A few years ago we were living in a Fukuyamaian World. Everywhere was either a liberal democracy or, supposedly, on the road to becoming a liberal democracy. Individual rights, female liberation, gay empowerment were on the march, and we were all set to become pleasure nodes in the giant consumeristic network that would span every inch of the globe.
In other terms, we were on the road to becoming a monoculture in societal, economic, and political terms.
In other terms, we were on the road to becoming a monoculture in societal, economic, and political terms.
Thank god that didn't happen! I don't say that for the typical gay reasons that soybeard-wearing, incel, trad freaks on the dissident right say it; namely because they have some total fantasy about living in a cave, eating mammoth steaks and marrying a "trad wife;" but for the much more practical reason that having only one model of political organisation greatly increases the fragility of the total system.
If every tree in the forest is a Dutch Elm, what happens when Dutch Elm Disease arrives? The answer, going by the facts, is that you lose practically all your trees. (In the UK this killed off well over 90% of Dutch Elm Trees.)
Likewise if every state in the World is a Liberal Democracy, what happens when LibDem Disease strikes? Yes, civilisation goes down the civilisational plughole and mankind practically becomes extinct.
But, isn't the whole point of Liberal Democracy that it is the "best" system, able to outcompete all other systems, who are, in sense, "genetically" inferior to this "supreme" product of the historical survival struggle?
Yes, except it isn't. Liberal democracies have severe flaws, as any glance at demographic figures will tell you. To be precise, the problem is deeply inherent in the liberal part and the democratic part, and the tendency they have to "privatise profits" and "socialise costs," especially in the demographic sphere.
The "privatising profits" part is people "living their best lives" while the "socialising costs" part is the shitty rate of natural replacement that this invariably causes (less than 1.5 TFR at present) as people marry late or not at all and stop at one kid or two, after ticking the "maternity lifetime achievement" box.
The "privatising profits" part is people "living their best lives" while the "socialising costs" part is the shitty rate of natural replacement that this invariably causes (less than 1.5 TFR at present) as people marry late or not at all and stop at one kid or two, after ticking the "maternity lifetime achievement" box.
Another way to view it is as a "free rider" problem, as in "I don't need all that hassle of having kids, someone else can do it for me," even if that person is currently living in a Calcutta or Lagos slum. (Don't worry, ineffectually moaning about immigration and being manipulated by populist scumbag politicians will help you come to terms with this too.)
So, yes, Liberal Democracy is a bit like Dutch Elm Trees, just like Roman Imperialism was like Dutch Elm Trees 2000 years ago, which is how we got the Dark Ages in the West.
Now, the solution for a fragile monoculture is a resilient polyculture.
In political terms, it means not every country being a Liberal Democracy or trying to head in that direction. If we are to solve the demographic crisis that is effecting the world, right now the chances are that it will not come from a Liberal Democracy, but from some other society. And just so nobody is tempted to say something stupid that looks like this...
...by solving the demographic crisis, I mean a healthy TFR, not importing more of those lovable Somalians.
In political terms, it means not every country being a Liberal Democracy or trying to head in that direction. If we are to solve the demographic crisis that is effecting the world, right now the chances are that it will not come from a Liberal Democracy, but from some other society. And just so nobody is tempted to say something stupid that looks like this...
Disgusting parasite demographics as pushed by The Economist
...by solving the demographic crisis, I mean a healthy TFR, not importing more of those lovable Somalians.
If you're a cleverer than average Libtard, you might say that it's not just "Dutch Elm Trees" that are infected, but the whole forest. After all, all the other species seem to be infected as well. Iran's Islamic Republic entered negative demographics soon after the Ayatollahs took over, then how about Fascisto-communist China? China's TFR is approximately 1.0 to 1.2 children per woman right now (and they might even be lying), while Iran's TFR is approximately 1.6 to 1.7.
Not that different from Lib Dem America and Europe, so why not just have the freedom?
Not that different from Lib Dem America and Europe, so why not just have the freedom?
But the difference here is that we all know that non-Liberal Democratic societies are much more likely to impose radical solutions that are not available to a Liberal Democratic West.
In the case of Iran, this may be delayed by regime weakness caused by decades of sanctions by the Liberal Democratic West (and war); and China may be too massive to nimbly adapt to the challenges that Liberal Democratic societies can't even dream about making.
In the case of Iran, this may be delayed by regime weakness caused by decades of sanctions by the Liberal Democratic West (and war); and China may be too massive to nimbly adapt to the challenges that Liberal Democratic societies can't even dream about making.
However, if we look at other, smaller examples, we can see that geopolitical diversity offers some hope. Israel is usually lumped in as a "Liberal Democracy," but if it still is, it is a Theocratic-Fascisto Liberal Democracy. Right now its TFR is estimated at around 2.85 to 2.95.
Then perhaps the most interesting example is North Korea, the last state that anyone would ever want to live in, but look at how well their tyrannical collectivist ethos is standing up compared to their southern neighbours, who fully signed up to the Faustian bargain of Western-style liberal democracy.
Right now North Korean TFR is approximately 1.76 to 1.80 children per woman, while its ethnically and racially identical southern twin won't exist soon at approximately 0.75 children per woman. How’s that for twin studies?
Yes, due to a little geopolitical diversity, North Korea has more than double the TFR of South Korea, and, if the North Korean government wanted to, it could probably shoot this up to 2.5 or even 3; whereas a Liberal Democracy, like South Korea, attempting to do this would merely embarrass itself and undergo a change of government.
Yes, due to a little geopolitical diversity, North Korea has more than double the TFR of South Korea, and, if the North Korean government wanted to, it could probably shoot this up to 2.5 or even 3; whereas a Liberal Democracy, like South Korea, attempting to do this would merely embarrass itself and undergo a change of government.
Of course, North-Korean-style Monarcho-Communism with Stalinist characteristics is not such an appetising choice, but the key point is that it—along with the also unappealing Israeli Liberal Theocratic Fascism—represents geopolitical divergence from the Elm forest of Liberal Democracy that Francis Fukuyama wanted us all to live in.
Once the principle is established that diversity, in a geopolitical and demographic context, is a good thing, then there is a green light to allow other experiments to flourish and to create political templates that can survive the global demographic Winter without destroying everything else that is good in human civilisation.
The trees that survive in the geopolitical forest of the future will need to have a strong collectivist element, at least in the way in which they organise their demographic health.
___________________________________
Colin Liddell is the Chief Editor of Neokrat and the author of Interviews & Obituaries, a collection of encounters with the dead and the famous. Support his work by buying his book here (USA), here (UK), and here (Australia), or by taking out a paid subscription on his Substack.
Follow on Twitter and Bluesky
Follow on Twitter and Bluesky
No comments:
Post a Comment
All Comments MUST include a name (either real or sock). Also don't give us an easy excuse to ignore your brilliant comment by using "shitposty" language.