bizzaro World at August 23, 2014 12:02 PM (o1hNt)

93 92 Mannnn.....deep, heavy reading when I'm drunk.

Game over, man. Game over.
Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Suntanning in Bizzaro World at August 23, 2014 12:02 PM (o1hNt)

I plan on baking foil-wrapped potatoes in the still-glowing embers of civilization.

Posted by: Insomniac at August 23, 2014 12:03 PM (DrWcr)

94 Why it was built? Why, to make me feel like the star of The Wild One of course!
--------------------

Hey!....

Posted by: Easy Rider at August 23, 2014 12:03 PM (F2IAQ)

95 Bloom's critique of modenity flows from Nietzsche, not Lewis.

Posted by: Emmett Milbarge at August 23, 2014 12:03 PM (nFdGS)

96 I think the destruction of the family unit was intentional. The best way to get someone dependent on the government is to strip away the family safety net.

Posted by: Lauren at August 23, 2014 12:04 PM (BPMYx)

97 Just because you are out in front doesn't mean you are leading the pack... It might mean you are the one being chased.

Posted by: Drumwaster at August 23, 2014 12:04 PM (trb6f)

98 Socialism always ends the same way. The people just won't cooperate..., so, more authority is needed to make it work.

Posted by: Mike Hammer,etc., etc. at August 23, 2014 12:05 PM (F2IAQ)

99 Nood

Posted by: Y-not at August 23, 2014 12:05 PM (zDsvJ)

100 Weird - Thanks for the very thoughtful post.

Posted by: Mike Hammer,etc., etc. at August 23, 2014 12:07 PM (F2IAQ)

101 I plan on baking foil-wrapped potatoes in the still-glowing embers of civilization.

Posted by: Insomniac at August 23, 2014 12:03 PM (DrWcr)

mkay. I'll bring a keg. Good stuff. Not the Beast.

Corona might work, as we will be watching the world implode, on chaise lounges just like at the beach.

Kinda.....

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Suntanning in Bizzaro World at August 23, 2014 12:07 PM (o1hNt)

102 r environments abound, keep in mind a few short weeks ago there were protests about people who hadn't paid their water bill having their water shut off.

Posted by: Mike in the Hinterlands at August 23, 2014 12:11 PM (DNpio)

103 I think the destruction of the family unit was intentional. The best way to get someone dependent on the government is to strip away the family safety net.

Posted by: Lauren at August 23, 2014 12:04 PM (BPMYx)

If you read your Marx you'll see that it absolutely was, in fact Marx and Engels disagreed on this point violently. Not that the destruction of the family was necessary for communist utopia, far from it. Both of them agreed that it was absolutely necessary. Marx however realized that that was going to be a hard, hard sell and strove to minimize it's importance in their writings, Engels wanted to feature it (he was, to use their terms, much more ideologically pure), thinking that people would recognize and accept the destruction of the family as a brilliant idea.

Posted by: Weirddave at August 23, 2014 12:12 PM (N/cFh)

104 Posted by: Lauren at August 23, 2014 12:04 PM (BPMYx)

Agreed. Even with John's life insurance I don't feel brave enough to say "No" to the Aid to Dependent Children. I know John Never paid in even close to as much as my kids will end up being given. Less painful if I think of it as the money *all* of our family members have paid in that was never used.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at August 23, 2014 12:14 PM (GDulk)

105 For those who might want a deeper look into r/K - check out some of Bill Whittle's "The stratosphere lounge" epispodes. He has been raving about this book and theory for months.
Go all the way back to episode 65 and you will probably find some discussion. And he talks about it a little in every episode.
You can find through 74 on youtube.

This is a wonderful theory but the question is what do we do to stop the cycle. We are not in as much time of abundance as people think. We should still be in K mode. Lot's of CS Lewis and Robert Heinlein in this work.

Posted by: RKinRoanoke at August 23, 2014 12:15 PM (b0n8A)

106 Posted by: Weirddave at August 23, 2014 12:12 PM (N/cFh)

The destruction of the family goes back to Plato's Republic though. It's not exactly a new idea.

If you want to control a populace you have to ensure they have no form of authority outside the ones you create.

Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) And father to be in 5 months! at August 23, 2014 12:16 PM (HDwDg)

107 Hotels.com is what Ayn Rand warned about.

Check out their "vacation equality project". They want the Feds involved in deciding if employers are offering enough vaycay. The fact that hotels will be beneficiaries (hotels which are often family-run and staffed with illegals, who won't rat THEM out) has nothing to do with this.

Posted by: boulder t' hobo at August 23, 2014 12:16 PM (XHnK+)

108 The problem is the USA has created a system that appears to produce abundance and wealth without effort.

This leads to various forms of exploitation and lying.

