It turns out that plants are tribalists too. They favor their genetically closest relatives with more light, more root space, and more flowering. It is as if nature fixes traits by producing them and then implementing a stable level of inbreeding to ensure that they stick around. In other words, because plants are tribalist — classist, racist, probably sexist — they are able to retain good traits (something conservatives would admire) instead of adding traits at random (which liberals might appreciate). Nature has a conservative bias.
A brief history of American taxation: the tax was first adopted for ten years during the Civil War in order to fund the Union armies. It came back in 1916 in order to fund WW1, and by the 1930s had become progressive taxation:
The movement toward progressive taxation of wealth and of income has accompanied the growing diversification and interrelation of effort which marks our industrial society. Wealth in the modern world does not come merely from individual effort; it results from a combination of individual effort and of the manifold uses to which the community puts that effort. The individual does not create the product of his industry with his own hands; he utilizes the many processes and forces of mass production to meet the demands of a national and international market.
During the 1930s, a time when most of our intellectuals were Communists or at least Left-leaning following the great upheaval after the first world war, tax rates were high but also occurred at different “brackets” or levels, with the highest serving to equalize the taxes paid among the richest citizens despite vast differences in income. The American government freely admitted that its goal was to end “unjust concentration of wealth and economic power” and “inherited economic power.” In other words, we drank the socialist kool-aide.
Over the next five decades, tax rates remained high; from the 1930s-1970s, top tax brackets paid between seventy and ninety percent of their income in taxes. However, since these were income taxes, they did not affect any wealth converting into holdings such as ownership of a business. One funny thing is how high taxes correlated with recessions: the tax was introduced in 1926, with a recession hitting three years later, and then intensified in the 1930s, at which point we came out of a war with high income potential and then taxed it into oblivion to produce recessions in the late 1950s, early 1970s, and early 1980s.
In other words, Ocasio-Cortez proposes nothing new; she hopes to do what Leftists always have done once given power, which is to raise taxes, “prime the pump” with stimulus/entitlements spending, and therefore create demand for our currency. This produces a brief boost and then a decade later, a huge crash, but in the meantime, Ocasio-Cortez and her allies will have made themselves into millionaires many times over.
The “yellow vests” represent an intermediate point in the disassembly of Leftism in the West: they realize that globalist implementation of the Leftist agenda has made them broke and taxed to death, but they cannot yet conceptualize any solution outside having government step in and fix everything. The conservative solution takes some years, but works best. We would simply abolish government, replace it with natural leaders like kings and follow natural law, then let the courts and markets do the rest. We would re-orient society toward the good, the beautiful, and the true and get it off of the treadmill of trying to find an outer reason for inner goodness; we must simply discover that inner goodness and get on with finding ways to implement it. In the meantime, we need to rediscover self-reliance, because dependency on government and jobs has made us weak. France needs to cut spending on entitlements in order to have a healthy economy again, and if the “yellow vests” have an Achilles’ Heel, it is that they seem to be demanding more of those same entitlements as a solution to the problems caused by entitlements spending.
People freak out over poster that says that binge drinking by women “leads to reckless sexual intercourse with strangers, disorders in menstrual cycles and pregnancies.” Since it is taboo to mention that this might be true, instead people want to use little categories like “sexist” as a way to deflect from the vital question of whether this is true or not. In reality, it turns out to not only be true, but to reflect the unique abilities of women and thus the unique risks they face and corresponding concerns that they will have. However, that offends the “I can do anything I want without social disapproval” mentality of the herd, so it must be burned, destroyed, concealed, censored, erased, confined, or made illegal.
Leftists have finally realized that we have seen behind the curtain, realized that Leftism and its programs are a scam that will terminate our society, and are now heading the other direction. This means a society in which Leftists are useless, and one cannot get a leg up by having the politically correct opinion and talking endlessly in a flat monotone about sexism, racism, homophobia, Islamophobia, veganism, and other neurotic fixations that Baby Boomers and Millennials like to bleat about. Leftists realize that America is over for them, and so more of them “said in 2017 and again in 2018 that they would like to permanently move to another country,” but that is as sincere as the braying of the Hollywood neurotics who said they would expatriate if Trump was elected.
Women and men think differently. Men look for a big picture “shape” to an issue and figure out what sort of position that should be in so that the best result occurs, and then align the details. Women figure out all the details and see what they seem to indicate, and then assume that this is the shape of events. Bureaucracy rewards detail-oriented to an extreme as well as rule-following, and women excel at these; at the same time, men are seeing that this society has become so far Leftist that it is hostile to people who are naturally strong, intelligent, or good and instead has chosen small-minded people who need external power in order to feel important. Our entire society has Napoleon syndrome. Women benefit first, although this simply means that they will be identified with the incompetence of the system in coming years.
67% of EU citizens who took a poll claim they support the EU. But who are these people? Are they natural leaders of humankind, or people who show up at repetitive jobs that they do in a mediocre way? Are they geniuses, wizards, warriors, artisans, and artists, or just people who attend everyday jobs at which they are told what to do, with no understanding of the business or management models, and whose aptitude is limited to a short range of tasks? Are they on the left side of the bell curve, or the right? Are they aware of their limitations, or yet more people without particular talents who think they are geniuses who should rule the world? In the last century, we counted warm bodies, and we got cold heaps of bodies as a result; in the next century, we might count minds.
