Return to question 11
Last updated by William B. Fox 25 Nov 2007:
The genetic viewpoint provides a good starting point for this discussion. The whole trend of scientific research in recent decades has been to establish a strong genetic component in virtually all aspects of human individual and social behavior (see commentary for question two). There is a genetic basis for not only for the distribution of intelligence within human populations, but also for more intangible characteristics such as moral character. As an example of the latter, we know from brain scans of humans that the brains of psychopaths function very different in terms of basic stimulus-response compared to normal people, and according to some researchers about 5% of the white population is made up of these people. I describe research on psychopaths in greater detail in my mutualism vs. parasitism article.
When you think "genetic," think "bell-curve." We learn in introductory biology courses that virtually any characteristics with a genetic base tend to distribute themselves along a bell curve. One reason is that all genetic characteristics undergo mutational change over time. There is a high probability of relatively little change for a certain period of time, and during this same period a low probability of a high degree of change. Plot these probabilities on a graph, and you get a bell curve distribution function.
Getting back to psychopaths, we might expect that they comprise the left hand tail of a bell-shaped distribution curve of moral character traits within a human population. At the other extreme, on the right hand side of the bell shaped distribution curve, we would expect individuals with a very high degree of social altruism and nobility of character. Somewhere in the middle we would expect the great mass of people, who are neither particularly devils nor angels, but some mixture of the two.
What does this mean in terms of individual political behavior? Well, obviously as the intellectual complexity and moral ambiguity of certain situations increases, we can imagine a horizontal vertical line sweeping from left to right across our bell-shaped distribution curve, where only the people to the right of the line are competent to deal with these issues. We can imagine, for example, with fairly simple issues, the dividing line is to the left of the large center bulge of the bell shape. However, with very complex issues, note how as we start moving our dividing line to the right of the center of mass of the bell shape, the percentage of competent people begins to drop almost exponentially.
At the same time we consider these biological facts of life, it is important to keep in mind the real meaning of the "republican virtue" concept espoused by Thomas Paine in Common Sense (recollect the passage in Common Sense "where republican virtue fails, slavery ensues) and ancient Roman writers.
My understanding of the "republican virtue" concept is as follows. While it is wonderful thing to decentralize political power and create rational government processes as a strategy to prevent tyranny (my definition of the essence of republican government), the process of decentralization pre-supposes that the overwhelming majority of the population which holds individual political rights has the requisite level of intelligence, education, rationality, diligence, attention to citizenship duty, independence of mind, and moral character (all of these things sum up as. "republican virtue") to wisely wield this power. If not, the republic will become corrupt and fail and ultimately be replaced by a dictatorship ("...slavery ensues.")
Unfortunately, for those of us who are ardent aficionados of republican government, psychological research studies on group mental characteristics in America pose some painful questions.
For example, we are told from the diffusion of innovation theory that the percentage of early adopters and secondary adopters is a minority of the population. What does this say about the ability of the general population to effectively react in time to major threats that are outside the intellectual sandbox created for them by the controlled national media? What does this say about real independence of mind required to fulfill the "republican virtue" concept?
We also know that a large percentage of the population is susceptible to hypnosis. What does this say about maintaining that certain independent, critical frame of mind consistent with "republican virtue"?
We know that on certain critical issues, most Americans find them too complicated and lack the intellectual curiosity to get their arms around them. An excellent example involves the corrupt Federal Reserve system created in 1913, that has provided the fiat-money rocket fuel required for the out of control expansion of that neo-Jacobin welfare warfare global super state which we call the U.S. Government. Henry Ford once voiced words to the effect that if most Americans understood their corrupt financial system, there would a revolution in the streets the following morning. I have also heard conservative talk show hosts on Republic Broadcasting Network, Antiwar.com Radio, and elsewhere comment that Ron Paul one of the very few Congressman who is not completely bought and paid for by the Jewish Lobby and other corrupt special interests who has actually taken the time to understand the Federal Reserve system and ask hard-headed question from its leaders, such as the former Chairman Alan Greenspan or the current plutocratic front man Ben Bernanke. Pretty pathetic. Again, we ask the question, how much "republican virtue" do we see among most citizens with this issue?
There other painful questions worth mentioning here. We know from political science studies published by the American Enterprise Institute and other sources that as broad statistical group, women, Jews, blacks, homosexuals, and other "minorities" tend to vote on average about one ideological standard deviation to the left of straight white males. One standard deviation on a bell curve is a huge difference. Generally "leftism" in American history has meant bigger, more nanny-like government. It has also meant more regulation of business, more taxes, more runaway government pork spending, and less individual freedom.
It is interesting to examine this issue on the individual cognitive level as well. The organic structure of human brains has been sculptured by long evolutionary processes to optimize problem solving and survival in relatively primitive environments. They include Neolithic hunting and gathering situations as well as more recent farming. Jews are unique relative to other groups by virtue of the very long period of time they have spent functioning within urban environments in trading and brokerage positions, but are nevertheless biologically constrained in other ways.
Humans tend to make lots of repeated cognitive errors when dealing with complex social phenomena. This is the viewpoint of an emergent field of behavioral finance in economics that attempts to interpret problems in decision-making from this perspective. I discuss how all this relates to logical fallacies in my environmental vs. genetics article.
Unfortunately our government-funded, multi-racial school system has failed miserably to address this problem. Average student performance has deteriorated over the past few decades despite the fact that America spends more per capita on students than most other countries in the world.
Please also note the graph below provided by Michael Hodges at the Grandfather Education Report. This measures SAT score results relative to education expenditures to derive an education productivity index.