Ultimately, reality wins and the system collapses (just like in the natural world).

What AC described is the predator vs. prey model in a single environment. He artificially divided it into two environments.

Posted by: eman at August 23, 2014 12:18 PM (MQEz6)

109 Posted by: boulder t' hobo at August 23, 2014 12:16 PM (XHnK+)

Eh we've reached a point where all capitalism is effectively cronyism.

This is what happens when the government controls basically all the economy in some way shape or form.

Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) And father to be in 5 months! at August 23, 2014 12:20 PM (HDwDg)

110 R's just use subversive tactics to conquer their prey.

Are Lois Lerner or Holder not seeking to destroy their conservative prey? Government is their weapon. They evolved alternative means to devour the competition (unions, tenure, civil rights, diversity).

Orwell's view of Big Brother is more good versus evil, rather than neither view being right or wrong. Our successful K society is not overthrown by an appropriate r society. It is subversive ( K for "Kommunist" or Nazi) forces that have used the appeal of fairness to assault and destroy the K based society. Success may have made the people more vulnerable to such propaganda, but it was instituted via K subversive tactics.

K's may be very r like in their culture, but using government to subdue private K culture is not an r government, it is a K fascist government.

Anyway, I haven't read all the background on this discussion, but I don't see K or r as neither right nor wrong. Liberty is right, subservience to government is wrong.

Free men serving their own higher power, with a limited government beneath that. K politicians buying r serfs' votes in order to subdue other K's is wrong, the opposite of liberty.

But I probably missed the point ... lol.

Posted by: Illini Bill at August 23, 2014 12:20 PM (dUGqM)

111 89
As for evolution, even though I am a Christian, that question has never bothered me in the least. Micro-evolution is a given and provable, Macro...well to me that's always been the most likely answer to "how" God created all of this, which is an academic intellectual question at best.

Posted by: Weirddave at August 23, 2014 11:59 AM (N/cFh)

Exactly! I'm an agnostic who was raised in a nominally Christian household, so my cultural and philosophic bias is towards Christianity.

I have no problem with the idea that God created evolution.

Do I believe in Intelligent Design? Maybe. I dunno. I'm not intelligent enough to know what was on God's mind.

Posted by: rickl at August 23, 2014 12:21 PM (sdi6R)

112 "
Mannnn.....deep, heavy reading when I'm drunk"

Being drunk never kept from nothing. You know the objective. Advance. Report. Advance. Fuck it. It's the job.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 23, 2014 12:21 PM (VsPux)

113 Liberals tend to reject ethnocentrism

for white people and encourages ethnocentrism in all other groups.

Posted by: Jack at August 23, 2014 12:28 PM (53CCM)

114 The Left has no interest in acknowledging the truth of the world, in fact it has every interest in producing a false image of reality.

It can not for example acknowledge that Capitalism is very much like Natural Selection and both systems are competition and cooperation blended together.

The left is a parasite. It must lie and evade and exploit in order to succeed.

The ultimate answer to the cycle of growth, collapse, and rebirth (at least to stretch it out and minimize bad effects) is honesty glued to accuracy.

Our society suffers because it is burdened with too many liars and the lies they tell.

Posted by: eman at August 23, 2014 12:29 PM (MQEz6)

115 "Mannnn.....deep, heavy reading when I'm drunk"

That's OK, I wrote it while I was drinking. Mmmmmm beer...the cause of, and the solution for, all deep thoughts.

Posted by: Weirddave at August 23, 2014 12:30 PM (N/cFh)

116 Outstanding post.

Posted by: fastfreefall at August 23, 2014 12:32 PM (gGeNe)

117 There is no difference between micro evolution and macro evolution.

They are one and the same, and both are true.

Life has been on this planet for at least three billion years and has been evolving since day one.

There is no evidence for intervention of any sort or sign that it was required.

Intelligent Design is Creationism in disguise.

Posted by: eman at August 23, 2014 12:35 PM (MQEz6)

118 Technical note: I just realized that the following paragraph:

"Groups of animals have two basic strategies that they can adopt to ensure species survival. In an environment where resources are abundant, the classic example is rabbits living in a huge meadow, the correct approach for the species to adopt is r. r-selected populations demonstrate certain characteristics:"

Got included in the blockquote by mistake. Those are my words, not ACs.

Posted by: Weirddave at August 23, 2014 12:35 PM (N/cFh)

119 105
This is a wonderful theory but the question is what do we do to stop the cycle.

Posted by: RKinRoanoke at August 23, 2014 12:15 PM (b0n8A)

That's the thing. It's a cycle. I don't think it can be stopped any more than the cycle of the seasons can be stopped.

If I'm reading it correctly, K traits create an r environment, which is then taken over by those with r traits. They squander the wealth that the K's built up, and the environment reverts to K. The cycle begins anew.

