Another lugubrious news event, to follow the foul murder of innocents in Las Vegas, strikes our screens with a sickening sense that this is the “new normal.” In Sutherland Springs, TX, an Irish-American gunman walked in and shot twenty people, then fled before being shot down by others, who being rural Texas residents, have an above-average chance of being armed.
Naturally the politicization of the event must follow. The Left argues for gun control; the Right, more sanely, points out that this was a victory for the second amendment, although perhaps not as much of a victory as if the congregation had been armed and been able to stop the attack by shooting back.
Underneath that dual viewpoint, however, another ugly truth arises in the context of recent truck attacks in New York and Europe. If we have those among us who hate us, those among them who develop mental health problems are likely to engage in acts of terrorism. Independent of the gun debate, we should have a mental health debate, and through that, consider the question of population quality.
The Irish-American shooter, who for some reason chose a multi-racial church as his target, provided us with plenty of warning signs before he went into his endgame and staged the murder-suicide:
‘He was an outcast but not a loner. He was popular among other outcast. I haven’t spoke to him since high school.’
Another former classmate, who asked to remain anonymous, told DailyMail.com: ‘I grew up going to school with him… Always creeped me out and was different.’
…[Air Force] Spokeswoman Ann Stefanek said Kelley was court-martialed on one count of assault on his spouse and another count of assault on their child. He received a bad conduct discharge, 12 months’ confinement and a reduction in rank.
The odd behavior of this individual suggests a troubled person who would just as likely run people down with his car, burn them with gasoline, chop them with machetes or otherwise enact violence upon them, if he were not able to get a gun. This raises the eternally question of, with so many red flags, why no one did anything about him.
In an individualistic society like our own, rooted in defense of the individual against impositions against acting out his desires, we focus on punishing crimes instead of determining whether an individual belongs in our society or not. As a result, we have dedicated ourselves to protecting the rights of the insane.
At the same time, we are degenerating in terms of ability, a situation brought on by years of destroyed families, lack of consistent values, ethnic mixing, survival of the weakest, caste mixing, welfare state subsidies and other methods of promoting individualism that allow genetic defects to prosper among us. As the saying goes, what you tolerate, you get more of, and in the case of America, we have produced a bumper crop of useless, angry, and miserable people like Stephen Paddock or [[[ Devin Patrick Kelley ]]] who then take revenge on us with mass killings, which also enable them to immortalize themselves, knowing that the press will run their photos at the top of each article.
If we believe in natural selection, we have to admit that we are degenerating, and the tendency of society to preserve itself through forced unity has steadily been doing this to us for centuries. Because they are regulated by social impulses and not the logical critical thinking that only a fraction of people can understand, civilizations as the thrive become dedicated to defending those they perceive as underdogs, which quickly results in those underdogs taking over through superior numbers and, because they are sensitive to some ideas, creating a type of Stalinesque group-think. This herd mindset then defends the individual against any restrictions, including the possibility of being excluded from society for being insane, defective or dangerous.
As one of our more famous scientists one related, the communal subsidy effect of civilization will in turn destroy that civilization by allowing a proliferation of the incompetent, who then engage in destructive behavior:
Do such people tend to produce more children than persons of average or superior ability?
That is my basic worry, and it was driven home to me by a specific instance in San Francisco where the proprietor of a delicatessen was blinded by a hired acid-thrower. Who was the acid-thrower? He was a teenager, one of 17 illegitimate children of an improvident, irresponsible woman with an I.Q. of 55 who could remember the names of only nine of her children.
The probable father died in prison, sentenced for murder. If that woman can produce 17 children in our society, none of whom will be eliminated by survival of the fittest, she and others like her will be multiplying at an enormously faster rate than more intelligent people do.
Is she an isolated statistic? Who knows? For myself, I fear it is not an isolated statistic.
I can see how, if this sort of thing can occur at all in our society, it could snowball so that the fraction of our population composed of such people could double in less than 20 years and outnumber all the others in a few centuries.
Broken homes, poverty, criminality, perversity and violence are not products of the environment, but products of individuals, and these individuals are tolerated as “equals” despite their lack of meaningful contribution and the clear threat they produce. Even if at a low level, they produce people who are born to be miserable, and several generations later, they destroy.
