Tagged: Cheikh Anta Diop


Amazing. Leading into a maze.

Under-stand. See what is under.

Woful = woeful, woe + ful => woman, woeman (wretched man, the wretched one)

In managerial economies like ours, high remuneration tends to accrue to positions held in depersonalizing organizations (cf. The Organization Man by W.H. Whyte). It is therefore surprising that few intelligent people, if the concept of meritocracy is accurate, are facing a motivation obstacle that prevents them from sacrificing personality to remuneration.

The concept of meritocracy ought to be further reviewed. For one thing, it may not be true that a degree is a sure sign of intelligence, insofar as we are now seeing women widely outperforming men in academic achievements while IQ testing does not predict it. All in all, those who take in earnest the Pygmalion effect (the influence of expectations on performance) are implicitly rejecting the concept of meritocracy as they claim school results depend on third parties’ expectations rather than IQ.

Which, by the way, makes John Stuart Mill’s idea of granting plural voting to intelligent people as deduced from education – ‘The distinction in favour of education, right in itself, is further and strongly recommended by its preserving the educated from the class legislation of the uneducated’ (Considerations on Representative Government) – nonsensical. Do the Millists of our days, then, advocate weighting votes according to IQ?


Veil Down in the West: A Woman’s Convenience

A couple of more quotes from literary documents supporting the thesis of my essay Le Voile en Occident here (en français).

She took those rooms for the pleasure of going there with her veil down, and imagining she was a heroine. She had a passion for secrecy, but she herself was merely a sphinx without a secret. (Oscar Wilde, The Sphinx Without a Secret)

Though it was midsummer Hetta entered the room with her veil down. She adjusted it as she followed Ruby up the stairs, moved by a sudden fear of her rival’s scrutiny. (Anthony Trollope, The Way We Live Now, 1875)

May I not ask you to lay aside your veil, so that we may look at each other fairly? (Ibid.)

The Veiled Lodger, in The Case-Book of Sherlock Holmes (1927) by A. Conan Doyle: The lodger keeps her veil down at all times to spare people the sight of her scars.


‘A machine-like footman.’ (The Case-Book of Sherlock Holmes) ‘Tis how a footman ought to be. Anything beyond machine-likeness would be obtrusive.

It is not being misanthropic to prefer being served by machines. Do not let the condition of our present feudal society think of yourselves as misanthropes.

Drop man from service. The habit of dealing with humans for purely monetary-functional transactions erodes our humaneness.

In terms of service Chinese dealers are closest to the perfection of the machine. This is why I patronize their businesses.

Amusement and recreation are necessary to relax from work; they are not leisure, which is an end in itself.

In Thomas More’s Utopia, the workday lasts six hours. But everybody works. Whereas, for Thomas Aquinas, the surplus of work for some (above, say, six hours) allows others to live a contemplative life (vita contemplativa) – in other words, a leisure life (See Sebastian de Grazia, Of Time, Work, and Leisure, 1962). It is this very notion of leisure life that has vanished from Western conscience, which disappearance makes the idea of the slavery of machines for the sake of living a leisure life sound quite… utopian.

Time-starved and as good as dead.

In our society many a man has no place intended to him as a man – only as manpower.

London subway, Dec. 24, 2014. A prerecorded female voice tells you to ‘alight here for the museums.’ But all museums are closed Dec. 24, 25, & 26 each year – you know why.

According to Marshall McLuhan, colonization has detribalized Africa through the introduction of the written medium. According to Cheikh Anta Diop, colonization has retribalized Africa, where great unified empires existed.

Old-fashioned vs mass-fashioned.

The great man’s mistakes are closer to the truth than the little man’s exactitude.

The craving for dignity, in a deterministic world, leads to absurd work ethics – to an unproductive show of make-feel-worthy.

On a plane with x-axis capacity and y-axis wealth I say we shall find a bell-shaped curve, because mediocre individuals are capacious enough to unite against the highly capacious and prevent them from competing. Not allowed to compete! [However, the main problem, as hinted above, is motivation – motivation obstacles. Competition is time-consuming and its rewards unlikely to compensate great minds for the time lost away from enjoying the company of other great minds through books, and their own inner dialogue, thinking, contemplation, leisure.]