This is a good place to plug the book The Fourth Turning. The authors have a very interesting cyclical theory of history and human generations. The four "turnings" are High, Awakening, Unraveling, and Crisis, each lasting approximately 20 years. The last "High" was the immediate post-WWII era. There is absolutely no question that we have now entered the "Crisis" phase.

https://tinyurl.com/nchonpe

Posted by: rickl at August 23, 2014 12:37 PM (sdi6R)

120 113 Liberals tend to reject ethnocentrism

for white people and encourages ethnocentrism in all other groups.

Posted by: Jack at August 23, 2014 12:28 PM (53CCM)

All cultures are equal, except for white Western culture, which is uniquely evil.

Posted by: rickl at August 23, 2014 12:40 PM (sdi6R)

121 just like at On The Beach.

Kinda.....

~~Posted by: Mike Hammer,etc., etc. at August 23, 2014 12:42 PM (F2IAQ)~~

~~122~~

Posted by: Mike Hammer,etc., etc. at August 23, 2014 12:42 PM (F2IAQ)

123 Wut? Conservatism is synonymous with competition? That's silly. Conservatism is the desire to protect the values and social arrangements that already exist. Liberalism is the desire to escape from the perceived limitations of those values and arrangements to some undefined ideal state. All the liberals I know are highly competitive. Some may use anti-competitiveness as an excuse to compete while feeling good about themselves. Meanwhile a conservative like myself may hate the spirit of emulation that seems in this post to be conflated with competition. Competition in academics? Isn't the point to learn? So yeah, too clever by harf.

Posted by: Caliban at August 23, 2014 12:42 PM (3GFMN)

124 massive fail

Posted by: Mike Hammer,etc., etc. at August 23, 2014 12:43 PM (F2IAQ)

125 There is no difference between micro evolution and macro evolution.

They are one and the same, and both are true.

Life has been on this planet for at least three billion years and has been evolving since day one.

There is no evidence for intervention of any sort or sign that it was required.

The mathematical odds of unguided evolution creating all of the accidental mutations that led to human beings is something on the order of 1 X 10 to the 41st power. You may consider such long odds to be "science", but to me it's far more likely that "something" started and guided the process. Please note that I'm not arguing for any specific God or gods, rather that ID is far more probable than pure random chance.

Posted by: Weirddave at August 23, 2014 12:45 PM (N/cFh)

126 On the contrary, nice save.

The Barrel has been denied another victim.

Posted by: rickl at August 23, 2014 12:45 PM (sdi6R)

127 There is absolutely no question that we have now entered the "Crisis" phase.
-----------------

Augmented, this time, by high technology, with all of it's fellow travelers. Disease, weapons, mobility, etc.

Posted by: Mike Hammer,etc., etc. at August 23, 2014 12:45 PM (F2IAQ)

128 The Barrel has been denied another victim.
Posted by: rickl
-------------------------

Yeah..., but odor of the yawning barrel is strong in my nostrils.

Posted by: Mike Hammer,etc., etc. at August 23, 2014 12:46 PM (F2IAQ)

129 WeirdDave, I have been enjoying your series (as well as your gardening posts with Y-not). Hope there's more where that came from.

Posted by: Mindy at August 23, 2014 12:47 PM (5GUfM)

130 Meh. Headed down to the pharmacy lunch counter for a round of gossip, grilled cheese on rye, and too much coffee.

Posted by: Mike Hammer,etc., etc. at August 23, 2014 12:48 PM (F2IAQ)

131 Caliban, I would say that Conservatives recognize that competition is the way of the world and formulate our political theory recognizing that fact. Libs don't. While individual Libs may compete in specific circumstances, overall the Lib worldview is that everybody can have everything, IOW, Utopia. Ain't gonna happen on this Earth.

Posted by: Weirddave at August 23, 2014 12:49 PM (N/cFh)

132 Pakistan and India are shooting at each other and China is warning us to mind our own business. Heck of a job, Barky.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at August 23, 2014 12:52 PM (8MlTP)

133 There is absolutely no question that we have now entered the "Crisis" phase.

I forgot to mention that that means we are living in "interesting times".

Among fans of the book, there is some dispute over when the "Crisis" phase began. Some say 9/11; while others say that was much too early.

My opinion is that it kicked off with Obama's election in 2008, although I suppose you could just as well mark it with the financial collapse in the same year.

Nevertheless, we are definitely in it now, and will be for many years to come.

Posted by: rickl at August 23, 2014 12:53 PM (sdi6R)

134 Posted by: Weirddave at August 23, 2014 12:35 PM (N/cFh)

So plagiarism by proxy.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at August 23, 2014 12:55 PM (8MlTP)

135 "43 Blood For Blood - Ain't Like You/Wasted Youth

Listening to it now. Pretty much sums up how I feel a great deal of the time. NSFW language. http://tinyurl.com/nl47ywz

Posted by: Insomniac at August 23, 2014 11:34 AM (DrWcr) "

Thank You Insomniac. This song pretty much captures my mood since November of 2012.

