
Does society favor the reproduction of the honest?

Those who freely express their thoughts and opinions?

If the violent can't express themselves, they are repressed and do not have a physical impact on the space around them. This includes a lack of reproduction.

Connection to the land increases with perception, emotion, and individualism.

Ants are so unaware of their surroundings.

They are moving, turning, grabbing, aligning.

But does the ant sit and observe? 

No. 

He is driven by *signal*, not *perception*.

~~


*How many people do you rely on -*

*How many people are responsible for your Life?*

*How much uncertainty can you sustain in your Life?*

*How immediate is the energy from your actions?*


Movement and risk tolerance are directly linked.

Does Industrialization make products cheaper, or does it make cheaper products? 



Will Durant says there are four components to civilization: Economics, Politics, Religion, and Culture. Of these, economics is our most direct connection to nature. It is how we eat, drink, and shelter ourselves from the storm.

It is commonly thought that the individual is the atomic unit of society: the basis on which all else is formed. This is false.

Humans were not formed to live alone. Our smallest and most ancient unit is the tribe. This is a familial unit on the scale of hundreds of people. Such primitive tribes still exist in nature.

Individualism as a political ideology is innately tied to a relatively large governmental size. Individualism and advanced Western technology are not coincidental in their appearance: they are the same.



**Society is a trade of individual liveliness for predictability**

But which is better, who can say?

The ants are a successful species. But so are the lions.

The West and the East worship these different human archetypes. 

There are two ways to narrow the gap between what one desires and what one has: one is to increase wealth, and the other is to decrease desire.

The Asian societies are antlike - great masses of individuals, subservient to the greater organism.

The Americans are bearlike - powerful autonomous individuals, who enjoy stretching out and hunting on large pieces of land.

However, neither ants nor bears are the animals most similar to humans. That honor goes to the ape.

African societies are the societies not moving towards a new archetype.

The Africans are chimplike - small clans of warlike individuals, often living from naturally-growing food.

The African lifestyle, then, is most similar to other primates. If evolution is true, both capitalism and communism are opposed to this African state of being, which has existed for millions of years. 

They are both large-scale social structures, seeking opposite ideals of human experience - individual autonomy and collective coordination. And, therefore, Capitalism and Communism are very similar.

Yes, capitalism is collectivist. The strange paradox is that, even though the American society worships individual autonomy - there are no sovereign humans in nature. Individual autonomy is only possible through technology. Technology is inherently collectivistic. Therefore, individualism is a collectivist ideology.

Capitalism and Communism are, so far, the two most collectivist ideologies in history. 

Imitation of both the ant and the lion require a high level of verbal intelligence to sustain. They require agriculture, pastoralism, and robust government structures.

The least collectivist ideology is the tribe. The tribe is the smallest self-sustaining human unit that has ever existed. It requires the least technology and verbal thought to operate. 

The development of communication and technology are tied, because the vast majority of technology is reliant on a larger supply chain. And the larger supply chain is reliant on communication. And communication is reliant on technology.

The development of communication and the amount of order and stillness in society are also tied. The more movement all individuals have, the less of an ability they will have to coordinate en masse. 

This is because mass movement must be learned through the brain, unlike individual movement. All humans know how to eat, fight, and reproduce. Anything beyond that requires learning and brain-led action. To conduct this learning requires stillness and outward attention. 

A sort of paradox in America now is that many men seek to become as collectivist as possible, typically through technology, with the hopes of one day becoming an individual with purely animalistic instincts. 

In other words, many men spend vast quantities of time in brain-oriented stillness, with the dream of one day simply cruising on a boat and having sex and eating well.

Since 1945, the culture of the America has begun splitting from the ideal of the bear. We have increasingly fluctuated between wanting more and less movement; more and less coordination; individualism or collectivism. This is an existential threat.

We have built a structure with a particular level of complexity. We are now fighting on whether we should increase or reduce it, with wider and wider gaps between the proposals. This war threatens the entire structure.

Farming and law are such complex structures that we have no direct animal analogue.

Beavers and ants are good comparisons, though.

Pastoralism is the highest calling of all - an existence based on the ordering of other large creatures.

Ants practice some form of pastoral agriculture with Aphids, herding them to safety and feeding on the sweet substance they produce.

Ants also farm. Leafcutter ants bring leaves back to their den and grow fungus to be consumed.


*Logic is Lower Bandwidth than the Senses*

So, we have the two archetypes: lion and ant. Both of these archetypes are distant from the original primate.

Interestingly, one thing which follows from this distance of archetype from the ape is that both sorts of societies have a “distance layer,” which is a large group or set of groups whose sole focus is distant times or places.

This “extra layer” of society consists of all the technological and civilized jobs which deal in high levels of abstraction: the more civilized, the more distant the affairs.