According to Kant, it does not take intelligence to know one’s duty, i.e. the moral law, whereas it takes intelligence to thrive in the world, to be worldly wise. Kant thereby disqualifies this kind of self-serving smartness (Klugheit) as in no way being a noble virtue and in no way central in mankind’s calling. As to Schopenhauer, he considers true intelligence as unselfish, as he posits a trade-off between Wille (will) and Vorstellung (‘representation,’ insight). The genius is detached from nature’s pursuits, finding no higher enjoyment than his own insight at representing the world in his mind, that is, in his own genius.

Perverted into compliance.

What best characterizes the present age of information is that it’s not an information age.

There must be something wrong with the so-called ‘extraversion-dominance’ dimension of psychology (one of the Big Five), as the organization man must be both extraverted/other-oriented and dependent/submissive in his life as a hierarchical team worker. Or it shows the dramatic extent of the strain the organization exerts on our nature.

Cities are no less pestilent than villages. Yet in cities one’s relationships are limited to people one cares to see, whereas in villages one is expected to socialize with all other villagers; the pestilence of social life is thus transferred from interpersonal relationships to some holistic crowd effect, in which the injury comes from unknown passers-by.

Most pets are castrated, sterilized by their owners. Remember we are a domesticated species. A self-domesticated species.

Ubiquitous mass media pornography is externalized delectatio morosa.

Assignment: Carry out big-data survey on scholars’ writings in scientific journals compared to their published books in order to assess the extent of publishers and editors’ intervention in the latter.

The specialized scientist’s worldview is unbalanced. As his worldview manifests itself even in his work as a specialist, the specialist’s work itself is unbalanced. The cold objectivity of facts and figures, so much flaunted by the specialists, is imbalance.

The specialist is an unbalanced man. His activity is knowledge as toil. Toil is what unbalances man’s development. Leisure ensures the balanced development of man’s faculties.

Morals has been replaced by priming, but the latter does not escape the objections addressed to the former, as scientists inevitably sneak priming in their writings.

In developing countries the role of the importune beggar is played by the street dealer.

All men are equal’: the legal axiom defies science. It is based on purely moral grounds and at the same time the recognizance of this moral axiom as being the fundation of the civil compact has become, or is becoming, though history, universal. Literally it only means that ‘all men are equal before the law’ but the qualification is immaterial for that the law should treat as equals people who are unequal according to nature is at defiance with nature. Where is the scientific evidence that ‘all men are created equal’? By opposing the civil state to the state of nature, Hobbes stressed the necessary humbling of natural urges before the civil law for the maintenance of civil order and peace, which, in religious terms, compares to the humbling of the natural man before the law of God. As it imposes an absolute restraint on nature, the law may be called moral and any breach of compact is abhorrent to the moral law. The restraint is absolute in the sense that if one is free to contract with others in the way that best suits his own interest, he is not free to violate, in his interest, a contract. The latter is incompatible with civil order. A person caught in the act of breaking his word is not allowed any longer to pursue his interest until a sentence has been served.

If science primes us (psychologically) to indulge in tendencies that are being surmounted by progress, then science becomes an impediment to progress and will be left behind.

When work is through, status via work will be no option anymore.

What is the ultimate cause (vs proximate cause, i.e. sudden rush of air in the lungs or whatever) of human babies being the only species born crying?

Civilization means psychoticism because mass media conditions maladaptive sexuality and the psychotics, according to H. Eysenck, are the least conditionable.

Admission of the naturalistic fallacy (the tendency to grant indicative statements the value of injonctions) implies that our aims are determined outside natural life. Darwinian theory, thus, gives no account of our aims, and Darwinists who warn against the naturalistic fallacy downgrade their own work and pursuit. And those among them who, like R. Thornhill, do the same while insisting on applying the experimental test to all propositions are inconsistent in the bargain.

