Thursday, October 27, 2005

The Royal Families

Jack Carter, drug abuser and son of former President Jimmy Carter, has announced he will benevolently save us all once he defeats John Ensign in his senatorial campaign.

He is running because he is frustrated with the current state of national affairs. Instead of having an agenda, political philosophy, or a clue what he’s doing, Carter is depending on his small town roots and a listening tour to decide his positions for him.

Carter, an investment consultant, has little experience with politics and his main claim to fame is that he smoked weed and dropped acid while in the US Navy. To be fair, he spent one whole day campaigning for the US house in 1980.

I don’t care who you are, do not vote for this man. He has no qualifications, he has no philosophy, and he has a dubious personal history. Why are we even talking about this lifelong ne’er-do-well?

It’s our political policy. Americans like electing royalty to the highest posts— if Jack had not inherited the last name “Carter,” nobody would care.

For evidence, take a look at our current government. The leadership of both major parties is made up of royals and nobles. In the Republican Party we have King George Bush the second and Crown Prince Jeb Bush pulling all the strings. Lord Steve Forbes, former presidential candidate and heir to the billion dollar Forbes empire, has shown he is willing to replace the house of Bush and to substitute the Imperial Forbes Dynasty. In the Democratic Party there is Duke Edward Kennedy, who inherited party leadership after the deaths of his brothers, King John and Barron Robert.

These people are royalty. None of them have ever done anything wonderful to earn any of their power. The real road to power seems to follow a slightly more haphazard course. Namely, do lots of drugs, spend the first thirty or so years of you life trying to land in a trailer park, have a few criminal children and then spend lots of daddy’s money ascending to the throne.

This aristocratic bunch is a slap in the face to the American Dream. Work hard and come up through the ranks my ass.

Please, please, please, learn a little about your candidates. Voting for someone based on their name is how we got into this mess.

Wednesday, October 19, 2005


How to encourage more guys like these to run the world

and fewer guys like these

This is a very brief outline of my meritocratic model of power.


Humanity, in its social capacity, has two opposite goals. They are the goals of inevitable superiority and of power. Inevitable superiority is a state of inheritance in which the recipient is given infinite wealth and power and cannot loose them regardless of how incompetent or stupid the recipient is. Power is the ability to destroy others and the ability to avoid destruction.

Inevitable superiority is expressed in four main ways.

1. Fiscal inheritance. The undeserved gifts of nepotism and resources based solely on birth. This is unique among the inheritance crimes in that it is the only one which is not always associated with undeserved prides. In other words, gaining a financial inheritance is not often a source of pride in the recipient. The purpose of fiscal inheritance is to directly achieve the goal of inevitable superiority.
2. National inheritance. Patriotism is national inheritance. This inheritance allows the useless individuals who cannot justify their own existence (most people) to feel good about themselves. They can bask in the completely accidental glory of “their” country. It is inevitable superiority because it is inherited, cannot be taken away (at least not if the individual is passive) and because it makes an individual powerful or elevated in status as part of a completely random circumstance, ie birth. People partake in patriotism because it justifies worthlessness.
3. Racial inheritance. This is the most idiotic inheritance pride in that the individual cannot ever change his racial standing. This makes it completely outside the realm of achievement. It serves a function identical to national inheritance. Included in this is the unfortunate lie that people have “proud heritages” of which they can take pride. It also serves to destroy talent by stereotyping its members into “proud” niches. A convenient example is the American Black, who is the victim of pressure in his own race to fit almost exclusively into the niches of criminal, rapper, and athlete.
4. Religious inheritance. This is the acceptance by the younger generation of the older generation’s religion. To accept the religion given you by inheritance is to cheat god if you decide to believe in him/her/it and a massive slight to yourself if you don’t believe in god. From religion flows the question; “What am I?” From this flows “What am I for?” From “What am I for?” flows the entire life purpose of an individual. To base this on inheritance is random, massively lazy, and wasteful of human talent. Religious pride exists for the same reasons as racial and national inheritance/pride.

The goals of power are not really goals at all. Power is simply the necessary condition for survival and dominance.

Power comes from three sources:
1. Access to human talent. A nation, tribe, alliance, ect cannot build power if it cannot access talented individuals. Examples of this are populations so racked with disease or other afflictions that the individuals of talent either die young, or cannot develop their talent because of their focus on bare survival.
2. Utilization of human talent, and ensuring dominance is in the hands of the talented. A society that draws its talent from a small pool (royal families for example) cannot utilize most of the human talent available to it. This is why they have been destroyed and marginalized by societies more open to utilizing power. Optimum utilization of human talent requires large amounts of upward, and more importantly downward, mobility, education and a large population base. Anti immigration laws and the concept of national sovereignty are examples of efforts to limit the acquisition and utilization of human talent.
3. Natural resources. The other two are contingent on this, however, if the former exist previous to entering an area without natural resources, they can overcome their surroundings to a great extent.

In the progression of the state, there has been a shift farther from inevitable superiority to power as powerful states kill off the weaker ones. However, morality (the basis of socialism and communism) is unrelated to power and has hindered it progress. The relations to power of the various human forms of government are outlined below.

Egalitarian tribes. Because they are unable to access the first source of power, they are weak. However, because they only survive, they cannot afford inevitable superiority either.

Despotism/Feudalism/Slavery. These forms actively suppress talent and power. They have resources that make them more powerful than the egalitarian tribes, but are essentially conservative and unable to further their power. The hereditary rulers are the essence of inevitable superiority.

Capitalism. Allows some freedom in the choice of work, and tolerates modest upward mobility. It allows and encourages inheritance however. At best, capitalism is power neutral.

Socialism/Communism. These are anti-inevitable superiority. However, they are also anti power. They actively stifle the talented from achieving dominance. This makes them power neutral as well. This form, ironic considering their anti-religious rhetoric, embraces practical Christian morality as its basis. To paraphrase Nietzsche, for every little step taken away from the church, they must show themselves ever more to be moral maniacs.

Meritocracy. This state would ban fiscal inheritance and instead provide an equal disbursement (current inheritances average $49,000) to each person upon reaching adulthood. It would invest heavily in education and work to equalize the quality of education. It would actively recruit and acquire talented individuals from everywhere and work to dissolve nations into larger units. For example, instead of the US and EU, a meritocracy would combine the two into “western civilization” to not only maximize the talent available to it, but to increase its access to natural resources. A critical part of this would be defeating the other inheritance crimes/prides and moving people cross culturally in large numbers. This would not only result in the homogenization of culture over time, but allow the best aspects of each to be incorporated into the pro-power state. The power state would seek nothing less than domination of the entire earth. Only with this condition met, can it seriously implement policies detrimental to its short term power, namely, protection of the environment and help for people who do not contribute to power like the elderly, the very infirm, and the mentally impaired.