Take, for instance, academic studies:

The primary purpose of all academic study is the ability to map or manipulate distant matter. This is the usefulness of science, math, history, philosophy, and computing. 

Some careers which involve such geographic or temporal distance are engineering, journalism, radio, or air travel. 

Here, distance does not mean simply physical distance but also time. The purpose of science is to discover experimental results which can be replicated over large distances. These distances could be geographic - scientists in other countries should get the same result - or temporal, meaning that scientists 300 years from now should get the same result.  

Africans, however, are close.

Africans display characteristics common among all primitive apes and humans: a mind focused almost solely on the present and small social structures. 

There are conservative critiques of the infertility of modern liberalism. And, it is true: progressive ideals directly destroy the birth rate through abortion, open borders, and loose morals. 

However, Western conservatives are still liberal compared to the rest of the world.

And, Western conservatives still have a lower birth rate than the rest of the world.

Indeed, there seems to be an inverse correlation between civilization and birth rate. 

Now, from the African perspective, can they not make the same critique of us? That ours is an infertile culture?

Empirically, it would be true. 

Even in our larger societies, we are only able to form deep connections with several hundred people. This would imply that the human social mind has not changed as fast as the human society. 

It seems the most blissful human existence is that of the successful tribesman.

After all - is Life not the ability to move unimpeded?

Is all Life not wrapped in that desire?

Expand. Grow.

Life is about how much you can move without pain.

Kanye has spoken many times about how he wants to make everyone more like a child.

About how he believes children are where good is contained.

This is directly polar to the "grown up" inhibitions which prohibit movement in the world.

Life is walkable. Life is spontaneous. Life is colorful. Life is energetic. Life is rich. Nearly every action is Life or Death. 

Technology is a facsimile for Life. As is verbal thought. 

Too much technology means too much disconnection from Life or Death. The “power process”, as Kacyznski calls it, is not achievable. Everything is either boring or impossible. There are no hard, vigorous tasks to be done. 

Our logical mass of control is a safety net, but too much of it results in slow death.

And, indeed, it seems what whatever is experienced or produced within this net is inferior to what is experienced or produced in raw nature. 

Consider music: for all the speakers and sound systems for a concert, the most beautiful and substantive sound is the raw voice of the singer. We may diffuse this information; compress it so it can be communicated over time and space; but something is always lost. We can never surpass the basic experience of our ears. 

Logic is lower bandwidth than the senses.


*The Evolution of Technology*

Technology is tools. An ape and his rocks; a hacker and his computer. We all use tools to shape reality.

What’s the difference between a rock and a computer? Mainly, it is the computer’s long path from raw materials to finished product. 

All tools are made from nature. However, the length of the path from raw materials to tool varies drastically. This difference in length is the difference between natural and social technology.

The more natural a technology is, the shorter the path from materials to product. Rocks are perhaps the most natural technology: apes use them to crack nuts. Fire is not as natural, but close. No society is required to create or use it. The ingredients are directly in nature.

Social technology is technology whose value or creation is derived from society. The more a technology relies on societal order and cooperation, the more social it is. A computer is the extreme example of a social technology: to create one, we need giant supply chains spanning multiple continents.

When we speak of technology today, we nearly always mean social technology. The vast majority of American lifestyles are reliant on a huge and intricate supply chain. As computers become more common, this supply chain is getting even bigger.  

Actually, it turns out, the vast majority of all technology ever invented is social. There are few really natural technologies. Fire, primitive buildings, tools, and farming are natural. But most of what we see is social. Even mechanical clocks, which are an obvious necessity today, was not invented until around 800 years ago. Before then, the medieval societies simply relied on the sun.

This means that when we think about technology, we are implicitly thinking about society. When we think about whether a certain amount of technology is good or bad, we are really thinking about whether a certain amount of *society* is good or bad. In other words:

“How much technology is good?”

Is the same question as 

“How large is the ideal society?”

As we have seen over the past 6,000 years, social technology compounds on itself. We invent writing; this births law; law births the nation; the nation births roads; roads help us transmit the law and any other idea.

This means that there is a big secret embedded within the most technology: it's not actually about the technology at all.

The secret of humanity's technological evolution is that it only happens through changing human genes. Specifically, we have altered human biology to make us more sociable. This is how civilization forms. Aggressive outliers are conquered, punished, and killed. This allows the members of a previous tribe to integrate into a larger whole.

It is the exact same idea as the domestication of dogs from wolves. Aggression is punished, while friendliness is encouraged. Over time, this creates organisms which can exist in close harmony with little or minimal violence.

The Jews are the oldest and most effective civilizing force. The Africans are the oldest and most effective animalistic force. The confrontation between Jews and Africans is the final battle of civilization itself.

