Saturday, 26 September 2020

1984 Revisited & Reinterpreted

George Orwell’s distopian novel,1984, was published just weeks after I was born in 1949. He based it on his knowledge & experience of 1930s fascism & communism, which he projected onto a future Britain - as a warning.

In 1949, the year, 1984, was 35 years in the future. Now, in 2020, it is 36 years in the past. Orwell would have chosen the title some time before it was actually published, so the year 1984 is very close to being midway between then & now. 

What Orwell fails to make clear is that Big Brother did not suddenly appear with fascism & communism, but has always been with us, ever since the first states & civilisations emerged from a tribally organised society, which members of a cognative elite have always sought to control to their own advantage, using whatever means of power they had at their disposal.

Medieval Europe was also dominated by Big Brother, primarily in the form & ideology of the Catholic Church, which provided the brains & wielded the power of the Word, i.e. moral authority, based on priestly interpretation of sacred scripture, but in need of physical protection by a warrior class (the “nobility”, in Orwellian newspeak), which provided the muscle & wielded the power of the sword, which it sometimes used to defy Church authority. It was an uneasy, but effective alliance.

Orwell did not foresee how, in the aftermath of WW2 & the defeat of Nazism, Big Brother would embrace liberal democracy, anti-fascism & anti-racism as a means of acquiring moral authority for himself & his minions, along with the power (formerly wielded by the Catholic Church) than comes with it.

The state conflates and confounds VERY different aspects of the original tribal environment in which human nature evolved, long before the first states and civilisations emerged from it, with the modern "nation state" now deceitfully posing as our tribe or nation (intra- and inter-tribal environment) itself, while at the same time facilitating society’s self-exploitation (as an extra-tribal environment, on a par with the natural environment, which we are also exploiting to destruction) to the personal advantage of its ruling elites and favoured (especially wealthy and academic/formerly priestly) clients, at the expense of society at large & future generations.

This is where we are in 2020: not really free, as most academics believe & teach we are in liberal democracy, but enslaved - rich & poor, Black & White, high & low IQ alike - to Big Brother & the Matrix of state & capital. Those with the highest IQs being the most able at rationalising a system which works very well for them personally & thus gives them the sense of being free & privileged, which, relatively speaking, they are, though ultimately still enslaved.

This why we have failed to rise to the challenge of implimenting a Sustainability Revolution, the existential need for which we were warned about in the 1970s. Instead, our grossly materialistic, mercenary, rapacious, driven, & thus inherently unsustainable, global economy was put into super-global & turbo mode, which put us firmly on the path towards to civilisational suicide, but which most members of our cognative elites succeeded in rationalising, along with the madness of mass immigration into the West & DIVERSITY, which is Orwellian newspeak (thus my use of capitals) for a global melting pot, the destroyer of genuine human diversity, which is a product of pre-modern Natural Segregation.

DIVERSITY is an ideology, which also goes under the names of post-racial multiculturalism & Anti-racism, and goes to the opposite but equally insane extremes of Nazi ideology of racial purity & supremacy. It is rooted in White racial self-denial, self-contempt & self-hatred, which was an overreaction to the evils of Nazism (esp. on the part of traumatised Jews), before being weaponised by Big Brother & his minions as a strategy of divide & rule.

It divides society into a morally superior, now supposedly non-tribal, unprejudiced, "colour-blind" and xenophilic elite, on the one hand, and the morally inferior, naturally (evolved human nature being what it is) tribal, prejudiced, not colour-blind, but nativist and xenophobically-inclined masses, on the other, who must submit to the authority of and domination by their "moral superiors”. A tribal and thus moral animal like ourselves can be manipulated and controlled by a regime of moral rewards & intimidation, as well as by one of material or physical rewards & intimidation, which in practice complement each other.

It is, in effect, a modern, secular replacement for the power-political role of medieval church ideology. Original sin (disobedience of divine, i.e. priestly, authority) has been replaced by "racial prejudice" (a natural human inclination - like original sin - to identity with members of one's own tribe, ethnic group or race, which was made responsible for Nazi antisemitism and the Holocaust), which only submission to priestly/academic/state ideology and authority can save us from eternal damnation for, not as heathens and heretics, as in the past, but as bigots, xenophobes, nativists or racists.

The existential question we need to answer now & with some urgency, if we want our civilisation to survive & prosper, is how to liberate ourselves?

