Welcome to Quadrant Online | Login/ Register Cart (0) $0 View Cart
Menu
June 04th 2018 print

Peter Smith

Societal Devolution

The human race is going backwards, Trump being the last flicker of bright light before the candle goes out. Unless you share the cock-eyed optimism to which I am prone, it's a demographic certainty public policy can never shed the Leftist memes that shape it. Still, I live in hope. Make Australia great again!

evolution IIWhat does evolutionary theory say about the development of society which gives a pass to a leader of the opposition who egregiously slanders our forebears – who claims, without evidence, because there is none, that we infected their (Aboriginal) blankets and poisoned their waterholes? I will come to it. Amazingly – at least it would be in a pre-post-modern world – the disgraceful perpetrator of this calumny still holds his office. Mind you, in context, slanderous lies are passé. When a prime minister can apologise on the nation’s behalf for a systematic policy of removing part aboriginal children from their parents, which patently didn’t happen, then factoids are the new facts. Scurrilous lies are the new truth. It’s all part of the current societal devolution.

The metamorphosis of lies into truths is not complete until they are taught to impressionable school children. And, it goes without saying, are embraced by the ABC. Done. Catastrophic climate change is happening, seas are swallowing islands, the GBR is rapidly dying off, all cultures are equivalently worthy (noting, of course, “white privilege”), uninvited border-hoppers are immigrants (just like those of old), capitalism is bringing economic inequality and injustice, And, one among the most recent, Trump is a racist, a misogynist and mocker of the disabled. I could go on obviously.

There is no point in exposing these and other lies masquerading as facts to non-conservatives. I have tried. I have explained, for example, that Keith Windschuttle has rigorously exposed the Stolen Generations tale for what it is, a very tall one. I add the killer point. Even with the litigious proclivity of the indigenous grievance industry, no test case save one has succeeded in court. And, in that one, the circumstances are particular and, in fact, when closely scrutinised, undermine the tale.

It doesn’t matter. It can’t break through. An impenetrable barrier stops ‘heretical’ evidence in its tracks before it can upset preconceived notions. To wit, evidence such as this:

  • Arthur Phillip did not employ cannons and landing craft to shell and storm the shore.
  • So far, hold onto your britches, catastrophic climate change has greened the planet.
  • Pacific islands are not sinking. The Pacific nation of Tuvalu, for example, “long seen as a prime candidate to disappear as climate change forces up sea levels—is actually growing in size” – Nature Communications, February 2018.
  • Each year millions of people flee or try to flee to countries whose culture is — or was — based on Judeo-Christian values; there is no reverse fleeing.
  • Immigrants who have knocked on the door and been let in are nowhere near the same as interlopers who sneakily break in.
  • Unemployed white people living in the opioid-afflicted Rust Belt in the United States are not privileged.
  • Capitalism has brought untold riches and lifted swathes of humanity out of poverty.
  • Trump’s mannerisms when confronted by a report from Serge Kovaleski of the NYT – whose right arm is partially withered – were no different from the same convulsive mannerisms he has used on numbers of occasions to express befuddlement. This has been well documented by those who don’t hate Trump.

I choose not to mention the state of the Great Barrier Reef, except to say that relatively speaking its death throes put the length of Jimmy Cagney’s death scenes in the shade. It has been forever dying to my memory. Think about it. Would the budget have allocated half a billion dollars to protect a healthy, robust and resilient reef? Hardly likely. The Reef just has to be always and forever in deep, deep trouble, otherwise a lot of researchers are on the street armed with an oversupply of degrees in marine science.

Back to evolution to explain all of this. Evolution must be able to explain it because, so far as I can tell, it purports to explain everything. When you believe that all life emerged haphazardly, without design, direction or intelligence from an inorganic primordial soup of some description, it is a logical step to think that mutations and natural selection led to the current state of play. So, for example, when evolutionists, such as Richard Dawkins, seek to explain our consciences they do it by assuming that communities with members (by chance) prone to helping one another survived at the expense of those communities with members prone to be at each other’s throats.