And to think that in my foolish youth I was willing to die for my fellow Americans. What was I thinking?

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at August 23, 2014 12:57 PM (PD6iL)

136 Yes, that I can agree with. Aristotle (the first great conservative) describes politics in terms of naturally competing interests. Hence private property becomes very important in political theory, not because we love "the rich," but because property and property rights are proportional. That is, they have real limits.

Posted by: Caliban at August 23, 2014 12:57 PM (3GFMN)

137 123 Wut? Conservatism is synonymous with competition? That's silly. Conservatism is the desire to protect the values and social arrangements that already exist. Liberalism is the desire to escape from the perceived limitations of those values and arrangements to some undefined ideal state.

Posted by: Caliban at August 23, 2014 12:42 PM (3GFMN)

Part of the confusion is caused by the changing definitions of "conservative" and "liberal".

Two hundred years ago, a conservative wanted to protect the traditional privileges of the landed aristocracy, while a liberal promoted economic and political liberty, i.e. free market capitalism.

Posted by: rickl at August 23, 2014 01:02 PM (sdi6R)

138 As opposed to absolute "rights," which have no limits, and therefore lend themselves to tyranny.

Posted by: Caliban at August 23, 2014 01:02 PM (3GFMN)

139 Rickl--good one! and of course right on.

Posted by: Caliban at August 23, 2014 01:04 PM (3GFMN)

140 I was perusing Audible for new audiobooks and I think I've noticed a new literary genre, the ghey werewolf romance.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at August 23, 2014 01:04 PM (8MlTP)

141 A successful K-selected society invariably creates a world where r becomes the appropriate strategy, and thus it collapses, and the cycle begins anew. We are conservatives because we recognize that however nice things are in the US, however rich we are, however free, the trials and tribulations that we had to surmount to achieve the success are still out there, and they still demand the same response.

I always knew I became conservative because of this, even when I hadn't actually heard of the r/K theory. It was just a sense that we had become the heirs of hardworking parents who had left us vast, beautiful property and we were trashing the place. And that it can't last.

Posted by: CJ at August 23, 2014 01:05 PM (jbdp1)

142 As apt as this theory may be to rabbits and wolves, it doesn't seem to match the reality we have seen in the United States:
1. The 'r's are not breeding like rabbits. Birth control has skewed the normal 'r' results.
2. From an 18th/19th century European's point of view, America was the great green meadow waiting to be overrun with rabbits. What did it produce? A large, economically powerful middle class with solid 'K' values.

Maybe if you say we now have a Super-abundance of riches, exceeding the wildest dreams of anything else in human history, and the K values are fading, you have a point. But, the America of the 19th century was that great green meadow and it strengthened K values, it didn't diminish them.

I think the advent of birth control has a lot more to do with the fall of social mores than this theory does, though economic superabundance contributes to it for sure.

Posted by: Mark in Portland at August 23, 2014 01:07 PM (kbr2E)

143 139 Rickl--good one! and of course right on.
Posted by: Caliban at August 23, 2014 01:04 PM (3GFMN)

Thanks. And I could go on to say that today a conservative wants to protect the system of limited government and free market capitalism, while a liberal favors socially liberal policies like free love, abortion, and gay marriage.

But paradoxically, today's liberals also support centralized government economic policies which would return us to the days of hereditary nobility and landed aristocracy.

/Yeah, that cyclical theory of history is making more and more sense.

Posted by: rickl at August 23, 2014 01:09 PM (sdi6R)

144 Mark, I agree. The pill and penicillin changed everything and led to the devaluation of life. It is this value, not competition, that is at the heart of conservatism. However, WeirdDave seems to be constraining his discussion to the realm of political theory, where it makes much more sense.

Posted by: Caliban at August 23, 2014 01:12 PM (3GFMN)

145 Has anyone mentioned the snowshoe hare, lynx population cycle? The predator/prey relationship in the natural environment.

The prey animal, the rabbit, grows it's population until the environment can no longer sustain such a large population. The lynx population grows as the rabbit population grows. When the prey animals die off unexpectedly, the lynx starves.

Upon further review, #108 eman, has in fact already made this point.

Which needs to be repeated. The natural cycle of life includes catastrophic cataclysmic collapse. The malthusians believe that with superior intellect, this cycle can be eliminated, as do the keynesians and their faith in a central banking authority which will manage the business cycle.

They might be right, it could work, someday with the right people in charge.