We need academics & other members of our cognative elites, whom we cannot do without, to recognise their own ignorance and enslavement, owing to their dependency on Big Brother & the Matrix of state & capital, which makes us ALL his minions, including those who have been awarded the Orwell Prize; people, like the eminent British journalist, David Aaronovitch, who has accused me of being a RACIST for failing to identity with multi-racial Britain as my nation. I wanted to discuss this issue with him, but he refused & “cancelled” me.

He is very liberal and rational on most issues, which is why I wanted to discuss the issue of race & national identity with him, but when it comes to state racial ideology, I discovered, he is very illiberal & in fact quite Orwellian, telling others, as he told me, how they should & shouldn’t feel & think about race, which he clearly considers necessary in order to prevent the rise of fascism & racism, having failed to recognise and been taken in by Big Brother posing as an anti-fascist & anti-racist himself.

Obviously, we can’t do away with the state, no matter how Orwellian it may be; and most states are far more Orwellian than Britain, where at least I have the freedom to point all this out & to propose solutions without being disappeared or locked up - provided my proposals are peaceful, legal & democratic, of course, which they are. But I will come to these in a follow-up piece.

Thursday, 2 May 2019

List of links to some of my Twitter threads

It's a pretty chaotic list, which I created for my own use. Many of the titles are incomplete. Some I've linked to a lot, others hardly at all. Some I'm very pleased with, others less so. But anyway, here they are, for anyone who is interested to take a look at.

The Nazis were beholden to a misconceived, nasty & fanatical racial ideology:

Why #MLK's Dream of a colour-blind society has led to a race-relations nightmare:

Sustainability Revolution & a revolution which puts an end to divide & rule:

A nationalist/identitarian manifesto for a new world order:

Western democracies are beholden to an ideology of white racial self-denial:

This thread is about MORAL AUTHORITY:

When does the civil war in the UK actually start?

With our elites all committed to putting an end to white majority rule in the UK civil war is likely:

Opposing the Pot & the states which have embraced it, is #Contrapot:

With our elites committed to putting an end to white majority rule within about 50 years, the likelihood of civil war is high:

Jews & white racial self-denial & self-contempt:

What forces are behind the anti-white attitudes?

In this thread, I compare the state with The Matrix:

In a radio discussion about immigration:

Nationalism & socialism are on the rise once again:

 BarbaraRoche, Tony Blair's Minister for Asylum & Immigration:

The Left hates nationalism & the Right hates socialism:

Why do the "far right" & liberal-left academics view immigration & #DIVERSITY from such different perspectives?

Socialism will only work when it develops grassroots-democratically:

A political party that is liberal, nationalist, or rather, multi-nationalist, socialist & #contrapot,:

The British state has committed itself to #DIVERSITY, in response to which . . :

Under these flags an end is being put to white majority rule in the West:

I've just thought of an analogy to help academics overcome their abhorrence at the thought of applying Darwinian logic to human society:

Are you a Native, white, Briton who struggles to identify with multi-racial, #multicultural Britain as your nation?

Britain, one of the world's oldest & most eminent "nation states”:

The differences of political opinion & attitude between @DAaronovitch & myself are profound:

Why is fascism always assumed to be not just evil, but also of evil intent?

It is no coincidence that we are taught to trivialise, ridicule or demonise human tribalism:

As favoured clients & employees of the state themselves:

It is no coincidence that we are taught, subliminally, to trivialise, ridicule or demonise human tribalism:

We can learn to live harmoniously with #racial differences:

It corrupted the #Catholic & #Anglican churches, whose "business model", so-to-speak, is their claim to moral authority:

This is the first draft of the first part of the party manifesto of #Contrapot-UK:

You can subjugate a population by force of arms or by means of moral intimidation:

Western society is being screwed by its academic elites:

Antisemitism or "Jew hatred" is a TRIBAL response to PERCEIVED Jewish tribalism:

More big reasons why Jewish & European history cannot be separated:

The persistent inspiration for socialism, as for nationalism, is deeply rooted in evolved human nature:

Grassroots-Democratic Multi-National Socialism:

I thought it might be interesting to compare myself to Jesus:

Altruism surely evolved to serve the well-being & survival of our own tribe or nation

White nationalism is NOT an ideology, but an IDENTITY:

I am #TheOne, here to liberate humanity from #TheMatrix of state & capital:

The biggest threat to #WesternCivilisation does not come from fascists:

The problem with capitalism is that it prioritises profit over people:

Those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad:

The social sciences are now in urgent & existential need of their own Copernican Revolution:

Ashkenazi Jews are KEY to the survival of western civilisation:

Medieval academics threatened people with eternal damnation:

#Nationalism, #socialism & #anarchism:

Britain played a major role the creation of modern civilisation:

Q. Why is western/white civilisation committing ecological & racial suicide?

The Catholic Church controlled medieval society:

#WhiteGenocide, Is it real or a "far-right" conspiracy theory? 

