Diversity + Proximity = War

In the clearest illustration yet of this infamous Chateau maxim, a new study is out showing how increased diversity in the form of bordered territory is leading to more war.

Wars steadily increase for over a century, fed by more borders and cheaper conflict.

New research by the University of Warwick and Humboldt University shows that the frequency of wars between states increased steadily from 1870 to 2001 by 2% a year on average. The research argues that conflict is being fed by economic growth and the proliferation of new borders.

We may think the world enjoyed periods of relative freedom from war between the Cold War and 9/11 but the new research by Professor Mark Harrison from at the University of Warwick’s the Centre for Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy, and Professor Nikolaus Wolf from Humboldt University, shows that the number of conflicts between pairs of states rose steadily from 6 per year on average between 1870 and 1913 to 17 per year in the period of the two World Wars, 31 per year in the Cold War, and 36 per year in the 1990s.

Professor Mark Harrison from the University of Warwick said: “The number of conflicts has been rising on a stable trend. Because of two world wars, the pattern is obviously disturbed between 1914 and 1945 but remarkably, after 1945 the frequency of wars resumed its upward course on pretty much the same path as before 1913.”

One of the key drivers is the number of countries, which has risen dramatically – from 47 in 1870 to 187 in 2001.

People like to form into competing groups. This natural impulse is encoded in every human being’s DNA. It is a deeply embedded encoding, and can’t be excised. It can only be controlled by authoritarian measures, i.e. ultimately at the point of a gun. More 20th century borders is likely the manifestation of these ancient desires seeking to congeal into ever smaller, and thus more closely related, human tribes, and now being free to do so. It should be no surprise to a realist of human nature that more borders would lead to more war.

Naturally, the hopelessly naive among you might ask, “Why not just dissolve borders like we are doing here in the USA? Fewer borders should mean less war, right?” Incorrect. What instead will happen — and what we are seeing happening today in the USA — is a chaotic scramble — a BIOLOGICAL IMPERATIVE — to form de facto borders within the essentially borderless nation. (The modern USA is the closest approximation we have to an essentially borderless nation ruled by a legitimate government. There is no way to explain the unsupervised migration of 50 million Mexicans in 30 years that starts with the premise that we have a working border mechanism in place.)

De facto internal borders are based on race, ethnicity, religion, ideology, and social status, just as hard borders. La Raza is an internal border. The Congressional Black Caucus is an internal border. Journalism is an internal border (80-90% of journalists are registered Democrats). Cosmopolitan elites are an internal border. Schools are an internal border (ever notice how students congregate in a lunchroom cafeteria? How about the quickness with which urban white elites set off for the decidedly less diverse suburbs when the kids reach schooling age?). J-Date is an internal border. NASCAR is an internal border. Libertardian blogs are an internal border. Gay Pride and Puerto Rican Day parades are internal borders. Gerrymandered districts are internal borders. Neighborhoods are internal borders. Of course, one notable group has no recognized internal border at all. And we know what happens to undefended, borderless lands: they get overrun.

Active wars of bloodshed might not be the result of such internal border-making (though don’t count your ammo before it’s fired), but all the political machinations and propaganda of hot wars are there in spades in our relatively bloodless diversity wars. The only thing missing is the stack of dead, uniformed bodies. “Uniformed” being the operative word here.

A country as (formerly) gifted with human capital as the USA can live with a little bit of diversity. But like every other nation on earth, beholden as we all are to our Darwinian overlord, it can’t live with a lot of it. We’ll soon find that out.

Read Full Post »

Is Female Careerism A Form Of Infidelity?

Reader Sidewinder writes:

While some degree of the female fascination/obsession with credentials can be explained as projecting onto themselves what they find desirable in men, I think there’s more to it than that. Not all, but a sizeable percentage of intelligent women become obsessed with their school or work. Maybe its just self-centeredness, but many women place their “career” to such a high level of importance that it almost becomes the primary component of their identity. Having read a good deal of marriage therapy literature the past year, some therapists have classified this female career obsession as a form of infidelity to the family and marrage. And its no coincidence that the vast majority of female infidelity takes place in connection with her workplace.