This is why Africans are everywhere in media. It is part of a two-pronged Jewish strategy. They use the host civilization to exert force on their next target for domestication, while also making attractive overtures of a better life to the target's citizens.

The problem, though, is that European civilization is becoming unstable. We are still very early in the process of African domestication, so if civilization were to fall it would be catastrophic for Jews and Europeans alike. Apparently, there is a strong possibility that Germanic civilization will implode before the Jews can establish a strong foothold in Africa. Already, blacks like Candace Owens and Kanye West are running a direct campaign against Jewish power.

Therefore, from a Germanic perspective, the same playbook can be run. Exaggerate black opposition to the Jews, while making overtures to them on the basis that this civilization is Germanic, and if it falls then it will be catastrophic for Jews and Germanics alike.

At the same time, we must establish more primal communities in some areas. We must be able to balance the African energy with our own. We must have many spectrums of primality among us, such that if one is to fall then the more ancient communities can continue.



As noted in the previous chapter, our nations yearn for more collaboration. Is this because we are afraid of competition? 





Social technology itself has two primary classifications: transportation and communication. 

Of these, transportation is more fundamental, because communication technology is really just the transportation of very small items (such as electrical impulses, or letters in the mail). Before electricity and the telegraph, transportation encapsulated both.

Most technologies are a mix of natural and social:

Natural gas, for instance, is very useful for physical manipulation. It is also, of course, natural. However, it can only be extracted and refined through a very lengthy and expensive process which requires the cooperation of thousands of humans. Therefore, natural gas is very social, even though it comes from the Earth and manipulates the Earth extensively.

Tesla cars are another example of overlap. Tesla is using physical technology to make its cars, but the cars rely on heavy communication between each other and with the man-made roads that our society has built. Teslas are not built for a non-centralized society. Therefore, even though they are physical inventions, they are also extremely social.



Social technology makes up the vast majority of all inventions. Collectivization, supply chains, and the exchange of knowledge have allowed for drastic rates of invention.

However, this raises questions for our own civilization: one which seems to be faltering under the weight of its own collectivist goals. The Globalists, after all, worship technology. This worship is shrinking us. But can we have technology without centralization?

Can natural gas be refined by a small community? Can a computer be made by a village? No. The more social technology is present, the more centralized society will be.

This puts us in a difficult position. We want to live technological lives, like the Globalists. But we also want to be fruitful and multiply, like the Barbarians. Is there a middle ground? How much centralization should humanity have? How much should we focus on technology?



Nature is God's domain. So is the church, which was previously the brain of society. Thus, even within Christianity, we can see the principles of competition and collaboration at odds.

If we want to think of "left" and "right", perhaps we should find the ultimate expressions of these principles. My argument is this: the fundamental principle of "left" is increased collectivism and centralization in human society. The fundamental principle of "right" is living in the old ways, which means living like the apes and the original humans.

This would create an implication that the Africans are the most right-wing human race, and the ultimate conservatives. Along with some scattered tribes on the Earth, the Africans are very slow to collectivize and collaborate on a large scale.

If it is true that the Africans were the first humans, this further argues the point. They are, in fact, the most traditional human beings on Earth. Civilization itself is a liberal idea.

This also implies that it is primitive peoples who are most reliant on God. They exert little control over the physical world, relying on weather and natural patterns in order to survive.

In society, on the other hand, many of the citizens are quite disconnected from God's domain, and therefore are less directly reliant on God and more reliant on other people. The level of centralization we have today is vastly taken for granted.



Look at this famous email from Steve Jobs:
  
From: Steve Jobs, sjobs@apple.com
To: Steve Jobs, sjobs@apple.com
Date: Thursday, September 2, 2010 at 11:08PM

I grow little of the food I eat, and of the little I do grow
I did not breed or perfect the seeds.

I do not make any of my own clothing.

I speak a language I did not invent or refine.

I did not discover the mathematics I use.

I am protected by freedoms and laws I did not conceive
of or legislate, and do not enforce or adjudicate.

I am moved by music I did not create myself.

When I needed medical attention, I was helpless
to help myself survive.

I did not invent the transistor, the microprocessor,
object oriented programming, or most of the technology
I work with.

I love and admire my species, living and dead, and am
totally dependent on them for my life and well being.

Sent from my iPad



Each man in nature according to his ability.



The church used to be the brain and the workers used to build its cathedrals.

They still do - but we worship humanity and technology instead of God and Nature.

The church was the DNA of society. That is its function.

Now, the DNA is the universities, technologists, and researchers.



Technological society will have Catholicism.

Natural society will have Protestantism.

America is becoming more Urban and settled, and therefore it is becoming more Catholic.


Thesis of the Globalist religion

Is the womb the greatest inventor, or the brain?

Are humans the greatest creation, or human systems?




 