Posts Tagged ‘children’

Career Women Learn That Time Will Beat Hubris

Tuesday, July 11th, 2017

When we speak of natural order, we are talking about an active pattern, or series of mathematical or logical interactions, that provide invisible structure to our world. This natural order has one warrior so fearsome that none successfully challenge him.

Who is this mighty warrior? J.R.R. Tolkien offers us a clue in The Hobbit.

This thing all things devours:
Birds, beasts, trees, flowers;
Gnaws iron, bites steel;
Grinds hard stones to meal;
Slays king, ruins town,
And beats high mountain down.

Tolkien uses a slick piece of narrative for Bilbo to get this one right. The answer, of course, is time. Bilbo Baggins succeeds by accidentally by yelling “Time!” the way Chris Webber accidentally called time out in an infamous college basketball game.

Sometimes life just steers us all in the right direction despite our own bumbling ineptitude. Other times, we end up like Chris Webber. This generally results from one major character flaw: hubris. Nobody since Oedipus does hubris like feminists.

But time is the stronger force, and feminists and all who have followed them are losing to time. Heat Street explains the existential angst of the “selfish career woman” below.

While it’s commonplace for snooty, liberal academics to blame men for every misery to betide humanity, boffins at Yale have taken this sexist blame-game to absurd new heights. They are claiming that modern men are too stupid – or “feel threatened by their success” – to date 30-something “selfish career women,” who are increasingly having to freeze their eggs until they meet men they deem worthy of siring their children.

Reasonable intellects can argue over whether these women are selfish, irresolute, or simply misled concerning the gravity of the life choices they were making. What is not up for debate is the fact that the old Michelob ads telling them “you can have it all” were lies. You can’t have it all, I can’t have it all and the Man on the Moon can’t have it all.

What each of us can have is that which we want more than anything else. If you really commit, go all in, and keep focused until it happens, you can probably achieve one great or significant goal in life. But now the vile hate truth kicks in. You, I and that dude up on the moon all have limitations.

Those are both general and specific. There are not enough hours in a day; this rules us all. But on a more personal level, if you have the natural physical grace of Michael Jordan, you are not going to have the g-loaded IQ of Michael Faraday. Even if you have both, you are going to have to decide which one gets the time and attention that will make you either genius or champion.

These limitations lead to stories such as the sad tale of a professional woman in England who never really understood that she had to pay her nickel and make her choice.

I never really yearned for a baby – until it seemed as if it might not happen. In my twenties, I was too busy travelling around the world for my career in overseas aid. I loved my job, and I always assumed babies would happen when I met someone.

Then the relentless and remorseless hand of time began to walk this woman down like a bounty hunter loose in the deserts of forevermore…

It was well before the wedding that we started trying for a baby. But after a couple of years, I was lurching towards 40 and still sitting in airport lounges. It was only then that I began to really long for a child. It began as a rising panic that I would never feel that love, never hold a small hand in mine and walk to the park to feed the ducks. My husband felt the longing just as keenly.

It turned out better for this woman than for many others I have known. She got her two kids and now ages gracefully as they become teenagers and will soon set off to be wards of the state somewhere. But there are so many sad stories this article doesn’t go into. Stories people who are younger versions of this poor woman need to hear. I would almost run out of fingers and need to remove a shoe if I were sadistic enough to count the number of older women I have known who tried to get pregnant in their late 30s or early 40s who wound up miscarrying or giving birth under the agony of c-section.

Life consists of trade-offs. Just as nature is composed of forces in balance, time requires that we choose one path to the exclusion of all other paths. We can either have a super-successful family or a super-killer career. A woman who settles with a man of honor and decency, and then bears her young in the flower of her youth will be statistically very unlikely to ever need the services of an IVF clinic. She will probably succeed in natural childbirth that requires an epidural at worst. She will also probably never get anywhere near the bigshot corner office at the law firm (or whatever useless NGO provides “overseas aid,” a government boondoggle of epic proportions).

That goes for the man in the relationship as well. Practicalities such as home prices in competitive urban centers and the time required to be a father to a young boy instead of just a sperm donor will require the truly-engaged dad to give up on that same corner office. This gives us yet another Hate Truth. Our leaders are too often short-term thinkers who couldn’t care less about the lives of the children that they do not personally have.

The death of the West comes from existential misery associated with “doing the right thing.” What society wants you to do is paradoxical to what you need to do. Many, who would produce great and outstanding children who could lead us to greatness tomorrow, take themselves out of the game today because there are not enough hours in the day to both “succeed” and succeed at biology. At that point our hubris is punished, and we die out from being too clever and not intelligent enough in our choice of social order.

Children of Humanity

Wednesday, March 22nd, 2017

by D.A.R.G.

I. Children are the Future

As with most slogans that are thrown around nowadays, the idea that “the children are our future” is understood in all its implications by a tiny minority only; the rest not takes it as a pretty-sounding phrase unblinkingly, as a rule and expecting someone else to lead them or do something about it. This is no different than with other things, except that, in modern times common people not only want to be told what they should do, but they also want to have their “rights” (whatever they feel they are entitled to, which more often than not is caprice).