I have a doubt on Ronald Fisher’s ultimate explanation of equal sex ratios. Fisher’s principle states that, when females are scarce, siring a male will be selected against as more males will not mate, and vice-versa. It is the vice-versa that disturbs me, because males are polygynous. ‘Whichever sex is in excess will have lower reproductive success, in average,’ yes: for two sexes having equal reproductive strategies…

I have a doubt also on some claims about parasites and evolution. Predators do not weed out the genetically slower individuals but those individuals that are made slower by parasites (for instance, susceptibility to predation is increased thirty times for infected fishes, according to one study). Being free from parasite indicates a better immune system, but I should think parasite infestation has a random dimension too: in some cases it depends on where the individual has been (the wrong place at the wrong time), what he has eaten, etc. If randomness is high, how can selection mechanisms, in the predator-prey interaction, generate adaptations?

The world is not within man’s reach – the world in the physical sense: stars and galaxies. Our thriving on a speck of dust lost in infinity cannot conceal its (our thriving’s) indecorum. We must leave room to a one better suited than us to explore and know the world: Der Geist.

Biology will become anecdotal because the most important for Der Geist will be to know Itself. In biology Der Geist will find what It is not, not what It is.

The profound meaning of political freedom is that political ideas do not matter in the least. The program will apply and Der Geist will awaken.

Subsidizing children amounts to a windfall. It is because children are one’s highest stakes in the system that governments subsidize reproductive success while burdening all other forms of success.

Crime novels are read by practical people who have no time and no patience for things remote from their self-interest. Not because these novels are easier to read – they are not – but because practical people always keep in a corner of their minds the more or less conscious idea that one day to kill someone will be necessary to safeguard their interests.

Lucretius’s ‘unalloyed empiricism’ (Milord Matt Ridley): yet the idea that the world is made of two things only, atoms and void, was not empirical but speculative.

In business they’re always talking about having ideas, but the ideas they have in business are of the kind a thinker would be ashamed to have.

How to pronounce the word ‘read’ when reading it is at times impossible to know before the end of the sentence.

It seems that scientific marketing has been so efficient that only those who underwent some religious conditioning (in part inconsistent with mass marketing) are now capable of being critical toward the current state of the society.

When I was young I was feeling a need for religious belief and I would see the scientist who lacked that need as a defective mind, same as I would see a man without sexual needs as unmanly.

I remember very well that when I used to be an avid reader of classic philosophy I couldn’t shift to more recent material without being highly disappointed by their content, I mean by the thinking evidenced in it. No matter how noted the authors were, Ivy League professors and all, they couldn’t rise any high in my estimation.

Love eternal: about the fourth or fifth time it comes in your life you start wondering. Women as transient objects of love eternal.

Google has decided they wanted to help you search things on the Web. So you start typing a name and their engine completes it, with the closest Hollywood star or soccer player, when you’re looking for a biologist… Am I the only one to think this will reinforce herd mentality?

Mexican film La sexorcista (Satánico Pandemonium) (1975) by Gilberto Martínez Solares takes place in a convent during Mexican colonial times (there are still black slaves, some of them escaping from slavery into convents and monasteries, where they are hardly treated better, and there is plague in the country too). Although the title is a bit of a ‘catcher,’ the film, about a nun falling into sin and consequently becoming a serial murderer is subtle and profound. Once one devotes her life to God in the way a Catholic nun does, that is, relinquishing the most demanding urges of nature, the slightest slip can lead one astray and into the deepest regions of despair and madness via a terrifying logic. If she loses in the slightest the firmness of her faith or faith in her firmness, and realizes in what grave she has buried herself alive, she becomes demented – a demon. Yet the apparences can be preserved, including through murder, and the horrible irony of the film is that by accepting to live in utter deception of others the criminal nun is offered the highest honors, the leadership of her community, whereas the confession of her crimes would have brought her into the hands of the Inquisition and to death after atrocious abuses. It is made plain, however, that her reward will corrupt the whole community and beyond: under the guise of devotion and unbeknownst to them, the believers will be paying honor to Satan, into whose sheep they have been turned.


‘Israel does not suffer from rape’


About the fantastic claim that Israel does not suffer from rape (made by Tobias Langdon, in his essay Fake Jews: Deceit and Double-Think in Britain’s Hostile Elite, UNZ Review online, May 16, 2017)

According to Tobias Langdon, as an ethnostate Israel’s blessings include Israeli women’s being spared from rape.