In the meantime, we are also experiencing a shortage of competence even in our military:
A report describing ship handling incompetence on two US destroyers which led to the deaths of 17 sailors raised the possibility that American can-do, once the envy of the world, may suddenly be in short supply even in places where it was once taken for granted. Everything suddenly seems to be going wrong, from a terror attack in Manhattan made possible by admitting an ISIS supporter under the Diversity Visa Program to the seeming ability of Russian hackers to turn the giant American social media industry against itself.
As Noah Rothman notes, the one common denominator in the public post-mortems of disasters seems the assumption everyone is stupid; everyone needs to be protected from the sly world. Not just dumb but “so staggeringly stupid that even the most mind-numbingly asinine foreign propaganda can convince a critical mass of voters to drive a stake through the heart of American democracy”. Yet this apparent hyperbole is merely self-description. Person after person mounts the podium to present himself as victim or fool; from Hollywood celebrities who ‘never suspected’ the sex abuse all around them to seasoned politicians who can’t even remember how they came to hire the shadowy agencies which did opposition research on their political opponents.
…In the heady years after the fall of the Berlin Wall it became tempting to select the fixers over the problem solvers to head organizations since in those golden days they could get away with the amorally expedient if they could rig the optics. Truth didn’t matter; spin did. The man with the nice hair, the pretty face and the smooth teleprompter delivery became valued over the competent. But over time it became progressively harder to sustain artifice until finally it became impossible. Now things have come, like a freighter on a collision course with a destroyer, full circle.
While he blames the increasingly complexity of society, that too may be a symptom of bad leadership, since greater complexity implies less organization more than any actual complexity, and much of what we see as “complexity” is in fact paradoxical programs like diversity, welfare, sexual liberation, globalism and anti-discrimination simply running amok because they are unrealistic.
If we combine the above two observations, we can see that the actual story is that as we have become more tolerant of dysfunction around us, it has reproduced itself at faster rates and now has swamped us. We are drowning in incompetence, insanity, ill-health and alienation as these deleterious mutations accumulate.
However, to hold a society together you need a system, and when a society becomes wealthy, it tends not to hold together as people head off in their own directions. Instead of cutting them free, we seek to control them with formal systems, and by doing this, we create an inhuman factory for producing defective humans:
From this perspective, literally-ALL organisations, institutions, ideologies and religions – all laws and rules and principles and procedures – all mathematics and science – are merely-systems.
Yet (of course) this world is made and sustained by systems – that is by abstract, incomplete, biased mere-models. Even our criteria of what works, what is wanted, are expressed in terms of systems…! Man creates system, and then is enslaved by it.
Confronted by apparently hopeless odds, we first become resigned to system – then we try to love what cannot be avoided: we try to love our submission, our dehumanisation – we count-our-blessings and ignore the rest; we ‘focus on the positives’… we seek distraction, displacement, some combination of rationalisation and intoxication.
For us to accept people as individuals, we have to accept their inequality and create a social order of hierarchy so that good is rewarded and bad is exiled, as was the law many centuries ago. Instead of trying to make everyone just get along, we need to allow those who are functional to cut themselves free and drive the others away, without guilt, for the betterment of the organic whole known as civilization.
Like an ecosystem, this does not consist of individuals alone, but individuals in roles. Instead of rights, they have purpose, and are rewarded for doing that well, which drives away those who cannot participate and increases the health of society by weeding out the mutations. In their unequal roles, they work together toward a purpose, and so each person has a place.
Equality does the opposite; it reduces our places to interchangeable, anonymous and atomized zones where we are not appreciated for any of our inner traits like honesty, intelligence, moral character, honor and wisdom. Instead, we all start out with nothing, and raise ourselves up only by flattering group opinion and becoming popular, which makes us obedient slaves to constantly currying more group favor.
After centuries of this madness, our society has selected for the insane, and so it is not surprising that violence and disorder come with them. We might take their guns, but as long as they exist among us, they will harm us by any methods available to them, applying the fiendish creativity of those whose consciousnesses have been reduced to an impulse to destroy.