It’s tenuous at best, with the withering advantage of being undisprovable. Nevertheless, I will get into the spirit of natural selection. I assume those who are prone to believing in myths, sinking islands, the Stolen Generations, Trump’s disparagement of the disabled, and the like — those predominantly on the left, let’s be brutally honest — keep on producing offspring like themselves because they tend to partner with each other. They attract one another. Look at the romantic comings together at the ABC.

Those of sceptical minds – those predominantly on the right (conservatives) – do not, I suggest, partner with each other to nearly the same extent. It’s not that many form relationships with out-and-out lefties, God forbid, those wouldn’t last. However, they are more likely, I believe, to be relaxed at partnering with the non-committed; the vast hordes of the politically indifferent. That’s my observation, anyway.

You might sense where this going? Normally, natural selection would weed out lefties. They believe in myths and these are usually destructive of progress – e.g., windmills, open borders, socialism. But they have two advantages. They get together and propagate and they have conservatives to apply scepticism and common sense to prop up society. For example, Whitlam comes in and drives the economy into the ground. Fraser comes in and saves the day (forget about his later regression). Rudd and Gillard let in 50,000 boat people, oversee 1200 drowning deaths, and lock up children in offshore detention camps. Abbott comes in, stops the boats and gets children out of camps. Any non-leftie with half a brain knows it. The left stuffs things up. The right is called in by voters to remediate.

Unfortunately, as I explained, it would appear that sexual selection, as part of natural selection, will, perforce, produce fewer and fewer outright conservatives as against lefties. Common observation suggests this is already gathering pace. Look at schools, universities, the media, public services and the politically-aware community generally. Conservatism will eventually be left as a rump or die out altogether. Lefties will prevail. Remember too, all those fecund inter-marrying Muslims are lefties almost to a man (the hijabed women don’t count). As a result, the human race will go backwards – devolution will replace evolution. The signs are here. Trump is one of those last flickers of bright light that sometimes happen before the candle goes out. Earthborn hope seems lost; unless, of course, like me, you’re a cockeyed optimist divorced from reality. Make Australia Great Again!

Peter Smith, a frequent Quadrant Online contributor, is the author of Bad Economics

Comments [17]

  1. Bran Dee says:

    How rewarding it is on a Monday to read Peter Smith. Thankfully, Trump like he remains forever optimistic – Make Australia Great Again.

    When mentioning Richard Dawkins we can now note that while he seemed to himself so brave in criticizing Christianity he of late criticized Mohammedanism and he is now in fear for his life. Fear to such extent that he refuses to mention that ideology again and refuses to tell why he refuses.

  2. whitelaughter says:

    In answer to your rhetorical question, yes evolution can explain this quite well. Any successful group – and western society is phenomenally successful – expands and so becomes more tempting to both parasites and predators. The protest industry relies on ‘go away’ money, the Humans Rights Commission is an extortion racket, Halal certification the same. The ‘education’ system is the worst.
    Any group that exploits other will eliminate intelligence in the exploited, (how many farmer would tolerate an intelligent sheep or chook?) so our education system keeps their domesticated creatures dumb. After all, if students crunched the figures and saw how much they would make by leaving a decade earlier and investing the money they make, how could they survive?

  3. en passant says:

    Peter,
    Two points to be commented on:

    “Each year millions of people flee or try to flee to countries whose culture is — or was — based on Judeo-Christian values; there is no reverse fleeing.” Actually, thankfully about 40,000 EU muslims and a few Americans and about 400 ‘Australians’ fled to the ISIS Paradise of Raqqa where they attended courses on beheading prisoners, torture, suicide bombing and general killing. Fortunately, many are now in Nirvana (or wherever).