Posted by: L. Anders at August 23, 2014 01:13 PM (itpbI)

146 America was the great green meadow waiting to be overrun with rabbits. What did it produce? A large, economically powerful middle class with solid 'K' values.

Really? There were no Indians, storms, wildlife or disease around? Our 19th century forefathers didn't have anything handed to them, they took it.

Posted by: Weirddave at August 23, 2014 01:13 PM (N/cFh)

147 142
1. The 'r's are not breeding like rabbits. Birth control has skewed the normal 'r' results.

Posted by: Mark in Portland at August 23, 2014 01:07 PM (kbr2E)

Ah, but the welfare state is definitely selecting for 'r's.

From an evolutionary point of view, baby momma Laqueesha and baby daddy Tyrone are far more successful than Mike and Sue in the suburbs.

Posted by: rickl at August 23, 2014 01:14 PM (sdi6R)

148 Interesting to see in the article that 'conservatives' embrace Darwin's theory of evolution, animal planet, and survival of the fittest.

Posted by: L. Anders at August 23, 2014 01:18 PM (itpbI)

149 Posted by: Mark in Portland at August 23, 2014 01:07 PM (kbr2E)

1. What are the r birth rates compared to K? I'm not sure. But I am certain they are higher than they normally should be, given the high rate of single-parenthood among r's.

2. That was the European view from Europe. The "abundance" may have been in natural resources, but not in government benefits or material goods.

Posted by: CJ at August 23, 2014 01:19 PM (jbdp1)

150 Lunchtime. Mmmm....two so-so tastes that taste great together, a McDonald's Filet-o-Fish and Orange Hi-C.

Posted by: Lincolntf at August 23, 2014 01:20 PM (2cS/G)

151 HOLY FUCK A B-17 JUST FLEW OVER AT LOW ALTITUDE.

Posted by: rickl at August 23, 2014 01:20 PM (sdi6R)

152 HOLY FUCK A B-17 JUST FLEW OVER AT LOW ALTITUDE.

--

It begins!

Posted by: CJ at August 23, 2014 01:23 PM (jbdp1)

153 I don't have time to read the book, but my initial reaction is to question the inevitability of the rabbit thing, and I certainly do not embrace the notion that neither is wrong, per se.

Posted by: BurtTC at August 23, 2014 01:24 PM (+wJB5)

154 Well, that made my weekend.

I'm speechless. I don't know of any air show in my area. I guess it was en route to one somewhere.

But it was real low, 1000' or less. I got to see it up close and personal. I was so startled I didn't think to look for markings.

Posted by: rickl at August 23, 2014 01:27 PM (sdi6R)

155 While this theory does make sense, I am of course, leery of putting to much weight on evolutionary theory.

Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) And father to be in 5 months! at August 23, 2014 11:35 AM (HDwDg)

The k and r patterns described in the post are not so much part of evolutionary theory as a description of a long-term, cyclical socioeconomic process when applied to human beings. The wolves and rabbits can be viewed as metaphorical in this context, I think.

Posted by: troyriser at August 23, 2014 01:27 PM (ptcFO)

156 Nobody hates the r-strategy group like the r-strategy group members.

Posted by: Last Night at August 23, 2014 01:35 PM (rCS6C)

157 Posted by: Weirddave at August 23, 2014 12:45 PM (N/cFh)

Meh, pretty deep problems with your logic, which pretty much proves that any particular shuffle of a deck of cards can't be real. It is after all, very improbable.

Such weak special pleading weakens that which it attempts to support.

Concern troll is concerned? No. Christianity's enemies commend it so strongly I can no longer ignore it. I'm being dragged kicking and screaming back to the faith. For which I suppose I should be grateful.

Check out John C. Wright's "The Logic of Illogic".

Posted by: phunctor at August 23, 2014 01:42 PM (rcLdR)

158 Just watched Bill Whittle's talk about r/k selection on YouTube. Very enlightening. And the first thing that popped into my head was:
Eloi and Morlock.
H.G. Wells was right.

Posted by: Rolf at August 23, 2014 01:47 PM (be0G3)

159 WeirdDave I just wanted to thank you for this awesome post....

Sven "Wolf" Olafson....

Aka Freeman Blonde Landowner II

Posted by: sven10077 at August 23, 2014 01:51 PM (/4AZU)

160 I've read Wright's essay, in fact I almost wrote another column on it prior to this one. I'm not sure, however, how my estimation of the likelihood of extremely long odds constitutes special pleading.

In any event, welcome back to the faith, we have punch and pie. And macaroni salads and fried chicken and potato salad and nine layer dip and wings and sausage and.....

Just stay away from the ludefisk that guy from Minnesota brought to the pot luck. That stuff's just nasty.

