Amerika

Critics of democracy usually focus on its ineptitude and the bad results that it achieves in policy, but fewer look at the effect that it has on its people, not just in the forebrain activity of ideology but in the genetics and intuition.

Democracy appears out of the constellation of egalitarian beliefs, or those which think that the problem with human life is that it is unequal, the solution is equality, and therefore you are either working toward equality or you are the enemy.

If people should be equal, democracy argues, we should not choose our best leaders, but the ones that are most popular, because consent of the ruled is more important than finding the most sensitive, analytical, and creative individuals to address our issues.

However, “equality” serves as a useful concept because it is both open-ended and absolute. In any world that is not a simple grid composed of equal-sized cubes, equality will never be achieved, but at the same time, it is such a simple and mathematical idea that it seizes the human mind.

Its absolute nature is part of its appear, in that it promises to smooth over the chaos and ragged edges of reality and replace them with nice, orderly, guaranteed, warrantied, indestructible, scientific, and technological uniformity.

Equality reduces nature from chaos and terror to a human-only world, with structures that fit human mental convenience as well as physical, in which the individual is protected from the chaos, unpredictability, predators, diseases, wilderness, and infinite potential of the natural world.

For this reason, equality provides one of the most addictive ideas known to humanity. People are either seized by it and fascinated, or repulsed by it and go down a path of misanthropy and alienation (don’t knock it till you try it).

The obsessive pathology of egalitarianism swallows people up and leads to them to commit acts of symbolic importance that, by the necessity of rejecting natural inequality, work against common sense, logic, biology, genetics, and natural selection.

For starters, democracies fixate on trying to make people equal, which always requires taking power, prestige, and social status from the natural elites and giving it to those who were less successful.

This creates a “moron pump” in that it elevates the mediocre while demoting the excellent. Over time, this has an effect on the genetics of future generations: the good have fewer children, while the dumb — who always have too many — breed profligately.

In addition to this moron pump, an egalitarian society also desires to bring together as many extremes as possible. This fits within the basic idea of egalitarianism, which is that when everyone is equal and therefore every behavior is accepted, whatever the individual is trying to hide will not stand out as anomalous and therefore, there will be no consequences.

The fact is, though, the more different ingredients you mix, the more you get an average of their abilities and not a refinement of any. You lose specifics and get a standard instead, a generic, and this means that it has no particularly useful abilities.

Democracy fails because people can vote for free stuff paid for by other people, but even more, they can vote for personal wants that create costs (“externalities”) which are then absorbed by all of society. These “socialized costs” then consume society.

We see it time and again. When individuals are given power, they destroy unity by each demanding what they want as individuals without considering its impact on civilization. Selfishness triumphs in the stampede of the herd.

Genetically, this means that both the moron pump and genetic averaging work against the democracy. Over time, its citizens go from attractive, intelligent, and distinctive to ugly, dumb, and average.

With each generation, the average drops. In year one, the average may be at one level, but the next year, some will drop below that, and so to include them, the new average drops even lower. Degradation, degeneration, and decay result.

Perhaps Karl Marx was partially correct when he hypothesized that socialism grows inevitably out of capitalism. Successful civilizations allow too many to survive who otherwise would be kicked out for being incompatible with that civilization, or allowed to die in nature.

When a society thrives, it accumulates masses of people who have no real purpose outside of existing in that civilization. They cannot create civilization, nor can they maintain one, but they can have a job, credit card, and shopping habits, so the middle classes argue for keeping them around because it seems like more money is being generated.

In reality, that civilization is trading quality for quantity, since we know that the two are opposite axes in the health of any group or institution. Over time, these low quality people take over as consumers because they are numerous.

They then demand equality, so that useless people can be anywhere in society and not contained as they should be in tenements and low quality establishments. They then vote to bring in foreigners, so that useless people can have servants, too.

Over the years, they accumulate both domestic and foreign DNA into a “melting pot” which produces the worst possible result. In America, we blended Western Europeans with Southern (including Irish and Mediterraneans) and Eastern Europeans.

This really picked up after the world wars, in each of which we needed the warm bodies from the Southern and Eastern European groups, so we gave them more power in society.

In the present day, some focus on racial admixture, and no doubt that produces grey faceless people with no heritage and no loyalty to anything but Leftism. However, our ethnic admixture — among “whites” — produced our first genetic disaster.

Most people stay true to their ancestors. They select spouses like them, from the same background and social class, and produce children in their own mold. However, just like we accumulated the useless, we now have a staggering number of “52%” mixed-ethnics.

Tags: democide, democracy, dysgenics, genocide