According to A Natural History of Rape (2000) by Randy Thornhill and Craig Palmer, rape is at least two different things, 1/rape by a sexual predator (his victims being unknown to him), 2/rape by a relative (including incest on children) or by a known person, that is date rape; and the second category is the commonest by far – very far. Yet rape by migrants is of the sexual-predator category.

(I also believe that the first category has always been more reported than the second one, and if it is found that a statistical increase in rape is due in part to more victims reporting, we will also find that this reporting concerns in large part family or date rapes.)

Rape, being a sensitive issue, comes handy for propaganda. Shock value of violent murders and rapes can cloud the reasoning and then one would swallow anything unsupported by statistics. And I don’t find statistics as much as shock-value cases in anti-migrant internet literature.

As to the fantastic claim that ‘ethnostate’ Israel ‘doesn’t suffer from this crime’ (rape) as she does not allow third-world immigration, it is preposterous, on three counts:

1/The claim assumes that family and date rape does not exist in Israel.

2/That there is no third-world immigration in Israel is not true, as Black Ethiopians and other third-world nationalities have immigrated to and settled in Israel.

To be sure, the numbers of Black people and third-world immigration in Israel may be considered negligible. But as Langdon notes, there are 20 percent non-Jewish Arabs with Israeli (however second-class) citizenship: hardly an ethnostate! Israel is not as ‘sane’ as Langdon likes to, perhaps craves to believe.

3/& finally rape rates in Israel are said to be rather high. [There are problems with international rape statistics, however. For instance, in the article here (wonderslist) about ‘Top 10 Countries With Maximum Rape Crime,’ I can see no reason why Canada has 14 times (!) more sex assaults than similar country USA. Canada: 460,000 assaults each year for a population of 36M =1277 per lakh; USA: 293,000 assaults/year for a pop. of 323M =90.7 per lakh…]

Tobias Langdon is one case of delusional thinking about Israel, combined with an ingrained repulsion toward colored people – that same repulsion that led one of my Twitter contenders to make, in the heat of an exchange, the fantastically preposterous claim that all rapists in Israel are Blacks (see Tweet Anthology 2 here).


Nor was ever the U.S. an ethnostate, as the economy of the South was based on slavery (on the paper, however, it could be said it was, yes, as slaves were not citizens). Neither slavery America nor apartheid Israel are ethnostates. Both are exploitative caste states.

Of course, that ruthless exploitation could be a political aim is not considered proper today, except perhaps to the most unabashed supremacists. For all others, an unarticulated desire to enslave a whole class of people in order to make one’s own life easier would translate as a perceived need, an actual anxiety to defend one’s civilization – where there’s nothing to defend but a heritage of exploitation and misery for the greater number.

It is because of the earnest possibility of such a collective desire for enslavement and exploitation that academia tends to reject IQ studies, as inferior IQs would be deemed a sufficient reason to enslave, say, the Blacks, however shocking this is to our moral sense. Liberals are often snubbed as moralists, but morality is no more to be dismissed from the fabric of man than are man’s lower instincts.

If there exist statistics that demonstrate high rate crimes of Black and other people of color, then I’d like to see them. What some are wont of doing on the internet is tweeting shocking cases of rape and murder, say once every week or two, when heinous crimes happen in the U.S. alone at the rate of dozens a day. So as these highly motivated militants can’t bring more than such numbers of cases to my attention, then I say to myself, wait, I am deeply nauseated by these Black on White crimes, but what about the figures now? Again, if there are figures…

The figure I know is Black inmates in American prisons. There’s no reason to suppose, like many liberals, that this high percentage is per se a proof of racism in American society rather than, say, the criminal nature of the Black man, as the opponents of those liberals would have it. Once this is being said, I have heard that the greater part of these inmates have been sentenced for drugs and I think that changes everything, because even if that might prove one of the Black man’s natural tendencies, I wouldn’t exclude that Blacks are being targeted on purpose by pushers having all the means of scientific marketing at their disposal, especially knowing that they are working in prison, that is, are just like the slaves of old and just like the Black peons of the Jim Crow regime (where they were not allowed to diversify their crops, to take just one instance). This is a pattern.


Singled Out

Some thoughts after reading Singled Out: How Singles Are Stereotyped, Stigmatized, and Ignored, and Still Live Happily Ever After (2006) by Bella DePaulo, PhD.