The far-Right is mostly aligned toward getting rid of foreign immigration from the third world at this point, and has reached some sort of balance with its Jews, most of whom are starting to see how the 1930s Germans could react so violently to the presence of foreign blood among them.
The number caught is low; who knows what the actual number is. However, when you send strong signals of “no free stuff here for you” and people see pictures of refugees living in filthy tent cities, the illusion of an easier life in the West becomes revealed for the hollow picture that it is and people stay home as a result. Amplify the ire to focus it toward diversity, affirmative action, and civil rights and more of the people who have been there for a long time will self-repatriate.
The Baby Boomers were promised pensions and other entitlements that added up to more than society could afford. Panicking, the Left imported the third world, hoping to tax them and use that money to pay for the entitlements of the past generation (not to mention the benefit that third world groups all vote Leftist). This ended in disaster because it pushed the problems of diversity to a tipping point and showed ordinary Europeans a large group of resentful, violent, and indolent refugees who were living on tax money while ordinary citizens were at jobs feeling the pain of high taxes and the high costs that those high taxes on others and businesses then produced. Teetering near the edge of revolution, the bureaucrats backed down for now, and are currently trying to slap a band-aid on the problem as quietly as possible, when the only real solution is nationalism, or deporting everyone but those of the founding ethnicity in every nation.
A vote for a second referendum on Brexit was only attended by a third the number of people that was officially claimed, according to an assessment after the fact. This is typical. The Left always inflates its numbers, sometimes by hilariously huge multipliers, and uses those numbers to claim that it is “popular” in the hope of hoodwinking more aimless modern people into following along and cowing the others into just letting the Left have its way. It seems that its old methods are not working as well anymore.
Everyone obeys diversity; no one likes diversity. When people are asked to defend diversity, conversation turns to food because diversity offers nothing tangible or intangible to us. It offers only ideological obedience: we are doing the right thing to advance equality, and soon we will live in Utopia. We are going to that promised land! In the meantime, in Australia, two groups of different diverse minorities attacked each other, and so the far Right protested to show just how ridiculous the farce of diversity has become. Every normal person, not wanting to get fired from their job and thus thrown out of their housing and becoming homeless and friendless on the path to dying alone, avoided looking at the spectacle and instead hurried on their way. They will vote for more diversity, too, because they fear that the vote is not secret. They will talk about how great the ethnic restaurants are. You can no more oppose diversity than you could oppose the Party in 1970s Russia.
Unintentionally, perhaps, Israel is making the case for reparations-with-repatriation: compensate minority groups for the error of diversity before sending them on to their homelands since this makes both parties whole. Likely this amount will be negotiated in the case of Israel versus the Arab countries, but it will give Israel a boost of cash as it attempts to make its economy central to the region.
Suffering from an excess of bad DNA and people who are inactive or otherwise prone to illness, the socialized healthcare system in the UK decides to beat up on people who have a few pints a week or smoke a pack of cigarettes instead. Right now, they claim it will be problem drinkers and smokers, but those categories will expand rapidly so that they can exclude as many people from regular care as possible with the excuse that they did not follow their anti-alcohol or anti-smoking treatment regimen. The NHS cannot possibly remain solvent; it is the reason, after all, that the UK imported so many third world nurses. It could hire them at lower rates and thus stay solvent longer. Now, however, even that has failed, and the system is careening toward a crash, leading its management to want to lose as many patients as possible.
Never Free. That is what you must remember about diversity: you will never be free of it. Civil Rights law makes diversity the gateway to more free stuff; if you can just prove that you were harmed somehow by inequality of any kind, you can then demonstrate that someone else who has money “owes” it to you. This means that as long as affirmative action and civil rights laws are on the books, and as long as we have diversity, there will be constant instances of “oppression” and “discrimination” which siphon away your wealth, energy, and time every day. Even if in tiny drips, the bleeding will eventually weaken you to the point where all you can do is keep up the appearance of being effective. Oh wait, that is where we are now. Diversity: we are Never Free, and we will never be free of this constant harassment, until we end it.
Crowdism is a social movement caused by unspoken conformity in the drive toward total equality, no matter how insane the steps to that Utopia are. It makes it necessary to deny the obvious and real and replace them with the politically correct. This ends in disaster every time, but before it does, the group gets to “feel” at one with each other which makes them all believe they are safe from social disapproval and therefore doing well, even if this fear has become a substitute for the need to accomplish anything creative or affirmative.
Nearly half of Americans identify immigration as a top priority for the coming year. They probably have doubts about the wall itself because of the huge media Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (F.U.D.) campaign against it, but they are concerned about immigration, in part because they have seen how cracking down on immigration and diversity has brought immediate rewards to the economy, more stable social life, less racial violence in the news, and more of a sense of a direction for the country.
The internet is a perfect metaphor for Crowdism. On the internet, you can be anyone you want to be, but that is only “real” when reflected in the eyes of others, so you must flatter those others in order to have them support your vision of yourself. In the same way, with egalitarianism, you get individualism but only at the price of supporting it through others, so your individualism depends on their support so soon you find yourself in a type of cult where you must do what makes them happy in order to avoid having them turn on you. Naturally people become depressed, starting with the most vulnerable, because they have been groomed into joining an abusive group and now cannot find a way to escape the cycle.