    Secondly, “Evolution must be able to explain it because, so far as I can tell, it purports to explain everything. When you believe that all life emerged haphazardly, without design, direction or intelligence from an inorganic primordial soup of some description, it is a logical step to think that mutations and natural selection led to the current state of play.” If evolution is incorrect and a god actually produced the world, then what role did it play in producing the mess we live in? This is the all-powerful god’s will …? If this is the best that the supermarket of god’s can do, then the rationality of secular atheism looks more attractive than ever.

    • Peter says:

      Oh dear En passant – we do not live in mess; otherwise we would all end it. Suffering with bouts of joy and fulfillment is our lot. I know we are told that this is a fallen world but I have my doubts. If indeed God created our world, which I believe, albeit through the use of His created natural forces, including evolution, then how do you think He might have done a better job? It is a test question which you owe it to yourself to try and answer. Suppose you were to criticise someone’s job of work, then you would be obliged to explain how it might be done better. So go to it. Good luck.

      • en passant says:

        Peter,
        I accept your challenge, but I wish you had given me a harder conundrum.

        Let’s frame the question as:
        “How could any god have done a better job?”
        If I were god … I would have:
        1. created a true ‘self-regulating Utopian, Shangri-La, Garden’ of Eden.
        2. This means there would be no overpopulation,
        3. No shortage of food or resources,
        4. No disease or poisons, or biting insects
        5. Debates would be rational with a diversity of solutions available to suit different tastes
        6. Knowledge would be available to all, but would require effort and time to obtain (we need challenges as a species)
        7. Death? That is a bit harder to decide, but probably necessary (which is why I consider the Eternity of Heaven a boring Hell.

        So, what is the argument against god, any god?
        1. Firstly, I have a thick book I bought from a ‘remainders’ stall in Adelaide that lists 5,500 ‘gods’ cults, sects, religions (but not atheism, the Greens or climate – a surprising omission). Are their really that many choices or only one true god who is 5,000, 2,000 or a 1,400 year-old whipper-snapper socio-pathic warlord?
        2. No god has communicated well. Even the Egyptians DEVELOPED their religion over eons. Does that mean the earlier ones were wrong? As for the Christians & Muslims, well, their god communicated through the illiterate prophets, with the Word generally recorded years after their deaths and mangled in translation. What sort of godly marketing plan is that? The Wizard of Oz did it better, until he was exposed as a conman..
        3. Why have all gods abdicated? Are they dead, dumb, or just disinterested. For every miraculous recovery there are more people dead or disabled by bizarre accidents. Personally, I think raising Lazarus was discriminatory as a lot of others, just as deserving missed out. When the the Tsunami swept away Banda Aceh and 35,000 souls living thee, the Imam put his finger on the cause: not enough prayer. Oh really? In twenty years: 20 by 365 x 35,000 x 5 = NOT ENOUGH to sway their god to save them. Yup, he nailed it …
        4. The Catholic church is an example of the human created god. Frank has done more to damage the beliefs of many ardent believers than any terrorist ever could. Is it the church of Frank or god that is losing its hold on you?
        5. ‘In God We Trust’, yet the whole Middle East that was once Christian has been progressively overrun by Islam. Europe is falling as I write. Is that proof that Allah is the real god in the Supermarket of Gods?
        6. An old friend and I had a friendly debate on god 30+-years ago in which he said he related to his god through prayer. I said that god and I had never exchanged any conversation and the prayers I made as a child went unanswered. I put $10 in my wallet and said it would remain there until god turned up and introduced himself. It is still there, but my friend has ceased going to church as he was sick of being told he was sinful, destroying the planet and a bigot because he feared the immigrants taking over his suburb. He no longer goes for walks after dark … God’s Will in action?
        7. As I mentioned, I cannot conceive of a Heaven that is not Hell. “Ah, Heaven, beautiful one day, perfect the next …” Sounds like Queensland. Do I win every game? Am I always calm and unstressed? Do I know everything (without Googling it)? Can I ever/never fail at anything? Can I hurt, feel pain, etc?