For a ultimate cause of ‘matrimania’ (marriage mania), I’d be tempted to look into evolutionary psychology. Bella DePaulo uses a meaningful phrase: ‘intensive coupling,’ or ‘intensive nuclearity,’ and I think it is key to understanding matrimania. Intensive coupling is the current form of mate guarding. Women’s emancipation has made it necessary that both partners couple more intensely than ever in the past, when the relative social isolation of the woman would guarantee some stability to the couple, as mate poaching would be obstructed by women’s reclusion and minority status.

The corollary of intensive coupling is the emotional value attached to coupling, which, as DePaulo observes, has not always been so exclusive in the past. Another corollary is the delusions she describes under the word ‘singlism.’

What she says about the fifties in America (‘Consider … the Americans who were newly wedded in 1956. No Americans on record married at a younger age than they did, before or since. Half the 1956 grooms had not yet reached the age of 22.5, and half the brides were 20 or younger’) also triggered various reminiscences. I see the American fifties as an era of profound change marked by ‘hidden persuaders’ (Vance Packard), ‘affluence,’ ‘reversed sequence’ and the rise of the ‘technostructure’ (Galbraith), ‘managerialism’ (Burnham), and I am led to hypothesize the intervention of  technocratic power (more efficient than that of churches!) in normalizing marriage in the American society. There may have been two incentives in that direction for these technocratic ‘persuaders.’ One is social control, as by and large single males would be seen as sexual predators and single females as feebly-inhibited nomads (from eugenicist Charles Davenport – and my understanding is that eugenics was still okay at the time). The other is consumption at the levels required by the newly achieved affluence. DePaulo stresses the response already made to Japanese scholar Masahiro Yamada’s contention that ‘single parasites’ consume less, yet I am not quite convinced that singles consume as much as couples; data should not be too hard to find on that score.

Yamada’s indictment of singles based on their consumption patterns or consumption levels is revealing of a tendency of capitalist societies toward ‘democratorship’ (from German Demokratur: Demokratie-Diktatur).


Evolutionary psychology postulates that we are replication machines for our genes (Dawkins): the goal of life is reproduction. EP scholars insist that the phrase ‘struggle for life’ is actually a misnomer, since survival is in fact at the service of reproduction. The phrase ‘reproductive success’ is key to their understanding of social relations. Now, as DePaulo says, some singles have children (and more and more people with children are singles); but this is still a way to maximize/optimize one’s reproductive success, if one’s partner turns out to be abusive, violent &c. She underlines that many singles and their children are better off single than in pair. But then they are in a typical EP pattern, whereas childless singles are not, and are rather, in that view, well, if the former are successes, then the latter are – the contrary of successes (and unhappy).

One EP scholar (Kanazawa) has come with an ‘intelligence paradox,’ trying to explain why intelligent people tend to commit ‘the greatest crime against nature’ (in his own words), namely voluntarily not to reproduce. Having read his book, in fact I can say this doesn’t even describe intelligent men by and large, only (or more likely) intelligent women. Still, in one other book (Why Beautiful People Have More Daughters, 2007, Kanazawa & Miller), he points to a productivity peak for scholars happening later in life in the case of singles than in the case of marrieds. He sees it as a confirmation of the EP view that once you reproduce you’ve done what you were called for in this life (by your genes) and you now concentrate on giving your children the opportunities to reproduce in the best conditions in their turn.

For a more thorough discussion of Kanazawa’s intelligence paradox, see here.


With Singled Out, Bella DePaulo almost made me think good of Oprah Winfrey (I can’t say I know Oprah Winfrey well, it’s just I have no warm notions of TV personalities generally speaking). But I have just been reading she is involved with a cult called A Course in Miracles (a course allegedly dictated by Jesus to a female medium, starting in 1965) and has put her large notoriety at its service. No doubt this has contributed mightily to the cult’s affairs.

In Order by Accident (2000), Miller & Kanazawa claim that, faced with unemployment, women evidence a tendency to join cults. I am pretty sure that cult membership also counts singles in larger proportions.


DePaulo sends a pique to those Americans who see themselves as adventurous and yet dare not go alone at the restaurant. Well observed!