Posted by: Weirddave at August 23, 2014 01:53 PM (N/cFh)

161 If r = rabbits = libs then this proves what I've always known:
Bunnies are evil.

Posted by: Anya the Vengeance Demon at August 23, 2014 02:00 PM (GSIDW)

162 Another thought on the local self-government thing. Why do we embrace competition in the economic market place, but resist it in the social market place? Why must one size fit all?

Let the socialists have their town, the conservatives another, as long as the one cannot lay claim to the resources of the other. Let a thousand flowers bloom and let's see which attracts more people.

Posted by: Theodore Rex at August 23, 2014 02:14 PM (Pqbl5)

163 154 Your answer lies within: http://tinyurl.com/nwfox

Posted by: MAx at August 23, 2014 02:24 PM (b7yum)

164 killer rabbits ... lol. Monty Python KNEW.

So our founders were the true nature conservators ... limiting predatory government. Wolf populations were constrained, deer multiplied ... harmony existed ... for about one day.

But K men planned and waited to use the r stock as voters, because in this silly analogy, bunnies can vote out hawKs.

Holder/Lerner are K's, not bunnies. They use WMD's to destroy self reliant K's, who are the true "conservationists". They really need their own letters. SK's .. for subversive.

This is evident in "The Green Party", which disguise themselves as protectors of bunnies and slugs, but are truly just communists, aka organized crime with a government kicker.

Westerners think our society "evolved", yet China also evolved ... and most of the world is more like ISIS than fundamental America. Man "evolves" into animal nature for most of the world, but western society recognized a higher power, first with royal kings, but then with individuals answering directly to their God ... which only happened in government terms ... in America.

But diversity and communists are "devolving" that back to service to the king (putt) ... then down to raw power like ISIS.

Posted by: Illini Bill at August 23, 2014 02:25 PM (dUGqM)

165 Nood

Posted by: Y-not at August 23, 2014 02:29 PM (zDsvJ)

166 Meh, the need to ram everything through a star-shaped evolutionary hole in the block no matter how much hammering it takes makes me just feel tired all over. That said, there's a certain consistency to all human history, a conflict between construction and truth... and destruction and lies. Politics tends to be along these lines, and usually the division is distinct from parties and labels.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at August 23, 2014 03:02 PM (zfY+H)

167 I have a different theory of right left types, but it is consistent with this r-K stuff. My theory is that conservatives think frontwards, following reason and evidence to arrive at conclusions, while leftists think backwards, using "partial reason" (rational pursuit of a proximate goal that may not itself be rational) to construct the most effective case they can in support of preferred conclusions.

Backwards thinking confers manipulative advantage. That is its evolutionary asset, while it's evolutionary liability is that it creates divorce from reality. To locate reality you have to think frontwards, following reason and evidence, while making the most effective case for the conclusions that one assumes to be right or in one's interest means finding was to dismiss and evade contrary reason and evidence, creating ever increasing divorce from reality.

The more harshly reality impinges (the harsher the conditions of scarcity that lead to the evolution of the K type) the greater the liability of the left-wing backwards-thinking cognitive style, so this fits with the r-K evolutionary theory. Frontwards vs. backwards thinking just becomes an available mechanism for creating these different r and K types.

Of course the r type involves more than just backwards thinking. It also includes specific tendencies, for promiscuity vs. monogamy, etcetera, but frontwards vs. backwards does fit, and we can see it in action. There are endless examples of the left jumping at any excuse to dismiss contrary reason and evidence.

[Length warning: I'm going to go on for a bit here. If you are interested in the subject, don't miss this.]

Making the most effective case for preferred conclusions does not mean making the best case, where "best" is judged by making sense. Backwards thinkers are trying to AVOID making sense, wherever sense would lead them away from their presumptions about what is right, and the most effective way to avoid making sense is to not engage in rational argument at all. They aren't going to fight where their opponents have the advantage.

Instead they stick to the realm of demagoguery, and sink further and further into it as their growing divorce from reality progresses. It is impossible to rationally engage a leftist. They just won't do it. No matter how much CAPACITY for rationality they possess they will only direct those rational faculties to the partially rational objective of AVOIDING making sense.

Where this complementary theory suggests an important revision to the stand-alone r-K theory is on the subject of loyalty. Frontward thinking Ks are loyal to the larger group, defined by the moral accomplishments that frontwards thinking leads to, like our system of liberty. Backwards thinking rabbits are loyal to those other backwards thinking rabbits who share their presumptions about what is right. Their goal is securing manipulative advantage vis-a-vis the larger whole.

We are all familiar with the leftist take on share of pie vs. size of pie. They are about maximizing their share of the pie and are heedless about their impact on the size of the pie. Thinking about the size of the pie is an archetypical "conservative" concern, while the left is all about getting pie away from those they accuse of having too much while scoffing at the idea that the pie shrinks when takers are successful in grabbing from makers. That is just conservative rhetoric. We don't want to hear none of your mansplaining!

