More and more individuals throughout the West and Anglo-sphere are looking around and wondering "how the hell did we get here?". In my home Country of Australia it has been a long, hard and often frustrating slog to finally break through the apathy and consistently see everyday citizens finally ask this question. When one asks ten different people one will get ten different answers. Many are uninformed or misinformed and there is so much fake news, fake sourcing, gate-keeping, lying by omission and outright misdirection, that it is really difficult at times to put one's finger on it. So it begs the question: how did we end up in this state of moral, economic and social decay?
This is not an easy question to answer, and to do so fully would likely end up being longer than the average PhD submission. There are a number of Alternate Media personalities who are quite reliable on this subject such as Stefan Molyneux, Jordan Peterson, Douglas Murray etc. who are well-read, well-researched, knowledgeable, logical and are open about biases unlike our frienemies in the Mainstream Media. It is certainly well worth taking the time to look at their material and judge their work on it's own merits. In order to understand and appreciate what is happening in our Societies now, it is best to zoom out and (I know it is boring to many) examine History.
There is one recurring theme in History that seems to be the catalyst for destroying strong, vibrant and overall wealthy Societies- central planning. This plague bacillus has been responsible for the fall of Rome, the miseries inflicted within the USSR, Mao's China, Ghandi and Jehru's India etc., and practically every fall (outside of conquest) in between. Hayek lays this out quite well in his book "The Road To Serfdom". In addition to this the Marxist tenet of 'oppressed versus oppressor', (adapted from the original 'proletariat versus bourgeoisie'), and the cultural and moral relativism of Post-Modernism, ends in a Society rotting from the inside out- and from the outside in.
In a culture based on individual freedom and responsibility aka Judeo-Christian principles and Enlightenment values, one is very likely to get a fairer, more free and overall more happy, healthy and wealthy populace. This was the model that built the modern West and helped to bring the poverty rate both in individual Nations and on a Global scale to an unprecedented low. Central planning ruins this; and, often undoes decades if not centuries of hard work, moral stability and capital gain within the space of a couple of generations. The following, in various modes and speeds of execution, seem to be the methods of crashing such a Society:
- Attack and destroy the family unit;
- Attack the "other" i.e. deity (with attendant values), and replace it with state-worship;
- Centralise the banking system;
- Develop a welfare estate;
- Centralise education, higher academia and media (for indoctrination);
- Hyper-regulate the markets and over-tax the populace;
- Increasingly encroach on the individual's freedoms and liberties i.e. a police state;
- Import unmanageable numbers of incompatible immigrants favourable towards the rulers; and
- Disarm the populace to ensure maximum cooperation and negate threats of rebellion.
We will go through each of these very briefly in turn and compare Historical precedent and contemporary reality. For point of reference the contemporary version of said method comes predominately from four men: Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels (Marxism); and, Michel Foucault and Jean Baudrillard (Post-modernism). One could argue quite easily that it goes back further to Jean-Jacques Rousseau and his ilk, however in the interests of expediency we shall stick to the aforementioned four. The major reason being that History is littered with these same ideas, and these same totalitarian thinkers- with little deviation between their individual goals i.e. all for the state.
Attacking and destroying the family unit has long been a hallmark of totalitarian i.e. centrally planned systems. The building block of any Society is the family unit, and in destroying this the State takes away the stability needed for the family to prosper- essentially getting women to marry the Government and having the Government raise their children for them. This was one of the Nazi tenets for example. Encourage teenage girls to get pregnant out of wedlock and the State would pay them, organise daycare and ensure they were well looked after. We see this repeated in our own Countries since the 50's and 60's. Feminism. Marriage Acts being passed i.e. Government hijacking Marriage. No fault divorce. Courts hostile to fathers. Women being paid per child so long as there is no man in the house. Etc. Happy families with working fathers, stay at home mothers and kids raised by both are anathema to Government getting bigger. Less tax. Less control. Less ability to push bad policy via the segway of welfare dependence. Less ability to enforce State-worship.
Attacking and destroying the idea of the "other" and religious institutions i.e. atheism is another hallmark of totalitarian Government- to replace the deity with the State. Traditionally it has been the Churches and Synagogues post-enlightenment who have been the biggest obstacles to totalitarian rule. The reason being that Judeo-Christian values advocate for the individual over the collective. Every atheistic regime from the French Revolutionaries to 20th century Communist regimes have viciously targeted their Churches, Synagogues and Temples resulting in an orgy of bloodshed and the rise of hedonism and nihilism. The fact that Italy did not fall to Communism post-WWII, for one example, is mostly thanks to the Italian Christians (mostly Catholic). The fact that Poland is currently defying the EU on islamic immigration, and the destruction that follows, is again thanks to Polish Christians. The largest resistance faced by both Ho Chi Minh and Pol Pot were the Vietnamese and Cambodian Buddhists- hence why both dictators did their best to wipe the Buddhists out. Theft from said institutions is also a symptom of such times.