In the West, children are thought as little new automatons who must be indoctrinated in the right way, as per the myth of the blank slate and equality, so that they grow up knowing how to self-indulge in the proper ways. Freedom is not so much a reality as an afterthought and a fantasy dangled in front of everyone long enough so as to entrance them, only to then continue to ask for subservience. So is the child reared with the concepts of liberty, free will and conscientiousness while he is taught to be afraid of nature and to run into the arms of social norms made specially to nurture and foster delusions.

In the East, children are thought as beasts of burden for their parents, their ancestors and society as a whole. Fetishists of the Far East will often look upon this as wisdom, when in practice what it really means is the perpetual enslavement of humanity in the service of the ideology of civilization and order: a metaphysical and cultural totalitarianism. Rest is reserved only for those who have done their duty, and it may only be truly found in old age after a person has gone through a life of unblinking and mindless toiling in terror of not having enough for old age. Some may say something similar happens in the West, but they know little of how intense and to what degree this permeates Far Eastern culture.

In truth, children should thought as neither little automatons to be programmed or as the workers that should maintain the delusions of society. They are neither the means to the future nor the inhabitants of said future, but rather the future itself. It all may sound like a lot of meaningless word-flinging, but when thinking about each of these concepts, the reader will find that they imply very different things. Furthermore, when seen under a holistic light that examines the causes of problems beyond the sphere of human social concerns, considering children as the future in themselves moves us away from ideology and into a more open-minded problem solving mode that sees them as part of larger natural system on which they are dependent as inhabitants and not as owners with “rights.”

The Family as a Means to Happiness

One of the greatest tragedies of modern thought is the ignorant, egocentric and solipsistic idea that the highest good for a human being is the search for happiness above anything else. The only condition is that the person should not directly cause any harm to any other human being (animals do not matter to these people, in general, or the rest of the planet so long as they can keep extracting what they want from it); I say “directly” because such people refuse to see beyond their noses when considering the impact of their decisions over the natural system as a whole. Who cares if society as a whole has already burdened the planet to the extreme with an overpopulation asking for more and more, I still have the right to create more human beings because that will make me happy, right?

The capricious production of children to fill ego voids creates adverse situations in an era when humans have shielded themselves from the ways nature has of controlling population. These impede the ideal or proper rearing of children themselves, bringing them to an overcrowded and unnatural world to live in the temporal comfort and delusion of modern human urban life. Not is life lived by and for material things that do not matter, but the real, the universe itself, is regularly ignored or thought of as a background to the ‘reality’ of human self-absorbed consumption and comfort at the expense of everything else.

What is worse, the stupidity of the de facto “right to reproduction” has gone so far as to tacitly encourage the spread and proliferation of genetic defects. To be fair, this is one of the side-effects of civilization itself as it shields humans from the consequences of poor breeding and excessive survival. You can see, for instance, the degenerate state of the general Chinese population that probably comes as a result of too-long a time as a surviving civilization: what in the West are considered genetic defects (limbs of considerably different lengths, cross-eyes and considerable impairment of eyesight, and more) are the norm among the Chinese.

Civilization in its softening aspects and Crowdism is entirely to blame, and only a drastically more conscientious approach to how we handle our long mis-used power can make for it.

The family as the nucleus of human society must have a transcendental goal whose focus must be the holistic health of all. That is, none of the reasons why it is started or why rules are implemented should be separate from a consideration of their ultimate effect in the long run; this probably requires a wise leader to be in charge, and a certain degree of empirical knowledge of psychology and biology.

Tradition as a Means of Conscious Evolution

In the interest of pushing forth an idea that is both new, and yet old as well, we can propose a way of treating the family, children, nurture and heredity that may yield better results than the blind goose chase for “happiness” has shown. Having understood that forming families is not without heavy consequence in the environment, the community and the future of the human world as a whole, anyone with the courage and interest in striving towards the better should acknowledge the need for some manner of control, even if the words “breeding” and “eugenics” are too emotionally charged for them at this time.

Setting the bases for a Tradition or culture for a new human being, we could start by saying that whatever the teachings are, they should be taught but not pre-conditioned; brainwashing techniques have been the norm in many civilized societies, for it mangles and shapes the individual to the interests of that group, however arbitrary they are. We can see how individual enlightenment and improvement are always at odds with that way of imposing things, since they individual may have to invest a very long period of time de-programming itself before a journey of discovery and development can truly start — even if what is discovered is exactly the same that said tradition was attempting to teach.

Most of a community’s laws should be based on a cultural consensus rather than a Federal kind of set of statutes; the group should be allowed to shape its views on all kinds of sensitive subjects, while an Imperial force should, if in existence, regulate grander issues pertaining the long-view of things and to function as a spiritual reference that moves little through time (such was the original meaning and function of Imperium, rather than an “ancient Federal state”).