When evolutionary biologists argue about the impossibility of altruism evolving they are looking at the behavior of the backwards thinkers who are focused on increasing their share of the pie (the gene pool in a population biology analysis) regardless of the impact on the size of the pie (whether the species goes extinct). So long as they are increasing as a share of the gene pool, they will dominate the species gene pool, even if their dominance runs the species into the ground (and species go extinct all the time).

The altruism-can't-evolve theory fails once the human being's open ended faculties of intelligence come on the scene. People who think frontwards are able to cooperate on the basis of a shared understanding right and wrong that their understanding motivates them to abide by and enforce. They are able, for instance, to establish systems of law and even institutions of liberty that distinguish the takers from the makers and throw the takers into prison or the grave. That is what all modern legal systems did until fifty years ago when the Democrats started using them to empower the takers against the makers.

Nature's two basic strategies for how to get by in the world are 1) be productive or b) steal from the productive, and the systems of law that were able to greatly enhance human prosperity (think of the Ten Commandments) achieved this effect by harshly punishing the takers.

For the genes for this behavior (cooperation on the basis of moral understanding) to increase in proportion in the gene pool the individual actors do not have to directly advance their own genes. They just need to advance the genes of the subset of people that share their moral understanding, whether their moral behavior is produced by the same genes or by an entirely different set of genes. Each moral persons behavior will advance the genes of all other moral people, with the result that all such genes increase in proportion in the gene pool vis a vis those genes that fail to produce moral individuals.

The ascendance of the moral population is synergistic with the ascendence of the systems of law they create, systematically protecting makers from takers and putting takers in the ground, making it more and more advantageous to be a maker, leading to an increasing preponderance of makers and an increasing backing for moral systems of law that suppress takers.

What has blocked this moral progress in the modern age. The r-K theory is compelling here. Yeah. As prosperity increases the reality-challenged downside to backwards thinking does not bite as hard, allowing it manipulative advantage to come to the fore.

Open ended faculties of intelligence, with the capacity for moral understanding, opens up a new avenue of evolution, but the old ones remain. We obviously still have lots of takers it isn't that they don't show loyalty and cooperation. That is something that r-K theory gets wrong. Powered by the mechanism of backwards thinking, they are powerful cooperators, just at a lower level. They don't cooperate on the basis of a moral understanding of what is right for everyone. They cooperate on the basis of sub-group manipulative advantage vis a vis the larger population.

A final note: the seeking of manipulative advantage is the characteristic female vice. This is why our now quite radically leftist Democratic Party slants considerably female.

The characteristic male vice is aggressive violence and the great white male achievement of the modern world is the securing of systems of liberty that are able to keep the characteristic male vice in check. But these institutions were not prepared for the ascendance of the female vice. They were not prepared for the very challenging manipulative power of backwards thinking.

There is always another battle to be fought and this is the battle of our time. Frontwards thinking overcame the male vice, now it has to overcome the female vice, which just happens to be the diametric opposite of frontwards thinking.

Reaching the maturity of a very accomplished career, Sherlock now faces his Moriarty, his toughest challenge yet.

Posted by: Alec Rawls at August 23, 2014 03:40 PM (kTTUz)

168 "...the seeds of their downfall were sown by their success, because as they grew great, they created a society of abundance, which demands an r-selected strategy for success. Remember, neither strategy is wrong, they are just different answers to different environments."

But when the society falls, it is under this r-selected "strategy for success". How can this be called a strategy for success when it inevitably leads to failure? It is no survival at all.

The failure, then, must lie in the transition from k-selected to r-selected; that is, the failure occurs in the diminution of k-selected survival, and r-selected is merely a term for a stage of that passing away. To say that r-selected is not wrong is to concede that any and every society must necessarily pass away. That History has shown that to be the case does not make it a fundamental truth about society.

Posted by: I lurk, therefore I amn't at August 23, 2014 03:53 PM (cr0Pu)

169 I'll try to make this short and readable.

Political theory is, to most people, the most boring of subjects. But politics is the way that people, in groups, act.

Foundational to the US is its Constitution. The foundation of the Constitution is the Bible. At the Constitutional Convention in 1787, the delegates quoted the Bible more than any other single document. Interestingly, the SECOND most quoted document was a book that has now faded into obscurity, but whose importance to the thinking behind the Constitution cannot be overstated. It bears on current politics and social commentary and makes clear any discussion of liberal and conservative viewpoints.