Absolute control over the economy aka the creation and distribution of currency is yet another tactic used by authoritarian central planners to cement their rule. Independent banks, backed currency and free markets allow both the entrepreneur and the consumer far too much control over how an economy runs. The answer? Centralise banking, adopt fiat (aka non-backed) currency and give sole authority to print currency to the State. This ensures maximum control over the citizen's life. Adopting the Keynesian Economic Model i.e. spend in the bad times and save in the good times further compounds this problem. When the State runs out of money they simply print more (Quantitative Easing)- debasing the currency. They artificially restrict interest rates, engage in Fractional Reserve Banking (i.e. lending money they do not actually have); and, bail the banks out when they inevitably fail. This methodology is at least as old as Rome (reducing the amount of silver in the Denarii) and was a large part of collapsing the Roman economy- as it has done to every economy where this method has been tried since. For a more contemporary look at an example of this one can look at the Great Depression or the GFC of 2008. A number of Economists and Entrepreneurs, including Jeff Berwick and Doug Casey, are predicting that when the current credit bubble bursts it will be far more catastrophic than any similar event before. This system is completely unsustainable over time.
One of the other reasons for this is the creation of the Welfare Estate. Again referencing Rome, by the time of the Octavian Caesar Triumvirate (before he was crowned Emperor Augustus), there was already a burgeoning redistribution system that sparked a food-shortage that came close to tanking the Empire even then. Free grain was given to the masses in the cities, and Rome imported the vast majority of it's grain from Egypt. Enter the Marc Antony and Cleopatra saga, with the Civil War and suicides that ensued. Fast-forward today and there are practically no Western Countries that do not have a large and expensive Welfare Estate. The bleeding heart would tell one that it is there to support the elderly, the sick, the single mother etc., and that one is heartless if they have issue with it. The truth is that the Welfare Estate guarantees one thing above all others- votes. Charities are bad for business in terms of Big Government. Better that the needy get their sustenance from the State so they are then incentivised to vote for the Government that sustains them. The fact that this is completely unsustainable seems lost on these people and if it is not they likely don't care. It is merely another layer of control and another vector used to maintain power.
Enter yet another level of control aimed at ensuring the longevity of one's own rule or at least that of one's collective interest i.e. the Party. In Capitalist Nations the creep towards Socialism often begins with National schools, universities and media. Whereas pre- and post-Enlightenment, most education for the poor and disenfranchised was conducted via Charity Schools (usually run by Churches and Synagogues) and Scholarship programs for the gifted, big daddy Government has seen fit to take over that role as well. The reason behind this is that controlling what children watch/read, controlling what they are taught in childhood, and controlling what they are taught in early adulthood ensures maximum control over their thought patterns, perceptions and voting patterns. This is called indoctrination. Specifically the Prussian Model of indoctrination. The end-state sought is to create submissive and willing members for the State- ensuring said sheep tow the Party line. It is the same for State-run media and private media corporations in bed with the State. George Orwell portrays this very well in his book "1984" and another good and, more contemporary reference, would be the Wachowski Brother's movie "V For Vendetta" from 2005. The ultimate goal of all of this is a communist dystopia. The "get them when they are young" school of thought. That way in their adulthood the citizen is more willing to submit to terrible policy and tyrannical diktats. More willing to surrender personal, financial and moral freedom to the State.
So after all of this indoctrination into Statism enter the hip-pocket Politics of economic strangulation aimed at making all of the citizenry "equal" (at least this is how it is sold). The premise being that allowing the entrepreneur and consumer to mutually decide on a price, or the employer and employee deciding on a mutually agreeable contract, the State must get involved. Again to use Rome as an example, after Emperor Hadrian, the elites started to overtly enact price controls, tariffs and further regulations on merchants, artisans, farmers etc. As a result these people tried to cheat the tax-man and often paid a very high price up to and including execution. Fast-forward to the USSR, China or practically any other central planning regime and the same method applies. Even in our own "mixed economy" system here in Australia. Many balk at trying to get into legitimate business ventures due to high fees, Government-enforced high insurance premiums, minimum wage requirements and union bullying. This means fewer and fewer people are entering the business-sphere. Fewer and fewer people are willing to grow to the point that they need to hire staff. Fewer and fewer entrepreneurs are willing to grow beyond a certain point because of tax-bracketing i.e. being punished (taxed higher) for making more money. This also means fewer full-time positions available and most employers paying more per unit for casuals. The worker, employer and consumer suffer under such a system and hence all suffer no matter their socio-economic status. Prices go up. Employment opportunity falls. Government wins. There are more people then dependent on welfare and affirmative action programs etc. Ensuring more votes. And as the individual's personal sovereignty is stripped away the only answer is (you guessed it) bigger Government.
