Harmony before Insight? The Destruction of Western Man
August 17, 2012, 01:13 AM
A+
|
a-
Print Friendly and PDF

Previously by Susie Green: Jews, Leftists, Immigration: My Journey To Nietzsche 

It is common for those in the West to talk of the decline in our countries—from the decrease in civility to the rise in violent crime. However, no one ever seems to be able to offer a coherent reason for these phenomena.

Yet, when one examines truthfully the actions of Western Man since the end of World War II, it is clear that the West has turned against the values of its own forefathers.

In our schools, teachers distort or dissemble or slander our forefathers. For example, Abraham Lincoln is now considered the “epitome of racial egalitarianism,” when, in fact, he never questioned the “inferiority of the black race” and had a plan to return the freed slaves to Africa. And Darwinism is denuded of its true implications—mankind evolved from the apes, but there are supposedly no differences evolved among groups of men after that. When nature is arbitrary and capricious, how can that be?

Without a single coherent thought, Western societies have created conditions that have already lowered the human animal to a more primitive state. Current policies are accelerating this trend. Western societies have supported the massive increase in the least productive and most violent of humankind, with a corresponding reduction in the birthrate of the High. This is leading to the destruction of our genius and capability.

We are also losing our vast middle, which is essential to the support of the top of the Bell Curve. This massive overall growth in the world’s least productive population is unsustainable.

The preponderance of historic and scientific evidence suggests that almost all human ability and sensibility flows through what is innate. Since there are material genetic differences among groups of people, one only has to follow this truth to reach a disturbing logical conclusion: We are bound to descend over time, to a place where the more violent and less intelligent human animals will roam across the vast expanse of a once-civilized world and destroy what remains.

Through compassion and false guilt we burden ourselves, and our future, with massive transfers of funds, medicines, and technology to undeserving Third World people. We do this without imposing responsible behavior on their part—a task that the Low is unable or unwilling to accomplish on its own.

In Africa alone, a population that was once relatively small, a mere 470 million in 1980, has grown to one billion in 2010. Africa’s population is now expected to double to two billion in a little more than 100 years. How can this be sustained?

A destructive philosophical movement now dominates the world. This movement has promoted the idea that the poor, the weak, the Lowly, are the good and the powerful and the High have caused their suffering. The “deprived”, the less intelligent, the violent, all exist because of our exploitation and racism, capitalism, or some other evil.

This philosophical movement holds that, because all groups are inherently equal, any differential in a group’s performance can be fixed by the massive infusion of funds, new systems, or the manipulation of the environment.

The result will be that we become slaves to the Low. Though once fanatically pursued mainly by the Cultural Marxists, egalitarian and multicultural beliefs have dressed up this premise in a new guise, with monstrous results.

It is understandable that Cultural Marxism appeals to those in the Third World. But the adoption of this credo in the civilized world is a recipe for suicide.

These Cultural Marxists and their cultural and philosophical allies have taken hold of Western civilization and turned our institutions against us. Starting as a small intellectual coterie, they have captured the major educational, religious, and cultural institutions of Western civilization—aided now by submissive and clueless conservatives. They have corrupted the universities, the Main Stream Media, the government, the church, and the arts.

It has taken generations of skilled work, cunning and outright dishonesty to generate this deep nihilism and bad conscience among Western people.

But every movement that seeks to alter radically the prevailing orthodoxy needs fertile ground to grow. Cultural Marxism would have remained largely irrelevant if not for several events in modern history:

1)   A deep malaise spawned in the West by two great wars. Millions of Europeans and Americans emerged from the war years weary and suspicious of traditional values. Although they labored to achieve material benefits, they had no philosophical direction to offer to themselves or their progeny.

Thus, these children, the first generation to be born into abundant material wealth, had no direction. They asked themselves: why should they be rich and others poor? And Cultural Marxism was ready with answers.

2)   In the past, Western communities had grown in large part due to the desire to “be fruitful and multiply,” a fundamental tenet of the Judeo-Christian faith. But this has now turned on its head: Western man has failed to replace himself and, instead, encouraged the reproduction of the Low.

Laws were written to institutionalize this change: among others, the Civil Rights laws; the immigration laws, the expansion of welfare,—now being replicated in Europe too. With no belief in God, Westerners attempted to establish a “heaven on earth”— a fundamental violation of natural laws.

And in an act of extreme hypocrisy, European-Americans tried to segregate themselves from the results of their own laws by running away from the miserable world of the Low.

What emerged was not a philosophy to live by, but hypocrisy and guilt (Nihilism). The viability of any philosophy is whether one can live by its tenets. This is clearly not the case here.

3)   As Peter Brimelow has pointed out, “Hitler’s Revenge,” the specter of Nazism, haunts any study of innate group differences.

Atrocities carried out in the name of group differences helped pave the way towards the opposite view—that essentially all human attributes are not innate and can therefore be changed by our efforts.

And if these efforts prove insufficient, the High had to double down and continue to try to uplift the Low—“by any means necessary.”

If equality is the unquestioned premise, then it follows that Higher people are oppressing the Lower groups. How else are we to explain these glaring group differences? The Low are encouraged to exhibit resentment, envy, and jealousy toward the High.

It is important to understand that there is a consensus for this: “conservatives” only want to use other means.

The High has degraded and subordinated itself to the Low. The weak, the Low, and the other have to be protected at all costs. Western Civilization is an historical accident, or achieved illegitimately, not based on the talent or hard work of a High people. Our accomplishments, once a source of pride, are now evidence of our exploitation.

We have become hypocrites. Moving to white communities while loudly proclaiming our love of diversity. Supporting the forced integration of schools, but only for the children of other people. In our self-righteous world of moral outrage and public theater, what we say is more important than what we do.

The indoctrination is largely complete. Our civilization recedes, desirable communities grow fewer and smaller, and human misery comes ever closer. Through a bad conscience, and the myth of equality, we are closing in on the destruction of ourselves

If we want humans in the future to be wiser, stronger and smarter, then we need the courage to understand and accept what is innate. The survival of everything that has been achieved, and the future of mankind, is at stake.

We must train ourselves to reject a false perception of harmony in favor of truth, every truth, even plain, harsh, ugly, repellent, unchristian, immoral truths—for such truths do exist.

Aren’t our true leaders the ones who have faced adversity with courage and tried to rid themselves of superstition? Great men such as our Founding Fathers, Friedrich Nietzsche, Winston Churchill, Galileo, took these risks. There are many others in our past.

Where are they today? 

Susie Green (email her) is an American of Jewish background. She has worked in New York City all of her professional life in various high-level managerial jobs. She is married and has a large blended family of children and stepchildren.