I wonder if in addition to projection, this obsession stems from an unconscious recognition of their declining attractiveness. Its like the 40 year old women at the gym: while they know that men aren’t especially attracted to muscular, hard-bodied women, its really the best option for them considering the alternative of sagging cellulite. Maybe girls latch on to school and work in their 20s because they feel its the only thing they can do to try to mitigate their inevitable declining looks as they approach their 30s and 40s.

Paging Penelope Trunk…

I agree that there is something “off” about women who are excessively devoted to their careers and to obtaining an acronymic parade of pointless credentials. Careerist shrikes are some of the most unpleasant, unfeminine women to be around. They must have more androgen receptors than normal women to be so grating to the male sensibility. Sure, they can fuck like Viagra-laced male pornstars, but as soon as you relieve yourself in them you will feel a second powerful urge to escape their aggro nastiness.

Sidewinder hits on an angle not much discussed in the media (obvi). Women who place their careers front and center are committing a kind of betrayal of their sex’s biological and psychological imperatives. It’s like a big middle finger to everything that distinguishes the feminine from the masculine, the yin from the yang. It’s quite possible that the worst offenders — the 14 hour day lawyercunts and the graduate school hermits — embrace the male-oriented rat race and achievement spectacle because it offers a welcome distraction from either spinsterly loneliness or boring beta male partners who, while intellectually are rationalized as good matches, do not viscerally excite them.

Maybe, too, these careerist chicks see their jobs as a way to enter the world of the alpha male, to have a taste of what it would be like to be part of his life. The office cubes and doormen and glassy skyscrapers have given legions of plain janes the daily stimulation to mentally masturbate fantasy romances with the alpha males who run their companies or the alpha salesmen who greet them at the front desk with a twinkle in their eyes.

Perhaps, as Sidewinder also noted, female careerism presents the illusion of a safe harbor from the approaching wall. When a woman’s SMV inevitably craters in her 40s, her career might be all she has to lift her spirits, especially if she has no husband she loves, no kids, or even just one kid who spends most of his time playing CoD or robbing convenience stores. Women with larger families don’t seem to dread the coming apocalypse of their beauty as much as the quasi-barren SWPLs seem to do, who start using expensive anti-wrinkle creams at age twelve.

The dumbfuck feminists will naturally ask, “Why doesn’t this same theory apply to men? Aren’t they escaping sad love lives by retreating to their careers?”

Don’t you know it’s different for guys? Unlike women, men are evolutionarily programmed to be resource providers for women. It is not a betrayal of a man’s innate purpose in life to ambitiously pursue achievement and accolades. In fact, just the opposite; it’s an affirmation of that ancient purpose. A man turning his back on raising his status is akin to a woman letting herself get fat and slovenly.

The women for whom career success is their comfort and their purpose are some sort of weird, monstrous amalgam of man and woman, halfway between both worlds, their sexual polarity askew. These types tend to attract either intense short term flings with alphas or plodding marriages with dweeby, effete kitchen bitches.

Additionally, it can be argued that a sexual market which favors easy sex (for alpha males only) and a marriage market increasingly against men’s interests pushes women into the careerist mindset, because subconsciously they realize that the guarantee of a strong male provider that was once their birthright is now a sucker’s bet, and one they have convinced themselves they don’t even want. Women, sensing the change in the rules, have responded by storming the state college citadels to earn their communications and women’s studies degrees by the boatload.

Of course, as I always remind the women reading here who complain about the change in the game…

Ladies, you get the men you created.

Read Full Post »

Government Jobs Defined

A commenter over at OneSTDV had this to say about government jobs:

Easy air conditioned jobs for chicks. Gets them out of the house, caters to their egos, and taxes men to pay their salaries. By the time the chicks get bored and disillusioned the players are done with them and they will be looking for husbands to support them.

I was listening to a girl complain about her impending unemployment, and her plans for finding a new job. I asked her what she was looking into. “Oh, something in media and communications.”

The current trajectory of America is unsustainable, and will implode sooner rather than later. Right now, it is a race between Malthusian mass disenfranchisement and the creation of a robot labor force to cater to our survival and entertainment needs. Any bets which way this will go?

Read Full Post »

When Will Libertarians Grapple With The Fact That Women’s Suffrage Increased The Size And Scope Of Government?