After taking all of the aforementioned "liberties" taken by the elites Big Government is far from finished. They then are the best authority (in their own mind) to tell one how to run one's own life, raise one's own family, treat your spouse, how and when it is acceptable to voice one's opinion- or even how to engage with other humans. Police can raid one's house 24/7 despite no probable cause to do so. The Department of Child Services can take one's child away even if there is no discernible danger to them. Under 18C and if you are a Victorian one can be charged, and then jailed, for merely expressing the wrong opinion about Indigenous people or Islam. One can be put on a Police-ordered Domestic Violence Order, have their weapons taken; and, be told where they can and cannot go for two years even if the Aggrieved is against that course of action. DOCS can garnish one's wages, take one's Driver's Licence, Passport and even send one to jail if one fails to pay State-mandated child support. One is automatically fined large amounts of money for slipping over the speed limit for the split-second it takes for the radar to register the speed. Councils tell one (despite being illegal as per the 1988 referendum on having Local Government) where they can and cannot park, drive, or what to do on one's own property who one owns. Everyone who does not have the ridiculously expensive Private Health Insurance has their tax return come back $1,800 light- like we don't already pay enough supporting the system. Spending one's already-taxed money invites GST. Taxed again. Alcohol is taxed at 800% and cigarettes 300% under the guise of Government forcing healthier choices on the populace. Yet no tax on obese people who overtook smokers and drinkers in terms of healthcare burden 10 years ago. For this particular point there is no need to go Historical. Modern Australia would make the USSR blush in terms of regulation, claustrophobic nannying and totalitarian diktats. So the populace (in the West and Anglo-sphere leaning more towards K-Type individuals) breed less and are then bombarded with barbarians....
Now big daddy Government has a serious problem. It's policies have resulted in far fewer children than anticipated and there is a massive shortage of fresh tax-paying blood. People are angry and voting said Government down far too much. The answer? Import as many third-world aka big Government-loving immigrants as possible. This gets the number of potential taxpayers to rise as well as guaranteed votes. A win-win.Again talking Rome they tried the same thing when, like us, they experienced problems with sub-par birth rates. Now of course there were other factors involved such as coming from combatant cultures (ring a bell?), but the principle remains the same. There are three rules for immigration in order for any sovereign Country to maintain itself- 1) The right immigrants i.e. immigrants with similar culture and values, 2) The right numbers and 3) Over the right time period to allow for proper integration and assimilation into the native culture. Rome broke these rules. As we are doing today. Multi-ethnic Countries can work, and do work, very well under the right circumstances. Multi-cultural Countries do not. Ever. Add to this that, in modern times, the majority of immigrants end up on welfare- ensuring votes but destroying the social fabric of said Country. Islam especially is a problem due to it's expansionist nature. When importing a violent culture it is best that the native culture has some violence of it's own to deliver outside of Police and Military force one would think.
Last but not least there is the age-old problem of rulers fearing their people versus people fearing their Government. What is the best way to ensure the ruling elite don't have anything to fear in terms of armed rebellion? Answer- disarm the populace. Hitler's Nazis themselves quoted John Howard almost verbatim (and I am paraphrasing here) 60 years before the Australian Weapons Ban, when they said only Police and Military needed to be armed, and that civilians had no need to be. A classic central planning move. It is much easier to be tyrannical when one has no fear of their people rising up and overthrowing them. It merely emboldens criminals and is a segway into Government legislating further restrictions on it's own citizenry. Since 1996 violent crime has gone up in Australia. Punishing law-abiding gun owners does nothing but make it easier to rule them. Was that John Howard's goal? I have no idea. I do know that the level of unconstitutional legislation passed at State and Federal level since has been off the chain compared to previous decades. Up to 200 pieces of legislation according to some online think-tanks. Who knows for sure? Historically it is always the same pattern however. Which is why the USA have their Second Amendment written in stone.
So Ladies and Gentleman here is a very quick summary of how we have gotten into the state we are at right now. An unholy potentiate mix of Marxism and Post-modernism, mixed with all of the worst Historical traits of Societies who have tanked before us. We, unlike previous Societies, may have a shot at turning this around before the slide into the Abyss. Do we get informed, get angry and step up? Or do we fade into History as yet one more pathetically weak post-glory populace awaiting our "inevitable" destruction? It is up to us.
Sources:
Williamson, Kevin D. The Politically Incorrect Guide To Socialism. New Jersey: Regnery Publishing, 2011. Print.
Hayek, Friedrich V. The Road To Serfdom. Chicago: Routledge Press, 1944. Print.
http://www.archives.upenn.edu/histy/features/1700s/charitysch.html
http://atheism.wikia.com/wiki/Karl_Marx
https://www.slideshare.net/jbradfo4/postmodernism-foucault-and-baudrillard
Orwell, George. 1984. London: Secker and Warburg, 1949. Print.
http://italianacademy.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/papers/CommunismAnti.pdf
http://www.forcedschool.com/post/69947261758/the-prussian-model
