Amerika

During a recent private geopolitical oriented discussion, the question came up about what makes the West or the East, the West or the East. My answer was that the West rally around individuals while the East rallies around families.

The implication of that is families have each other to depend on while individuals do not have anybody; in fact, they depend on systems (the system is my family). The deduction therefore is that all humans depend on systems, but in the West they just depend on it that much more.

One fact here is that systems do not eat or take holidays, which means that its productivity is much higher and hence efficiency and effectiveness propel those individuals to higher levels and faster than family-based systems can ever hope for.

Another fact is that those having a lot of systems to take care of them, have very little children, while those having a lot less systems to care of them, have a lot of children. Not able to grasp the implications of that, the discussion changed to another issue:

What is the purpose of humanity?

Looking at rough history in search of some clarity, one can assume that the earth and its solar system existed for a couple of million years (for argument’s sake, let us assume twenty million years). Humanity’s entry only came about a hundred thousand years ago, although early humans were a bit earlier. So, instead of nature’s experiment with humans failing due to evolution, somehow our previous ancestors survived and from this initial success, humans as we know them, can assume to have only existed for about one two-hundredth of earth time. Basically, in terms of nature, humans are johnny-comes-lately.

It is like being the youngest child in a family of ten (like my grandfather for example). The youngest grow up in a mostly human presence and basically have little to add or learn, because there are examples of what and how to do things in all functionalities of his life. Humans, however, were similarly not prepared to learn from nature’s system because nature was tough on them, so they slowly created their own systems. This means human systems were competing with natural systems and because it was more successful in human terms, i.e., faster, humans deliberately pushed forward this development. Faster – is what the West calls progress, while the East calls it decadence.

Again, this is not a fight between humans and systems, it is between natural and man-made systems. It is just that the West has a lot more of it, that it now becomes problematic. The original mistake therefore is that all humans are taught they can develop systems without the limits natural systems determine.

Because these humans are getting killed over, and over again, it is clear that nature does not mind at all if its youngest child(ren) die out. Other species can be generated at will. The purpose of humans is to see if they can survive as a species (being the only intelligent species), but to do that humans will have to understand and accept the very system they live in (because they don’t). The alternative is that we will just perpetually kill each other (because somebody broke the rule).

In summary, humans kill each other because they are too stupid to understand nature. Nature’s experiment with humanity is failing, and it is ready to replace us with something perhaps less narcissistic and more realistic.

Tags: evolution, family world order, human biodiversity, individualism