I mean, the evidence is staring them right in the face. And yet, not a peep from them. How utterly surprising.

ps 50 million mexicans will do the same. heh heh.

Read Full Post »

Cheap Chalupas On Loser Men

The ol’ Open-borders-for-thee-but-gated-academia-for-me blogger-cum-economist has taken a stab at trying to explain why one-fifth of all prime working age men are unemployed. Other than the obvious market factors (helllooooo cheap, displacing, low human capital labor and negative externalities!), I’ve already outlined in this post why this recession is structurally different than past recessions, and the reasons for the decline in male labor market participation. Quote:

Prediction: As women’s financial status rises to levels at or above the available men in their social sphere, they will have great difficulty finding an acceptable long-term partner. The men, for their part, will turn away from emphasizing their ability to provide as they discover their mediocre-paying corporate jobs are no longer effective displays of mating value. They will instead emphasize the skills of “personality dominance”.

That post is now more than three years old. And its prediction has come true. All hail the Chateau, for here truth resideth, and the liars and dissemblers hang by their entrails from crosses made of fiat money.

Polite, liberal society seriously underestimates the impact the Pill, abortion and women’s financial independence has had on the labor market and employment levels. Incentives do matter, and in a world where women can pretty much support themselves and have sex free of the consequences of pregnancy, men as provider betas have become more expendable. A man cannot get the traction with women he once could get by simply going to an office from 9 to 5.

What I call the Four Sirens of the Sexual Apocalypse has changed the rules of the dating market since its advent in the early 1960s. Men have either had to adapt to continue getting young hot tight pussy, or they have had to drop out, and society has enabled their dropping out with the convenient narcotics of video games and wide screen TVs, (and soon to be sexbots). Invasion of tens of millions of peasant laborers has contributed to the labor market malaise by sapping the native men of their will to compete for stagnant or dropping wages.

Yet, a bright spot exists. For those who won’t settle for less than success (and success for men is predominantly a function of how well they do with women, either directly or indirectly through the acquisition of power), game — i.e. studied charisma — has rushed in to fill the void.

Any economist whose head is stuck in a cycle of mumbling about aggregate demand is simply not seeing the forest for the trees. Widen your scope to include the id monster that supercharges human nature and behavior and you will begin to fathom consilience. Until then…

enjoy your exotic restaurant guides.

Read Full Post »

To Thine Own Shrine Be True

Why was Osama Bin Laden’s body buried at sea before third parties could confirm its authenticity through DNA tests? Based on the experience of the last ten twenty thirty years, do you autonomically believe anything the government tells you these days? It would have been a simple matter to hold onto the body for the media to confirm it was Bin Laden.

A commenter over at Steve Sailer’s says it best:

I find it weird that they [claimed] Bin Laden ‘wasn’t a real Muslim’, but then rush to bury him within 24 hours in accordance with Islamic law.

File under: PC makes you stoopid. Of course, Osama was a real Muslim. He was following the Koran to the letter when he declared his jihad against the infidels. But PC has infected the minds of everyone in the West, top to bottom.

The circumstances over this capture open a bigger can of worms than they close. It’s looking like Pakistan’s intelligence agency and military knew Osama was alive and were actively hiding him from US forces while their government fleeced the American taxpayer to the tune of billions. Shifty Muslims, feminism, PC, diversity, open borders, bailouts, subprime mortgages… maybe Americans should come pre-equipped with the word SUCKER tattooed on their foreheads?

I hope the Navy SEALs pissed on Bin Laden’s corpse before they tossed him overboard.

Read Full Post »

A Nation Of Einsteins

A libertarian open-borders economist asserts:

Smart people may excel in all activities, but as the law of comparative advantage reveals (see here and here) everyone’s better off if people with high IQs outsource their less challenging tasks to others.  In a society of Einsteins, Einsteins take out the garbage, scrub floors, and wash dishes.

A nation of Einsteins would invent labor-saving devices for these mind-numbing tasks. And a nation of Einsteins wouldn’t make as much of a mess to begin with. How conveniently these libertarian economists forget the concept of externalities.

Stupid people do a lot to me. Have you paid taxes lately?

Read Full Post »