Non-white identities are respected, while white identity is disparaged:

America's founding fathers knew that it would be difficult enough forging a new nation from different European peoples:

Britain, as a country, is based on lies, deceit & a regime of rewards & intimidation:

"Xenophobic populism" is being deliberately incited by western elites:

My moral authority I see as being relative to that of @DAaronovitch

Western civilisation has a fatal flaw:

It's an Orwellian ideology which stipulates how we should all FEEL & THINK about race:

Sunday, 14 May 2017

Open Letter to Prince Charles

In response to his call for a Sustainability Revolution.

Dear Prince Charles

In your book, Harmony, you say the following:

“The Earth is under threat”. It cannot cope with all that we demand of it . . . If we want to hand on to our children and grandchildren a much more durable way of operating in the world, then we have to embark on what I can only describe as a ‘Sustainability Revolution’ - and with some urgency”.

I agree entirely.

Influenced - like you, I suspect - by books such as E F Schumacher’s Small is Beautiful, Meadow’s The Limits to Growth, and Herbert Gruhl’s Ein Planet wird Gep√ľndert (We are Plundering our Planet), the whole essence of which is contained in its title, I came to this same conclusion in the early 1970s - more than 40 years ago!

Clearly, you were also an early convert to the realisation that we couldn’t carry on as we were, but needed a radical change of values and behaviour, in respect to the economy and the grossly materialistic lifestyles and lifestyle aspirations it engendered and depended on. We were placing an increasingly unsustainable drain and strain on the finite natural resources and carrying capacity of our vulnerable and already (even back then) overpopulated planet, which the very survival of our civilisation clearly depended on us putting an end to. There HAD to be a Sustainability Revolution.

I was young and naively expected those in positions of power and influence to recognise this too and take appropriate action. I was greatly encouraged by many eminent individuals, including yourself, who clearly shared my perspective and concerns.

When I eventually realised that, despite all the fine words and good intentions, the radical change of course towards a sustainable economy and ways of life wasn’t happening, and wasn’t going to happen  (on the contrary, the socio-economic order of consumer capitalism responsible in the West for our suicidal direction of travel, was emphatically endorsed by our leaders and put into “turbo mode”), I set my mind to trying to understand the cause of such madness. How could such an intelligent race as our own, capable of putting men on the Moon, be so blind and stupid when it came to the existential need to develop a sustainable global economy and ways of life?

It took a long time, but eventually I discovered what I believe to be the answer. Again, despite being older and wiser, I naively expected those in positions of authority in academia, to recognise the importance of my discovery; but again - thus far, at least - this hasn’t happened. When I’ve tried to communicate my insights and ideas to academics and others, they have not listened, or, if they have, have dismissed them, usually with distain as a form of “social Darwinism” - which I’ll come back to.

The obvious explanation for my ideas being ignored or dismissed is, of course, that they are rubbish, that I am deluding myself about their importance. After all, who am I to judge? 

Then again, who is anyone to judge?  We look to academics as authorities in understanding the human condition and situation, but as my discovery (which is indeed based on a human-evolutionary, i.e. Darwinian, perspective) reveals, it is a mistake to expect academics to have a realistic understanding of the society, state and economy they themselves, like everyone else, are utterly dependent on, and thus quite incapable of viewing objectively.

Undeterred by the lack of academic interest in my ideas, I’ve continued to develop them and explore their implications for understanding human nature and behaviour (individual, social, political and economic) which evolved, in the natural and very tribal environment as it existed for human beings long before the first states and civilisations emerged from it.

From what I know of your views, you look to “old wisdom” as your main source of inspiration in facing up to the existential challenge of achieving a Sustainability Revolution, while my inspiration is based on the relatively “new wisdom” generally associated with the name of Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution. I don’t reject the “old wisdom”, where it makes good sense, but see it as part of our historical heritage, which is a mixed bag of ideas and values, which need to be assessed very critically.