Another key aspect that should form an integral part of our new way of guiding human beings in a new era should be a realist awareness about ecology and as human as both an animal and as a creature that has overstepped the boundaries of its natural past; which overstepping now places a heavy burden of responsibility over us, since we have in our hands the power of utterly destroying everything: ourselves and the rest of the biological systems on the planet.

What should be emphasized here is that the actual learning that matters for holistic purposes is that which is individually discovered; knowledge that is attained through experience and personal intellectual effort, rather than handed over as something to be accepted without questioning or as a formula, has an visible effect beyond the simple utility of that knowledge.

The present is a cultural teaching methodology that encourages the creation of opportunities for experiences early on in the life of a child, while at the same time leading them to seek guidance in a way that this teaching is not imposed.

There are several direct consequences which might be the cause of objection in the reader, the first of which may be the dangerous and perhaps apparently unstable nature of it all. A considerable portion of the individuals might never look for guidance, some out of a greater sense of independence and self-reliance, and the majority of these out of inadequacy and incompetence. The first would excel, and the second would be culled by our allowance of natural selection to play a role within our Tradition. Those who did seek advice would form a third group that may or may not succeed in following the advice and applying it in a successful way.

The aim of this kind of selection system is to create generations of individuals that are increasingly self-reliant and aware of both their place and relation to the species and to the wider biological and energetic spheres; individuals that are increasingly cooperative towards what is good (defined within a context and not dogmatically) out of conscientiousness and a natural tendency towards balance rather than out of superimposition and the fear-mongering.

The idea linked to this is that no matter how widely individually-discovered paths become, the most successful must ultimately converge in the larger scheme of things. If anyone points to the present system and conditions as relatively successful, we need only point out where the breeding style and energy consumption schemes in overpopulation of the present are taking us.

At the present and in the current state of affairs, the increasing dependency of individuals and communities on governments and environments that isolate them from a natural way of life (and thus less direct contact with the consequences of their actions), along with the further encouraging the breeding of even more dependent individuals while ostracizing those who seem too strong and independent, may lead only to a slow and smooth decadence akin to putrefaction in life and a death without resurrection.

The importance of home

Thursday, July 14th, 2011

One element of culture often overlooked is the idea of home; specifically, how important roots are when growing from a child into a man or woman.

Many in their 20s or early 30s never cared much for the idea of home, mostly due to parents who never gave them a reason to care. Most children, when raised with love, and friends and relatives nearby, will have fond memories of home and won’t jump at the first opportunity to relocate.

Too many parents foster households where kids are a nuisance; a television set but less interesting. While not exclusively their domain, the young adults from these homes tend to later move anywhere for the hell of it. “Let’s move to New York City”, “I want to try a new place out; I’m bored here”, and ultimately, jumping around for the sake of administrative/mid-level careers.

These are the type of folks you see in movies like 40 Year Old Virgin; a collection of randoms in a warm-climate city with boring jobs and zero connection to their surroundings.

Not to say moving itself is a bad thing. If one is very intelligent, and the best university for one’s area of expertise is thousands of miles away, one has to weigh the pros and cons of leaving home, possibly for most of one’s life, or not succeeding as much at one’s chosen profession.

But it’s almost expected in places where there are no large or coastal cities. This one is currently working in Scotland; that one took a job in Texas but wants to move to Chicago soon. What is life except your job and your shallow dating life, if the people you know best are constantly thousands of miles away?

This phenomenon has grown in recent years, and it matches similar symptoms of societal decay like increased immigration rates. On either side of your house, there may be a family from some third world place or other, stamped visas and all, just “getting by” with corporate jobs but otherwise holding no ties to the community.

The idea of home is robbed from us when we stop caring about who lives next door, and who runs our town. This attitude works outwardly as well; politicians from small, indifferent districts will become indifferent and corrupt when attaining higher office. This problem is like adding water to a musty basement; pretty soon, you have rot everywhere.

Later in life, the desire to move for mundane things breeds the HGTV mentality. People move to places where property is cheaper, not knowing the demographic of their new home, but not caring because it looks like something that nice lady on TV showed to the cute couple.

While it’s good to have a mobile labor force, allowing economic activity to peak during good times and land softly during a recession, that mobility at the expense of local culture only takes us as far as our base desires allow.

Culturally speaking, strong roots and a solid idea of home, including a tightly knit neighborhood where behaviors and mores are sharpened during developmental years, creates a great framework for children.   In this model, local school systems would actually reflect the values of a community instead of what’s being broadcast on CNN.

The “wrong side of the track” types could still work hard and change the fortunes of their lineage, learning lessons along the way, in contrast to a perpetual welfare state for those disorganized enough to fail.  Similarly, kids from wealthy or strong neighborhoods who become burnouts would change theirs for the worse.

This is more natural, and better, than forced averaging.  Our fear of inequality drives us to fit all kids into the same mold, under the umbrella of “equal chances for all”. What they leave out is that no kid is 100% equal to another, and that is true as early as birth.

Recommended Reading