That book is Rex Lex: or The Law and the Prince. Fortunately it is readable for free at http://www.constitution.org/sr/lexrex.htm (which should also indicate its importance). Here is the first 3 paragraphs from its introduction:

The title, Lex, Rex, is a play on the words that conveys the meaning the law is king. When theologian Samuel Rutherford published the book in 1644, on the eve of the revolutions that rocked the English nation from 1645 through 1688, it caused a sensation, and provoked a great deal of controversy. It is ostensibly an argument for limited monarchy and against absolute monarchy, but its arguments were quickly perceived as subversive of monarchy altogether, and in context, we can perceive that it provided a bridge between the earlier natural law philosophers and those who would further develop their ideas: the Leveller movement and such men as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Algernon Sidney, which laid the basis for the American Republic.

This book has long been undeservedly neglected by scholars, probably because it is written as a polemic in the political and sectarian controversies that are distasteful to later generations, and many of its references are somewhat obscure, but a closer reading reveals how it laid the foundation for the contractarian and libertarian ideas that came to be embodied in the U.S. Declaration of Independence and Constitution.

Rutherford's main idea is that in the politic realm the real sovereign is the people, and that all officials, including monarchs, are subject to the rule of law, a phrase Rutherford uses only once, in Question 26, "Whether the King be above the Law or no", but this is the book that developed the contrast between the rule of law and the rule of men. He does not use the term social contract, but does develop the earlier idea of covenant in a way that leads naturally to the idea of the social contract. He also develops the idea of a separation of powers between legislative (nomothetic), executive (monarchic), and judicial functions, in a way that they can balance one another, in a mixed constitutional order that combines the best features of monarchic, aristocratic, and democratic forms of government.

Posted by: Geekasaurus at August 23, 2014 03:58 PM (P9M3r)

170 Hmmm... The US Constitution is, fundamentally, a k-selection enforcement document. No wonder the liberals hate it so much.

Posted by: Rolf at August 23, 2014 04:40 PM (be0G3)

171
I love this. However, it is the oldest story in the book, as well as being the oldest story in The Book.
The pendulum swings, yin/yang, you can't have r without the K and vice versa. What came first, the r or the K?
Should you believe in the creator, then it would seem that r came first; blessed with abundance and beauty the inherently flawed beingswere poor stewards of their good fortuneand thus began the momentum that swings the pendulum back and forth.
Perhaps the answer to the questions is; that's just the way it is. (h/t Bruce Hornsby)

Posted by: missbosslady at August 23, 2014 04:44 PM (Q4EF7)

172 Pardon me, but this post is complete junk.

For a man who claims to have read GK Chesterton, I am a bit surprised to see this tripe.

The unified theory is the Fall.

This r/K stuff presumes a humanity lacking free will, an argument you buy into because either a) Your philosophical (theological) background does not allow for it or because b) You have succumbed to the Statist arguments and Statists constantly rail against the concept (like religion, it is an inconvenience standing in the way of "progress").

But it all falls apart when you argue r behavior provides an evolutionary advantage in times or environments of plenty.

It does not.

Not for humans.

The only people reproducing now are Transcendents (those who believe in God and are otherwise "K oriented"). Secular liberals elect to be childless by contracepting, aborting, or foregoing relationships where child-rearing is likely.

Those children they do have are doomed to misery and failure. Single parent homes are the single leading indicator of a LIFETIME of POVERTY. Their offspring tend to be less educated, less stable and less capable of dealing with hardship in life.

The children of Transcendents, on the other hand, are on the opposite end of the spectrum. That demographic trend is why colleges are becoming more and more favorable towards religion -- the children of the successful families are moving on to be successful people.

You contradict yourself by pointing out the behaviors between r and K are a matter of choice regardless of the environment. But you deceive yourself by positing moral equivalency for sets of actions that can be judged to be amoral.

The problem with libertarianism is it sees morality as just another choice among the many humans make, like ice cream or shoes. Truly moral people do not "prey" on the weak.

Posted by: StubbleSpark at August 23, 2014 06:01 PM (rNJd3)

173 First heaven and earth ended (just Bible philosophy)

THEN, after dinosaurs and early man, Bible says here comes 2nd heaven and earth ... adam and eve (third one is where righteousness supposedly will dwell) ... r'Eve was deceived by evil, Adam was not deceived but chose to follow her rather than obey K'God.

Adam was K, Eve was r ... he was in the garden, so voted for sexy r, but that resulted in mankind being kicked out of the garden. The cycle?

Posted by: Illini Bill at August 23, 2014 06:08 PM (dUGqM)

174 hello world

Posted by: bestie21 at August 24, 2014 08:26 AM (qifmL)

175
StubbleSpark (@172):

THANK YOU. I was getting ready to comment, then read yours, and realized you'd already expressed my thoughts perfectly.

Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at August 24, 2014 09:58 PM (afLO3)

Processing 0.02, elapsed 0.0296 seconds.
14 queries taking 0.0099 seconds, 183 records returned.
Page size 124 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.