        It does not add up to infinity.

        I will be in Sydney in early November, so we should catch up for coffee and debate this. I have an old $10 note in my wallet, so I will pay for the coffee, otherwise it will never be spent …

        • whitelaughter says:

          Rather than go through and rebut point by point (which while easy would be boring and a waste of time), I’ll just point out that *you* have rebutted your own first point: you demand a garden of eden, and then insist that anything heavenly would be hellish.

          Oh, do remember to put that $10 in the swear jar next time you stub a toe and blaspheme: unless of course (to quote Terry Pratchett) you swear “Oh, random-fluctuations-in-the-space-time-continuum!”

          • en passant says:

            Whitelaughter,
            You are actually supporting my argument that as god I would have created perfection, then found that for INFINITY that was in fact Hell. How does any god, including me, overcome this and every other paradox – pain, suffering, loss, anguish and create a decent world? As for death: why create a short-term life, only to terminate it and hold a judgement on the results? So, in fact, we had no ‘free choice’, just a secret set of behaviours we had better follow – or else. Unless god is a Stalinist or a sociopath that sounds pretty dismal. Fortunately, we do have the option of choosing a psychopathic god who appreciates a bit of serious misery, mayhem, torture and death – in the name of Peace. And his name is not Orwell …

            I can reasonably expect to be dead in less than 3,000 days, given my age and childhood arithmetic. I accept that is all our fates. My only objection is that all the knowledge that I have spent years of effort accumulating will cease with me. This is why I spent 3-years documenting my family history for the next generations as that is a form of immortality. Oh, and the fact that I have donated all the bits I no longer need to extend the life of some other poor sod …

  4. In 1982 news items of the Israeli attack in Lebanon showed images of a hospital that Israel supposedly bombed, with grass and weeds growing in the remnants of the demolished building that would have needed more than a season to take hold. A clean white flag was unfurled on its roof that should have advised the nasty Jews that it’s a hospital. Lies. If it was bombed why was the flag and flagpole intact. How does grass and weeds grow that thick within a short few days. I locate my awareness of fake news as purposeful propaganda to that date. Somewhere I read, but haven’t been able to find it again, that Hitler said “Watch how I turn the values of the world upside down simply by attacking Jews”. That’s a contentious topic, but there’s no doubt that the primary values that have subtended all civilisations have been upended in our western nations. Remember the old saying, “Jews are the canary in the mine”.

  5. Keith Kennelly says:

    Social devolution.

    No.

    By its very nature evolution occurs because adaption is a capability of humans.

    Humanity has evolved because of adaption.

    Lefties and the managerial elites cannot deviate from their ideologies

    Westernism is based on adaption and adoption of improved ways of doing things and creates mechanisms to right dysfunctions.

    Therefore it is logic that as left and managerial ideologies fail, as the left has and surely will Continue to fail, just as surely westernism will evolve to confront the changes and produce an adaptions suitable to western society, that, and unlike the conservatives would like to see, will not return to the past processes and edifices.

    Eg I believe we are watching the death of universities and we are seeing the seeds of new educational structures in the funding by private means education about western culture.

    Once the mass of people understand this and the benefits of having that knowledge, evidences itself, as it surely will then evolution of education will have begin.

    That is being led by Trump in the US and Howard and Abbott in Australia.

    The university as it now stands is stuck in the straitjacket of managerial and leftie ideology and won’t be able to adapt to this new structure. They will wither and become dank edifices of the past.

    That’s how westernism will thrive.

    Oh and of course, money.
    The left and it’s idealogues along with the elites will run out of other people’s money.
    Western capitalism produces wealth.

    • en passant says:

      Keith,
      I spent time in Caracas 15-years ago. Wonderful place, friendly people and a vibrant economy. It was about as dangerous as Melbourne these days.