The Abrahamic idea of man being a sinner, i.e. a fallen angel, for having disobeyed divine (i.e. priestly/state) authority is a very bad idea, or at least, one well past its sell-by date. I see man very differently, as an aspiring ape. We have to rise above our primitive Darwinian nature, but first we must acknowledge and develop an understanding of it, rather than making it a taboo, which a previous generation of academics did in overreaction to the Nazis having hijacked and abused, for their own evil purposes, the half-baked ideas of social Darwinism

So, what does an evolutionary, i.e. Darwinian, perspective tell us about ourselves and our situation, which academics, because of their self-interested blindness to the true nature of the state and the taboo they themselves put in place, are missing?

First of all, it tells us that the human brain must have evolved to want (subconsciously more than consciously) to maintain the environment on which it depends and has been “successful” in. Clearly, we ALL depend on the socio-economic status quo and don’t want it changing to our own personal disadvantage.

This means that everyone who is anyone in society, whose “success” within it has given them any degree of power or influence, is the least inclined to want radical change. Or if, like you, they recognise the vital need for radical change, they will, nevertheless, still be subconsciously very much inclined to envisage only the kind of changes which preserve their own privileged position within the changed socioeconomic order/environment.

This is a difficult obstacle to get around, rather like trying to jump over one’s own shadow. We have to trick our brain into recognising what it (subconsciously) doesn’t want to recognise, either ignoring or rationalising it. It is a difficult trick to pull off, not least, because we can never be sure that we have succeeded, are not just rationalising and deceiving ourselves at a deeper level. We have to remain sceptical and self-critical.

If I feel with some confidence that I have got closer than most to the truth, it is because mainstream (academic) understanding of the human condition and situation is so badly misconceived, the academic brain being no different from other human brains in respect to its inclination to rationalise the state and status quo to suit its own, personal, self-interests. 

Like their medieval predecessors and counterparts, academics are privileged clients and employees of their respective "patron state", with a massive personal self-interest (subconscious more than conscious) in rationalising and defending its role, self-image (as a "nation") and ideologies (social, political, economic and racial/formerly religious), on which the state bases its claims to moral and knowledgeable authority.

Secondly, a human-evolutionary perspective reveals how the state and the society associated with it conflate and confound very different aspects of the original tribal environment in which human nature evolved, with the so-called “nation state” now deceitfully posing as our tribe or nation (intra- and inter-tribal environment) itself, while at the same time facilitating society’s SELF-exploitation (as an extra-tribal environment, on a par with the natural environment) to the personal advantage of its ruling elites and favoured (especially wealthy and academic/formerly priestly) clients, at the expense of society at large and its long-term survival.

This is why all past civilisations were bound to a cycle of boom and bust which eventually led to their demise, as happened to ancient Greek and Roman civilisation. 

Our own civilisation is bound to the same cycle. The present, unprecedented, boom phase, will soon be followed by an equally unprecedented and likely terminal bust phase. 

Our failure to face up to the challenge of a sustainability revolution will, of course, play a major role in our civilisation’s demise. But so long as we fail to recognise the true nature of the state and its primary role of facilitating society’s self-exploitation, there is no way we can rise to this challenge.

I’m not a doom-monger, any more than you are when you warn of the dire consequences of us failing to achieve sustainability, but a realist - and an optimist. 

If we continue on our present course, we are doomed. That’s just a fact that you and I have been aware of for a long time. It is probably too late now to avoid a degree of civilisational collapse in the decades ahead, which will be terrible enough, but we could still reduce its scale, overall damage to the biosphere and bio-diversity, and greatly increase our children’s and grandchildren’s chances of survival and recovery.

However, before we can embark on the Sustainability Revolution in earnest, we have to develop a much better understanding of society and the state, along the lines I have indicated above.

As heir to the British throne, you are in a uniquely influential position to promote such an understanding and to play a leading role in the revolution that would follow from it.

The question is, are you up to it?

I’m optimistic, but at the same time realistic in respect to just how big a challenge this would be for you.

All I can do is present my ideas and hope that they resonate with you.

Best regards

Roger Hicks

P.S. I know, you receive piles of letters every week and are very unlikely to actually read this one. For this reaon, I will publish it as an open letter on my blog, where others might also read it, and who knows, perhaps someone who knows you personally will recognise its relevance and bring it to your attention.


P.P.S. A few years ago I watched live coverage of the Queen's Speech to both houses of Parliament, in which your mother read out the government’s plans for the coming legislative period.  

