![]() ![]() Reactionary politics considers this question and explains it in a way that is politically and rhetorically "common sense" to many people. That is at the heart of the discussion, "what is it exactly that allows for people to be cruel?". The problem is that LibSocs have a hard time with coming up with theories of cruelty, or at least with coming up with ways in which cruelty can be an adaptive behavior that people can exhibit. ![]() You can still have overpopulation and plenty of food, especially when artificial scarcity and natural scarcity reinforce each other. The distinction between overpopulation being a social problem and a biological problem of evolutionary mis-matching is quite blurred. ![]() Urban congestion, caloric instability among the working class and poor, the evolutionary advantages for offspring to be more fit when raised around access to more resources still proves Malthus right, in many regards. Nothing about social relations being unequal and barbaric implies that they are necessarily false, or that Socialism is inevitable. Cruelty can be an advantageous behavior that allows for some people to acquire vast amounts of food stuffs or whatever other surpluses from society by amassing armies, and killing and raping anyone that would oppose them. In a sort of sense, Malthus is still correct. Yet, even with it being the cause of Capitalism, we are still hard pressed to come up with a way in which this observation proves that Malthus is wrong. If that's the case, why hasn't everyone been fed on the planet earth yet? Because of Capitalism? Well no shit. In terms of food, for example, we could feed 150% of all humans. What exactly do you mean by overpopulation. People have been able to manipulate and use technology to produce surpluses of food stuffs for their cities for the past 5-10,000 years, yet all of the sudden because Murray Bookchin writes a book Malthus is wrong? I don't buy it lol Not everything comes down to food, in that way. I have no idea why LibSocs like to think that the "we haz food" argument somehow has implications upon Malthusian premises of overpopulation. It can get lonely, but I feel that loneliness is a small price to pay to avoid the filth of humanity. I like to spend time reading my Kindle, riding my bike on trails, watching Netflix, or browsing Reddit. Where I live (Australia) there are legal and regulated brothels, so I usually visit once a month, but I haven't been in the last two months, so I feel that is good because it is not cheap (about $220 per hour). I'm quite happy just grooming myself and doing my own thing eg I am getting into cycling, and I have even started to buy fashionable clothes and to groom myself (eg get nicer haircuts and clothes). I see chaos, vulgarity and evil all around me and I am keen to just get away from it. I see myself as in a similar position to the beautiful ones. But the repulsion I feel towards humanity is many times stronger than any desire I have for human intimacy, and everywhere I look, everyone I see around me, I see nothing but greed, vanity and destructive, cruel and callous behaviour. We evolved to be social and to seek connection to others. In my opinion, the beautiful ones are the result of a fallen society, which causes a rise in misanthropy. It is no surprise that few care anymore and wish for human population decline. From political corruption to the callousness of humanity to deal with environmental problems all the way to sex trafficking as well as slavery, factory farming, racism, sexism, etc, the evidence against humanity is overwhelming. The workplace and the internet has pushed everyone closer and allowed us all to see human corruption and depravity in remarkable detail. The experiment suggests that as there is overpopulation, as people get closer to each other, they descend into madness, and I believe this is a result of realisation that your fellow man is corrupt and depraved, and as such you don't care anymore about society because you know deep down that it is corrupt. In my opinion, what we are seeing in society today mirrors the mouse utopia experiments. They simply retreated to be by themselves and spent their days grooming themselves, which ensured they were free from scars or injuries hence the name "the beautiful ones." Another feature emerged, which was that a class of mice emerged known as "the beautiful ones" who were mice who did not engage in courtship or fighting. As expected, population exploded initially, but over time population began to decline and aggressive behaviour emerged eg mothers would eat their babies. There is a famous experiment called the "mouse utopia experiment" whereby mice were put into a space with infinite food and zero predators. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |