Amerika

Conservative alarmists are crying about topics like “bell-weather” and “WW3” while liberal alarmists decry lack of diversity. It all seems to be a bit mushy, but the difference between the two is that liberals have planned diversity while conservative did not plan WW3.

Conservatives across all civilizations have failed in planning their futures, hence they fail and always will. It is (almost) better to be a liberal because Utopian philosophies have a plan for the future instead of simply trying to conserve the past (a misunderstanding of conservatism, which attempts to conserve the best of human endeavor).

One example of this is visible in the publications industry. When one writes a book, or publishes an article, or produces a film or theatre, there are a few ways to do this. One could be authoritative or documentary oriented, meaning that absolute proof of the topic discussed is required.

Alternatively, one could be imaginary or fictional which requires no proof. Or one could be intellectually oriented which requires references to other publications to provide context of the argument, which may be model oriented allowing futuristic projections.

From universities one could expect typical academic papers and books used for educational purposes that may or may not have any association with reality and lastly one could just be creative and propose a new unpatented solution to any problem encountered (for which no references are required).

As we see from the above, intellectuals may be more prone to think in terms of models that enable future applications, while academia educates the young (for the future no less) using old references. Three decades ago I attended a Creativity conference where proof was produced that only 2% of adults retain their creativity, which means that among other things, “education” and “meritocracy” destroy creativity.

Last year one newspaper article in a small African country asked why there are so many PhDs walking around but there are so few patents? It is obvious that degrees only require good referencing techniques which in the light of leadership stupidity experienced today in the collective West, explain just about everything (if IQ is not allowed to be discussed).

While conservatives act as if they are concerned about the lack of effective education, it is not a problem for liberals however, because liberals are only concerned about the future. A distinction between conservatives and liberals can therefore be described as backward-looking and forward-looking respectively, and never the twain shall meet.

Apparently, a French King decided to divide his court proceedings by keeping liberals on the left of aisle, and conservatives on the right. The only way this can work therefore, is when the monarch is able to discern not the middle ground, but the appropriate context. In other words, neither the left nor the right provides context. Another way to express context is to talk about situational awareness that requires a combination of all characteristics such as intellectualism, academics, authority, personality and most importantly, creativity.

Another example of the forward-backward looking issue is how people think about the current wars taking place today i.e., Ukraine and Israel. Conservatives are concerned about America engaging a two-front war which Biden just scoffs at, because he knows that the “two-front” backward-looking narrative keeps conservatives busy, while he is fighting a forward-looking single proxy-war with many arms, that will give him a second term because that is when the “whole-society” (uniparty and deep-state) will really put the pedal to the metal.

There are three deductions possible from the above:

1. The “Fuehrer” or White House has no situational awareness (cognitive dissonance) because it is totally liberalized.
2. Conservatives are engaging current actions taken by liberalized actors who have already moved onto the next part of their plan.
3. As the whole-society moves leftward, more and more conservatives will give up by abandoning their voters and such voters will follow, causing the increase in polarization currently visible across the collective West.

One conservative intellectual type of model developed over the last twenty years is the Dark Organization model. It identifies and predicts for the most part decline in organizations based on personality characteristics such as defensiveness, toxicity and rogue behavior. For example, the easiest way to identify a Dark Organization is to notice that employees get richer while their organization gets poorer.  One conclusion is that Dark Organizations cannot be fixed, and that “society” or organizations must therefore be rebuilt, almost like Elon Musk (with considerable fore-sight) did with Twitter.

Another way one of the few forward-looking conservatives view the current state of world affairs, is the Deputy CEO of Afriforum in South Africa (Ernst Roets), also CEO of Forum Films media and who has been interviewed by Tucker Carlson in America. He is of course aware of politics and culture and after learning from a few mistakes. He discusses the decline of South Africa’s electric utility as described in a book authored by its ex-CEO De Ruyter. He notes that the electric utility cannot be fixed and therefore the only future option is to (re)build a new society, even culture.

The mistake made by simply imagining re-building is that it is not that simple anymore. In history smart Romans left Rome for Croatia, Prague and Constantinople, which they then re-built. But today, for the first time in history, we must do it in place. This places the prospect of rebuilding in a different context. And creativity is required from the 2% remaining educated, intellectual and authoritative leaders, if any.

Tags: conservatism, dark organization, future orientation