My overwhelming impression was of it being a ritual humiliation of the monarch, who is required to present the government’s plans as if they were her own, when everyone knows they are not.  

You will be expected to do the same in due course and, given public knowledge of your views on many issues, I shudder at the thought of you allowing yourself to be similarly humiliated, especially in view of you usually having more enlightened ideas than any British government is likely to have.

Sunday, 16 October 2016

Political Implications of Evolutionary Psychology

This is something I recently posted on the closed Facebook page of Applied Evolutionary Psychology, which I am making generally available here on my own blog.

I’ve been observing the changes in ethnic composition in London, my city of birth, as a consequence of mass immigration, since I was a child in the 1950s and my responses to it, along with those of family, friends, acquaintances and others.
The responses I have observed have been overwhelmingly negative, essentially xenophobic, which is in stark contrast to the attitude of government, which demonises xenophobia and encourages people to celebrate DIVERSITY, i.e. their own ethnic displacement (white flight), replacement (white Britons have already been reduced to an ethnic minority in large swathes of their major cities) and ultimate demise as the country’s indigenous and dominant ethnic/racial group.
Why (not for the first time) am I bringing this subject up here? Because I believe that evolutionary psychology can explain this madness, which is what it is. It’s Orwellian and totally insane, which does not bode well for the future.
Homo sapiens evolved as a tribal and territorial animal, so of course we are going to respond xenophobically to an influx of strangers. It would be unnatural, unhuman, not to.
Western governments, it would seem, are deliberately (but not necessarily consciously) provoking xenophobia in their native populations, in order to condemn it and claim a spurious moral authority for themselves, and the power that goes with it.
It is, I have come to realise, a modern, secular incarnation of the state’s age-old strategy of “divide and rule”, dividing society into a morally superior, now supposedly unprejudiced, ”colour-blind” and xenophilic elite, on the one hand, and the morally inferior, naturally (evolved human nature being what it is) prejudiced, not colour-blind, but xenophobically-inclined masses, on the other, who must submit to the authority of and domination by their "moral superiors”. 
It is no coincidence that we are taught subliminally to trivialise, ridicule or demonise our tribal nature, despite it being absolutely central to who and what we are as human beings, when what we should really do is study and understand it. This, however, would deprive the state of its ability to manipulate and exploit our tribal nature for its own purposes the way it has been accustomed to do for centuries.
Being a very tribal animal also makes us a very moral animal, which the state uses to intimidate and control us, but there is virtually no awareness of this, even amongst academia, because of the lack of an evolutionary perspective, which is a consequence of a previous generation of academics having made a taboo of it, in overreaction to the Nazis having hijacked and abused, for their own evil purposes, the half-baked ideas of social Darwinism, which is what evolutionary psychology and anthropology used to be called.
The problem for evolutionary psychologists and anthropologists is that much more influential social and political scientists, in the service of their state employer, are professionally committed to this madness, which, of course, they fail to recognise as such. If you try pointing it out to them, they stonewall you, and if you persist it might well cost you your job and career, just as criticising church ideology would have done in the past (in medieval times it might have cost you your life). 
I suspect that most of you already know this at some level and are therefor very careful about what you say and who you say it to, as we all have to be on this and related issues.
The social and political sciences, trapped as they are in a pre-Darwinian dark age, are leading western society badly (fatally) astray, and the only ones qualified to challenge them are evolutionary biologists, psychologists and anthropologists. 
These ideas undermine mainstream academic and state authority, which is fraught with danger, but to allow this state-sponsored madness to continue can only lead to disaster. The encouragement by much of mainstream academia of continued mass immigration into Europe is like priming a powder keg, which will eventually explode, but anyone pointing this out is dismissed as a xenophobe, along with xenophobia itself which is simply seen as an evil to be suppressed, rather than as an aspect of human tribal nature which we need to understand and work WITH rather than against the grain of.
I’m not an academic myself, which has made it easier for me to overcome the taboos which might cost an academic their career, but it means that I lack authority. My ideas are simply ignored. I know, the ideas of academics are also often ignored, but when enough academics with highly regarded reputations promote the same ideas, they tend to be listened to.
Without wanting to sound alarmist, time is running out. If we don’t get our act together soon, and succeed in dragging the social and political sciences out of their pre-Darwinian dark age, it will be too late and the consequences catastrophic.

The blogs linked to below are a bit repetitive, I'm afraid, but I hope also complementary, and provide a reasonable account of, not all, but much of, my thinking: