Wednesday, 24 March 2010

British and Israeli approaches to combating their terrorist enemies

The difference between the British and Israeli approach to combating those working for their destruction and the murder of their citizens:

The Israelis focus on eliminating the danger they pose, by assassination, if necessary; while the British are more concerned with defending their human rights and will go as far as giving them political asylum and supporting them and their families on social welfare.

The reason, I suggest, lies in Britain's ruling elites being systemically and personally more concerned with their claim to a spurious "moral high ground", along with the political, social and economic advantages that go with it, and following a centuries-old tradition of the clergy, than with the welfare of the "British people", which are not a genuine PEOPLE anyway, but as a human environment and resource, which has to be maintained (served), of course, but primarily to facilitate its (self)-exploitation, to the advantage of power, wealth and privilege (which includes our ruling elites in politics, the media and academia). Thus their indifference to Britain's ethnic composition, which, perversely, they have made a virtue and moral imperative of.

Israel's ruling elites, in contrast, are genuinely concerned - in part, at least - with the Jewish people and nation, and in preserving their identity as such.

Monday, 15 March 2010

What evolutionary anthropologists are missing

Open email to Robin Dunbar, Professor of Evolutionary Anthropology at Oxford University:

Dear Prof. Dunbar,
I was very impressed by the interview you gave to the Observer's Aleks Krotoski, but please forgive my boldness for saying that there is a vitally important aspect of evolutionary anthropology which you and your colleagues seem to be missing.
It is the fact that civilizations (most relevantly, our own) are a product of man's Darwinian nature and its misplaced and perverted expression in the artificial environment of human society itself, which states and economy, I postulate, developed over the centuries to facilitate the (self)-exploitation of, to the advantage of power, wealth and privilege, by deceiving us all (exploiters and exploited alike, and now often embodied in one and the same individual) into believing that the state represents of our original tribe (or Dunbar number!).
In the artificial environment of our civilization, man's Darwinian drive for survival and reproductive success has been largely reduced to the pursuit of POWER, i.e. money, social and professional status, the moral high ground, etc., which, of course, has the potential to greatly enhance the individual's chances of survival and reproductive success.
The profound implications of this insight, I believe, are what make it so difficult to recognise, even for anthropologists, because it undermines the political and socioeconomic order on which we all depend (academics, if anything, more than most), and because our brains didn't evolve to grasp reality itself, but to interpret it (i.e. its environment) to its own (now perverted Darwinian) advantage.
If we fail to recognise and develop an understanding of this harsh reality (instead of using our prodigious brains to rationalize and disguise it from ourselves), it will inevitably become progressively harsher, as we exploit ourselves towards extinction . . .
With best regards
Roger Hicks

Wednesday, 10 March 2010

A Darwinian perspective of "anti-racism"

"Anti-racism" is not the noble cause it started out as (a response to genuine, ugly racism, e.g. Apartheid, Jim Crow, and above all, Nazism) and is still made out to be, but primarily a means of claiming a spurious "moral high ground" for oneself and for a proprietary and mercenary state seeking to assert its traditional, but false claim to nationhood, authority and power over an increasingly multi and mixed ethnic population.

"Anti-racism" no longer simply means opposition to genuine racism, but also the demonization of any assertion of ethnic identity amongst Europeans (i.e. white people), as if this natural propensity itself were racist and therefore evil.

Why, a "Darwinian" perspective?

Because it is an expression of man's continuing (though misplaced, perverted, rationalized, and thus largely unrecognized) primordial struggle for survival and (reproductive) "success" in the artificial environment of human society itself, where, next to material wealth, a successful claim to the "moral high ground" and the social status that goes with it, is the most important advantage one can have.