A few months ago, I wrote a three part series titled “Revenge of the Productive” which was essentially a thought experiment looking at what might happen if mass underclass immigration continues indefinitely. The assumption was made that the underclass would be fairly content and happy, as long as they could be subsidized by the productive class, which would ironically imply that the productive class would be the most likely to agitate for change.
Since the events in New Orleans a few weeks ago, much of what I wrote in the series, especially about the weaknesses of a multicultural, politically correct society, seems to have been clearly demonstrated. It is with that in mind that I am amending and annotating the series. Besides some spelling corrections and edits, the posts are essentially the same in content however. Part IInternally or externally imposed order? One of the results of a politically correct, multicultural (PC/MC) society is to radically reinvent society into a form of bondage or coerced association between a collection of productive individuals on one hand, and parasitic individuals or groups on the other.
In every society there have always been children, the elderly, handicapped, and others who could not fully support themselves. However, this new coerced association is marked by the degree to which fully capable adults and feral youths do not contribute, and by the presence of an underclass which is disproportionally costly to society or even anti-social. One of the results of a highly developed, highly educated, yet redistributive society is that even individuals who do some form of minimum-wage work may still be a net-loss to society due to the degree to which they are subsidized, directly or indirectly (consider health care, or driving without auto-insurance as examples).
For some, the thought of calling the parasitic elements of society "parasitic" may seem cruel or hard-hearted; however there is no other word which better describes the situation. It is certainly true that if some individuals take, then some productive individuals somewhere else must in turn give. In this way, there is a clear hierarchy of dependence, but it is only a one-way dependency. It should be obvious that these parasitic elements of society benefit from a system that they neither created, nor could ever create if left to their own devices. Further, it is certainly right to call this state of affairs unjust, for that is what it is.
If one doubts the necessity or value of the productive elements of society, Bangladesh, Mexico, and Zimbabwe should provide sufficient examples to learn from.
While the parasitic elements have benefited from this redefinition of society, many of the leftist and elitist fetishes which have been foisted onto society in these last few decades have only been possible as long as the law-abiding citizens have keep society functioning. It would seem that the democratic process would easily solve this abuse, but there have been several major obstacles which have prevented this from happening. First, those most influential and well off often benefit from the system, or tend to be protected from its negative effects. Secondly, politicians have long since realized that redistributive government measures make it easy to buy the votes of the parasitic elements. Finally, our PC/MC society has made it very difficult to even raise the concerns and interests of the productive elements of society in a direct and honest fashion, much less to actually build enough consensuses to generate political results except in the most extreme instances of abuse, such as welfare reform in the 90's. This produces something of a conundrum for the productive middle class however, because unlike say, the riots during the civil rights period, they cannot easily engage in mass-scale civil-disobedience without collapsing the very pillars that keep society held up.
The rather obvious danger is that society will slowly sink to the level of the lowest element, or at least diverge into an overclass and underclass as is the case in many third world countries. However there is a second possibility which could emerge, especially in an Anglo-Saxon, common-law culture, specifically, that the productive citizens might turn the tables and force the rest of society to recognize their importance. It should not be forgotten that the productive elements of society also have the potential to be far more effective in their application of destructive action than others: what they create they can also destroy. Their superior social organizing ability, education, sense of order, and productivity trace back to what Victor Davis Hanson calls the Western way of war, and has long provided the West with an advantage over its adversaries.
By "destructive action", one should not take this to mean anti-government para-military action, terrorism, or any other such extremism however. The probability of any actual revolt by the productive elements of society would tend to be exponentially more likely with respect to lowering the threshold of action. This is to suggest that civil-disobedience/civil-disorder type behavior would both be the most likely result of middle class frustration, and probably the highest degree of disobedience and danger which would still draw large support. For this to be a possibility would require that these social-disobedience/civil-disorder type actions would need to be effective enough to have at least some chance of generating change. If this condition can not be established, then the chances of such instability are quite low.Part II Internally or externally imposed order?
Now I will state here, in case anyone who is not already familiar with this blog is unsure, that I am not suggesting, condoning, glorifying, or in any other way supporting any form of revolt. Rather, at the center of my reasons for this blog is a belief that our PC/MC society is rapidly approaching a point of becoming socially and politically unstable; my hope therefore is that we can correct the problem before it is too late and while these changes can be made peacefully and democratically. In other words, the motivation behind this post is to sound out what we might be looking at in a decade or two if we do not take action soon. [Recent events suggest that one to two decades may be far too optimistic.]
Now back to the primary topic: what actions might the productive elements of society take should their frustration reach a tipping point? Some would be rather predictable -- forming associations to promote their interests, lobbying congress, protesting, and even strikes all seem rather plausible. On the other extreme end of the spectrum, we would likely see a rise of extremist groups, especially among youths. However none of these actions seem very effective except for national strikes, but even such strikes would be difficult to actually pull off effectively.Internally or externally imposed order?
As in any case where resources are at a minimum and efficiency has to be maximized, serious thoughts must be given the methods used. Since the aim of any such actions would be ultimately political rather than merely destructive, a careful evaluation of the political situation would need to be made. Further, all available opportunities would need to be used to exploit the weaknesses of the opponent, and to trick them into working against themselves whenever possible. This would require a careful eye for their weaknesses, fissures, contradictions, and critical nodes.Internally or externally imposed order? What then, is the effective weakness, or at least a prime one, of the PC/MC society compared to the Jacksonian social order? It seems that the weakness is effectively whether individuals and groups have self-imposed order, or externally-imposed order. Internally or externally imposed order? The disadvantage which the productive elements face is that they not only have to maintain a self-imposed order, but they are also required to provide a minimum amount of external order for the parasitic elements of society. This boundary, where order is imposed internally or externally, is a core weakness of any PC/MC society
, and one which presents a weakness which is very vulnerable from attack by any enemy, be it Islamic extremist, China or other foreign powers.