      The implosion of the economy was so fast that even some bearded Leftie from the ABC (whose name I cannot recall) was still praising it while it was crashing. On my last assignment I had to be picked up and driven to work and walking the streets was now already out of the question. Sounds like Melbourne tomorrow.

      PDVSA, our client was now a multi-tiered bureaucratic labyrinth with all productive decisions near impossible. Oil production was falling and safety standards became a mystery that was only solved when their refinery blew up and killed 49 workers. They then bought an oil rig from Ocean and were towing it from Mexico to their major field, except it sank when a single pump failed and nobody knew what to do. $500M gone to the bottom of the Gulf.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SP2cXoeOxY = Venezuelan Socialism – The Green Dream

      Socialism, Bernie Sanders, the Greens and Jeremy Corbyn epitomized by the decline and fall of Venezuela. California is next, then Australia …

  6. Keith Kennelly says:

    And of course it is in the interest of the managerial elites to promote and propagate the belief the Socialist/Conservative narrative is kept alive and spread.

    As I’ve said before.

    • Mickrick says:

      Keith, I rarely comment but follow those who do regularly. Rest assured, I at least, have James Burnham’s two books in my reading list. Maybe it’s something to do with rote learning from my school days…

  7. Rob Brighton says:

    In any case, evolution is change over time not necessarily advancement.

  8. Keith Kennelly says:

    Mickrick then you indeed are a very special person.

    But … you miss the point.

    Are you both, Rob and Jody, not understanding totalitarianism isn’t an improvement, like with the Nazis and the socialists and that it’s here now among us in our ‘democracy’.

    Can’t you see, that which defeats totalitarianism is indeed a change that is an improvement.

    Trumps isn’t totalitarian, that’s a change in politics and an improvement and yet isn’t a return to the past.

  9. Keith Kennelly says:

    Not you Mickrick. You get the point. You are probably aware of Burnhams predictions.

    Btw his writing style I found very difficult going.

  10. LBLoveday says:

    “I live in hope. Make Australia great again!”

    I went “home” for Mothers Day (or Mother’s Day, or Mothers’ Day as you choose) and stayed for 4 weeks. What mostly gave me hope was the tradies, still the “salt of the Earth” – out at 6:30am in the bitter cold in their utes filling up and getting a pie and a chocolate milk from the petrol station, in the pub at 5:30pm having a well-earned beer and chin-wag.

    But it reminded me of government policy 6 years ago to pay employers to take on mature age female (and only female) apprentices, regardless of aptitude and suitability (I and my drinking mates used to reckon that the best test needed to determine suitability for a female being a motor mechanic was to require her to put her hands in a container of dirty sump oil for 5 minutes). I’ve not researched current policy – where I live if you want a big, strong, mature-age man for security at a bank, that’s what you advertise for; reckon your gym would attract more customers if the receptionists were young, trim females, ditto – but here’s a text I sent to my Oz MP at that time:

    Tony,

    You’ve likely noticed renovations to The Exchange.

    I see you at your desk working while I’m enjoying a glass of red therein.

    Some electrical channelling around the ceiling molding was handled by a mature age female apprentice. Ok, she’s the same right to an apprenticeship as a young male if capable, but is she as capable?

    Skin-tight jeans, one foot on the bottom rung of the ladder, grasp the sides with both hands, look down, put the other foot on bottom rung. Repeat, getting even slower as she gets higher. At last able to reach the channelling, reaches up and does the work on the channelling within width of her shoulders.

    Climb equally slowly down, move the ladder the width of her shoulders. Repeat. Repeat.

    A young man, or even an old one like me, would have been up the ladder, done the work for a width of 1+ metres, and descended in the time she took to climb 2 rungs (hyperbole, but you get the drift). And no, I don’t think she’ll improve significantly.

    But the patrons loved the tight jeans and the wiggle, so maybe that makes it worthwhile, but I doubt the unemployed young man would agree, nor the taxpayers who effectively pay her wages to ensure she is employed in preference to him.

    Regards,

    LBL