Mr Hodges comments:
The poor level of education quality domestically and vs. foreign nations places our young at great risk. This seriously impacts the economic future of our youth, including their future living standards - as they face the most internationally and technologically competitive era in history. Here's a picture you may not have seen. It demonstrates the 71% decline in the education quality productivity index for the 34-year period up until SAT tests were revised in scoring methods and made less rigorous. This index shows the relationship between education quality (SAT scores) and education spending (inflation-adjusted, '93 dollars) per student is worse than 34 years earlier - 71% worse. Despite rapidly rising inflation-adjusted spending per student over this period SAT scores declined. As a result, education productivity fell 71% - - as seen in the chart. (quality continued to deteriorate in the years following this chart, covered down the page). (Note: Some say if one wants SAT scores in the future that cannot be compared to higher scores in past decades, without improving student learning, simply make the test less rigorous and change scoring as has been done - - just as if the distance to the left field baseball stadium fence was reduced to produce more 'home runs'). This chart confirms: 'The quality of schooling is far worse today than it was in 1955,'' Dr. Milton Friedman, Nobel laureate.
The declining education productivity trend correlates highly with the declining white middle class population that is being physically replaced by nonwhites. As Tom Chittum observes in Civil War Two: The Coming Breakup of America (carried by America First Books) the white population has recently been dropping by roughly 1-1.5% a year as a percentage of the total population.
I view republican government as essentially nothing more than an effort to adapt elements of the scientific method to governmental processes to make them more rational, more stable, more representative, and less inclined to tyranny. It is essentially nothing more than just a refined, institutionalized group decision making process.
Many commentators on the American Right note that a major reason why the Jewish supremacist-controlled national media hypes "democracy" as an inherent right with mystical properties fit for all peoples around the planet is because, paradoxically, they more than anyone else think that real democracy is a complete joke. In other words, the media masters are a viperous gang of complete hypocrites. What the media masters really believe in is their ability to brainwash the masses through their use of mass media. They also believe in their financial power to buy off politicians behind the scenes. The term "democracy" to them is simply one more hypnotic rhetorical manipulative tool used to pacify the masses and tell them what they want to hear. This is one reason why they fear real democratization of media through the Internet. This is a major reason why these sinister plutocrats currently seek every back door means possible to shut up dissidents and censor the cyber world (Please see the Rev Ted Pike archive for an overview of First Amendment battles).
What we really need in America are hard-headed realists who nevertheless have a sentiment for our republican traditions and the plight of the dwindling white middle class. Perhaps such individuals can make constructive suggestions to deal with the very serious problem addressed by Michael Hodges involving the declining competence and quality of the general electorate.
Incidentally, the highly decentralized society of the early 19th century naturally lent itself towards solving this problem. America was over 90% rural. The so-called "best and brightest" were fairly evenly distributed across America and heavily embedded in local communities. They typically served as the opinion leaders. They typically lived out their lives responding to the needs of their local communities. "Democracy" meant the voice of such highly competent and devoted people dispersed throughout the heartland, who led the political behavior of common people in their locality.
One can get a strong sense of this, for example, in the famous "Sockdolager!" story where Congressman Davy Congressman, himself a self-taught pioneer, got upbraided by a farmer he happened to meet while out on horseback while meeting constituents in western Tennessee. This farmer was also a very innately intelligent self-made man. Both individuals felt a fierce loyalty to their locality and took the principles of republican government very seriously, or at least by today's standards.
The industrialization and urbanization of the 20th century completely changed this pattern. The distortion in grass roots political leadership was severely aggravated by the centrist political coup de etat accomplished by the Abraham Lincoln dictatorship during the War of Northern Aggression Against Southern Independence, which of course obliterated States' Rights. . It was also sabotaged by the financial coup de etat accomplished by Jewish bankers and their gentile front men with the creation of the privately owned Federal Reserve Banking System in 1913. Increasingly, a preponderance of the "best and brightest" across America lost their sentiment for the common people in the heartland and gravitated to New York, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, and other major power centers where they wound up spending most of their lives using their brilliance to make quick bucks as front men and apologists for Jews.
I certainly got a strong personal sense out of all this when I graduated from a well known Eastern business school in 1984, and the best-paying job I could find in media was as a financial analyst at the CBS headquarters at 51 W 52nd Street in Midtown Manhattan, and certainly not in any of the small towns where I had grown up.
Two blocks to the south of where I worked, in Rockefeller Center, was NBC. Two blocks to the north, at that time, was ABC. Hence, within a two block radius there in Midtown Manhattan, were three networks that supplied 75% of the news information absorbed by most Americans at that time. Furthermore, the average American household left its TV on about seven hours a day. When people changed jobs within the TV network industry, most of the time they would simply move a couple of blocks in Midtown Manhattan. It was a very consolidated and incestuous situation. And most of the people at senior levels were either Jews or their gentile collaborators. As an example, I was once told by an Academy-award winning Hollywood producer in the privacy of one of his homes that out of about a hundred people who controlled all the financing and distribution of motion pictures, every single one of them was Jewish.
All of this has significantly changed with the advent of the Internet, or at least as long as we can prevent the ADL and other tyrannical Jewish organizations from shutting us down. (Again, please see the Rev Ted Pike archive). Needless to say, prior to the Internet, it seems so shockingly unreal that such a relatively small number of people --a group referred to as "the most criminal of all races" by ancient Roman writers -- could have been so empowered as to pump so much pro-Zionist, multi-racial, multi-cultural, pro-homosexual, pro-radical feminist, neo-communist sewage into the brains of so many Americans across the heartland for so long.
I think that as part of the solution, the so-called "best and brightest" have to regain a sentiment for the common people, and get back in the corner of the dwindling white middle class out in the heartland. They also have to repudiate the Jewish special penchant for deception, gangsterism, financial manipulation, and quick dishonest gain and instead embrace the more traditional American conservative values of industrial heroes like Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, and Andrew Carnegie.
Proceed to commentary for question 12