In keeping with the above then, it seems that creating the conditions to separate society clearly into these two groups, and emphasize the difference would be the political objective. In order to do this, it would be necessary to remove (temporarily) the means by which to effectively impose order, thereby allowing what amounts to an exaggerated opportunity for the exercise of free will. At the same time, individuals in the productive majority would be forced to reevaluate their ideological foundations in light of a more honest and realistic picture of society, shaking off the contradictions of the the PC/MC society.
What practical implementation might this strategy take? While there are many possibilities, one is given as follows. Using tactics which are non-violent (though possibly not generally considered merely "civil-disobedience") 3000-5000 individuals would carry out vandalizing attacks on key civil infrastructure: traffic control for major intersections, blacking out of the power grid, and obstructing major highways and transportation infrastructure. At the same time, further efforts to create disorder and swamp the civil authorities might be taken, such as setting tires and refuse on fire, agitating crowds of the unproductive elements, etc. All these activities would be taken simultaneously in 30-100 major urban centers, creating a sudden and unexpected disruption of order.
It should be clear that the efforts would not be designed to be especially destructive in and of themselves. Certainly with the lack of manpower available for such action and potential as few as 30-50 "activists" per urban area, their direct effect would be fairly limited. Rather, the objective of these actions would be to spark further unrest and disorder, as the parasitic elements realize that the civil authorities can not impose order on them, for the time being.Internally or externally imposed order?
The efforts of the initial disruption of order would be a classical guerilla maneuver, which would be aimed at exposing the opponent and forcing them to overreact and show their true hand. By removing the effective enforcement of order from these parasitic elements, much in the way of their true nature would be reviled. Not only would there be the rather traditional rioting, looting, and opportunistic behavior that characterize such events, but radicalism, be it Islamic, La Raza, or other, would also likely be revealed. As these parasitic elements revel in their new-found "freedom", they would almost doubtlessly begin to display the arrogance of the mob as they overestimate their power and misread their opponents.
Certainly such a scenario would be a potential death-blow for the PC/MC society. With much of the media infrastructure (TV, internet, papers) temporarily disabled, there would be no way to reframe the situation or scapegoat it onto a less politically correct group; rather, individuals would be forced to make up their own minds based on the scene before the. By putting the instability of a PC/MC society on full display, there would be no room left to believe utopian schemes. Finally, the shared experience would tend to create a new sense of unity and identity among the productive class, thereby bringing the sense of "us" and "them" unmistakably out into the open.Part III
Internally or externally imposed order?
From part II, it does seem reasonable that fairly low-threshold, non-violent action could prove to be very disruptive if targeted at the fault-lines of an unstable PC/MC society. Also, given the fairly small number of "activists" required to initiate such a situation, there would not necessarily need to be a unified productive class before-hand, but rather simply a dedicated core.Internally or externally imposed order?
Despite the potential danger of such a situation unfolding, there is little reason to expect such a scenario would develop in the near term. First, there is still a significant lack of awareness of the problem among the productive elements of society. Further, multiculturalism has not yet reached its peak, and good economic conditions have masked over much friction between groups. Finally however, even action by a few thousand individuals in a coordinated manner would be quite unrealistic at this stage because of the difficulty of planning and recruiting members without detection by the authorities. Without an established infrastructure in which the productive elements could associate, plan, organize and built trust and relationships, executing such a plan would be essentially impossible.
However, should conditions continue to disintegrate, it is likely that organization on the part of the productive elements will increase. In a sense, the Minuteman Project is an example of the early consciousness of the collective interests of the productive class. The very existence of such an organization, combined with the publicity and the negative attacks directed against it also serves to further concentrate this group identity.Internally or externally imposed order?
It has been mentioned by others that any violent attacks on the Minuteman Project volunteers while on the border, say by drug or human smugglers, would likely spawn a resurgence of the militia movement of the 90's (though probably not by Minutemen volunteers themselves). It is certainly true that much of the militia movement was in response to the perceived threats of the Clinton administration, and seems to have largely receded since the Bush administration. So it does seem rather plausible that continued failure by Washington to protect the border, combined with violent attacks on non-violent observers might cause the politically sensitive militia movement to reemerge.
A resurgent militia movement would be one sign not only of an increased awareness and organizing on the part of the productive class, but also potential preparation for action. However there could also be other organizing going on, with aims less radical than the militia. These organizations might center on other common interests or goals: concern over crime, collective political lobbying, or shared culture and ethnicity.Internally or externally imposed order?
Certainly the next few years will be interesting to see how our PC/MC society develops. It is possible that efforts such as the Minuteman Project and others may gain enough momentum to start rolling back some of the excesses of our current society. It is also possible however that instability will grow as the parasitic elements mushrooms, creating a future which we will all wish we had avoided.-I think at this point that the New Orleans situation has likely caused far more damage to the public perception of the current PC/MC society than we yet realize. There should certainly be no doubt that it had an effect on our enemies, especially China and Islam, as they realized just how volatile our social mix has become. It has become a very cute fetish for many individuals, even on the right, to talk about reforming these parasitic elements, but there is not an infinite time horizon to try these latest social engineering experiments in. The reality is that the situation at this point constitutes a grave national security threat, which makes it practically impossible that our nation with its current demographics could fight another WWII type situation without looking more like Brazil than the USA.