Our friend Anti-Gnostic has been reiterating a substantive point on various forums for some time. This being that the time of man’s preoccupation with ideas is concluding. I don’t know to what extent the notion has found purchase even in these azure waters, though it’s a deeper insight than what just a quip gives justice.
Homogenous western societies, or at least those still sufficiently so to reminisce, have enjoyed a fairly long and atypical age of ideas. In the absence of tribal friction within a society, men began to pursue their natural inclination toward combat with the word rather than the sword. Ideas were hatched and debates commenced at an elevation above eternity’s ground level divide. That is to say: philosophically. As a result conversations became viable on forms and functions of government, roles of sex and family, of individual and society, and church and state. This prosaic fundamental, ignored as a given, represents an enormous achievement. From this, modernity was made possible. When an argument transitions from who will eat the cow to how it should be prepared, the trajectory of men’s knives changes dramatically. Soon enough they are discussing microcircuitry over filets. There is much in the concept of we. And the Age of Ideology is born.
The conception of which is no more esoteric than Maslow’s hierarchy writ large. Humans seek fulfillment of base needs before considering more grand aspirations. Men looking for food aren’t looking for love. And I’ll wager none argued politics at Rorke’s Drift.
No one gives a thought to breathing until the moment their head falls below the surface. And suddenly a new top priority! Just as we may be assured none of the condemned souls in the Paris theater spent their last moments despairing over the most important issue humanity has ever faced. In the analogous hierarchy of a society, ideology follows tribe. And when the latter’s formerly stable base fractures, priorities shift as well.
Of course the Rorke’s Drift example can be countered with the assertion that few fought over philosophy at the Somme either. Just as one can cite examples of conflicts over the affections of a woman as for the skin of an apple. Though either would be ample evidence of the speaker’s autism. But the dispute will only be resolved definitively when Kim Jong Un puts an EMP over Nebraska and we can compare the present carnage of lovelorn skirmishes to what erupts once every calorie outlet is suddenly rendered inert. “Food fight” will take on a newly sinister connotation. The point being that the frequency and desperation of conflict scales down with what layer of the hierarchy men are attempting to sort. John Adams understood this in different context implicitly.
I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history, naval architecture, navigation, commerce, and agriculture, in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain.
John, I regret to inform your porcelain painting grandsons have now compelled their own children back to the study of war.
Because we assiduously forget all lessons absorbed prior to last Tuesday, western society now beavers away at its foundations under the blithe assumption our cherished ideologies will simply levitate in their absence. Many cheeks will moisten upon learning the truth.
It has been explained often to the congenitally obtuse that neither conservatism nor libertarianism can survive the demographic defenestration of their constituents. Both ideologies are carried exclusively by whites, with no others remotely interested in shouldering the load. Colorblind conservative is an epitaph.
And while it may seem counterintuitive–though it shouldn’t–liberalism also rests upon the premise of a large white majority. It is just another ideology after all. And one that, like all the others, collapses when attention turns to baser instincts. That attention is already on lurid display among liberalism’s many disparate and overtly tribal factions. As the movement continues to progress in retrograde, the only remnant of principled ideology will be in its name.
If you’d like to watch this process at light speed, observe the situation in Tarnsjo, Sweden
A tranquil Swedish village is being torn apart by bitter tensions after the arrival of 20 refugee families. Tärnsjö, 150km north of Stockholm, has become a hotbed of resentment where migrant children as young as five need a police escort to get to school. Residents and newcomers have exchanged insults, thrown rocks and set fire to cars, leaving many on both sides scared to leave the safety of their homes.
In the last few months, with 10,000 asylum seekers arriving a week, the country has reintroduced border controls and the anti-immigrant Sweden Democrats has become the second largest party in Sweden. Tärnsjö, a relatively small village with a population of 1,200, is a snapshot of those places where bubbling anger has spilled over into violence and arson. Protesters have set fire to 17 immigration centres in the past two months – and the authorities have warned it is only a matter of time before someone is killed in the race-hate arson attacks that have engulfed this once peaceful nation.
A once peaceful liberal nation. A pridefully, almost unanimously liberal nation. A nation that boasted of liberalism as its defining creed. Yet one that now crumbles along with the foundation that cultivated it. And beneath, as always, lies the ancient bedrock of tribe.
The Age of Ideology is over.