Our enemies accurately understand (and hence dislike) folkish imperialism:
https://www.eurocanadians.ca/2023/08/why-is-the-west-so-weak-and-russia-so-strong-the-role-of-human-capital-and-western-educationLet’s say there are three companies with combined 100% market share in some sector. There is no real competition between them and everybody can just relax because the customers can’t go anywhere else. These companies can get away with absolute incompetence on most levels, including in management. They don’t need to think about efficiency, safety, productivity or costs, except on their websites and in annual reports.
What our enemies call "incompetence" is what we call ethicality. For example, imagine if these three companies all cared about the environment. They will therefore all agree to not do anything as part of their business that will harm the environment. This will probably mean that productivity/cost is sub-maximal. But so long as none of them deviate from their mutually agreed ethical rule that harming the environment is off-limits, they can stably share the market.
However, if a competitor with competent employees manages to infiltrate the sector, those three companies will hit a wall. There will be an enormous crisis and one or more of them will most likely go under.
Now imagine a fourth company turning up which does not care about the environment. If allowed to compete against the existing three, it will surely (by being willing to unscrupulously use operational methods that harm the environment) outcompete the existing three by maximizing productivity/cost beyond what the existing three (with their commitment to environmentalism and their consequent operational limitations) are willing to do. This will either cause the existing three ethically superior companies to shut down, or pressure them into also adopting the ethically inferior practices of the newcomer.
The only way the existing three can avoid such a fate is to destroy the newcomer (with the help of the state if necessary). This is what we support, and what our enemies oppose:
Monopoly and oligopoly is the rule and the main objective of most large western companies is to prevent anyone from infiltrating their sector – usually by bribing regulators or by buying the competition. This is a necessity because a huge number of western companies are now run by incompetent management and staffed by incompetent people
From our enemies' perspective,
ethicality is "incompetence" while unethicality is "competence". From a Darwinian perspective they are correct, since the ethical will indeed be outcompeted by the unethical over time:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/exposing-people-with-the-western-darwinian-worldview/unless the ethical destroy the unethical before we are outcompeted by them. Our enemies know this, which is why they describe describe our pursuit of ethics via folkish imperialism in a negative tone:
Many people have noticed that meritocracy has been systematically abandoned in the West and the relationship between competence and reward severed in giant swaths of the economy – and almost completely in government. What few people seem to realize is that this is a necessity for the West’s ideological goals to be reached. High-level competence cannot be promoted because it is a threat. It cannot therefore be rewarded.
What they call "meritocracy" is Darwinian meritocracy. (Also, what they call "the West" is actually Counterculturedom.)
What our enemies most fear happening:
This will get progressively worse and we will soon reach a point where complex systems which underpin society cannot be kept running. That will require some kind of “reset” to a less complex society, with less prosperity of course.
is what are are aiming at.
![Smiley :)](https://trueleft.createaforum.com/Smileys/default/smiley.gif)
But we will only succeed if we are willing to practice folkish imperialism with total ruthlessness against those who threaten us with their greater competitiveness consequent to their disregard for ethics:
IQ and objectivity/independent thinking are somewhat correlated but let’s assume they are not. Let’s say that we have a pool of potentially objective and rational people that is 30% and a pool of people with IQ of 125 that is 5%. That means that the pool of high-level general competence people is 5% of 30%, or 1.5% of the population.
If we are really generous and assume that 50% of the population is objective and rational and an IQ of 115 is sufficient for those jobs, then we have 16% of 50%, which is a pool of 8% of the population.
The importance of this cannot be overstated. This group, whether we define it as 1.5% of the population or 8% of the population, is extremely valuable. This is essentially the only group in society that can reliably evaluate complex situations and make subsequent rational decisions. Without it, modern technological society simply cannot be built or maintained – let alone advanced. Let me rephrase this – if we do not identify and utilize this group, we cannot run our complicated societies except into the ground.
This group must be removed from existence ASAP. Let me rephrase this - if we do not identify and totally exterminate this group, we will end up in:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/progressive-yahwism/Our enemies accurately point out the demographics of this group:
A significant number of companies are now specifying which groups will not be hired in their job advertisements. Since they can’t overtly say “we don’t hire smart, independent thinkers” they usually use “white men” as a proxy for that group for some reason. That group is considered to be a particular threat
It is! Who do you think was behind the Industrial Revolution in the first place?