In my experience, in restaurants that ambition to be fashionable, service to singles is extremely poor and as customers abandon themselves to the goodwill of the waiters the experience can be quite unpleasant. It’s as if these restaurants have an anti-single policy that they implement through bad service. They do their best to spare their ‘normal,’ or ideal, paired customers the inconvenience of being seated near a single – looser by definition in the dictionary of singlism.

Alternately, it may be no policy from the management but come from the staff themselves. As union is strength, waiters might hesitate to be inconsiderate and mean to pairs, while it’s fair game with singles, and they release it! If the waiter intends to be mean with a pair, Madame will insult him in soft voice while talking to Monsieur and making sure the waiter hears and his pride is hurt, while the single remains silent, doesn’t even whisper, because then they’re looked upon as having bats in the belfry.

Try the burger parlor.

July 2017

Pensées XLIII

Si je peux compter jusqu’à l’infini, quelle est la place d’un Dieu fini ?

Dans la guerre des sexes, j’ai parfois le sentiment d’être seul contre tous.

Le temps qui ferme nos blessures nous rapproche de la mort. Le temps qui nous rapproche de la mort ferme nos blessures.

La certitude de la mort console les malheureux et assombrit les gens heureux, si bien que les premiers ne sont jamais tout à fait malheureux ni les premiers tout à fait heureux.

Diderot, dans ses Pensées philosophiques, est intervenu dans la controverse sur le destin des enfants mort-nés en recommandant ironiquement aux parents de tuer leurs enfants pour leur éviter la damnation. Cet argument porté contre la religion chrétienne peut aussi être un argument en faveur de Grégoire de Rimini, général des augustins, surnommé tortor infantum (le bourreau des enfants) pour sa doctrine selon laquelle les enfants morts non baptisés sont damnés à cause du péché originel (d’après Leibniz, dans les Essais de théodicée).

Diderot disait regretter d’avoir écrit « ce livre abominable », Les Bijoux indiscrets. C’est pourtant le livre qui lui valut la protection de Mme de Pompadour.

« Ce que nous connaissons de l’univers n’est presque rien », dit Leibniz, qui croit à l’existence de planètes habitées, dont certaines par des êtres plus parfaits que nous. Pourquoi la Parole divine n’en dit-elle rien ? (Au moins dans son sens littéral : ces autres planètes sont-elles évoquées par les Écritures de manière ésotérique ?)

Conciliation du déterminisme absolu et de la morale pratique chez Leibniz – et de même chez Schopenhauer. Les actes contraires à la loi et aux mœurs sont peut-être excusables dans la mesure où la personne n’étant pas libre elle n’est pas responsable, mais ils doivent être « punis », de la même manière qu’on enferme les fous jugés irresponsables et dangereux. La justice est un instrument de sélection : elle épure le corps social des individus qui ne peuvent se conformer à ses normes, et ce dans l’intérêt supérieur de sa propre harmonie et de l’intérêt collectif. L’individu a intérêt à se conformer aux attentes sociales et si le déterminisme par lequel il est régi ne lui permet pas d’entendre son intérêt ou de le suivre car d’autres instincts plus forts le poussent en sens contraire, il doit être retranché du corps social. Ses actes ne sont pas à considérer au point de vue de la responsabilité mais à celui du déterminisme dont ils témoignent, et les violations de la loi sont autant d’indices d’une nature antisociale. La justice, comme pour Hobbes, n’a qu’une valeur dissuasive, « médicinale » dans la terminologie de Leibniz. (Essais de théodicée) – Cette théorie pénale est « fixiste » ou conservatrice.

Selon le traité Malleus Maleficarum, les Inquisiteurs sont protégés de la sorcellerie et l’arrestation d’un sorcier sur ordre de l’Inquisition a pour effet de dissiper tous ses sortilèges. De même, le sorcier prisonnier de l’Inquisition ne peut s’évader par magie.

Dans Les Châtiments de Victor Hugo, les oiseaux ne peuvent plus voler dans le ciel au-dessus de la France à cause de Napoléon III : « Les Oiseaux : Il a retiré l’air des cieux et nous fuyons. »

Tous ceux qui passent en France, à partir du dix-neuvième siècle, pour des écrivains catholiques de premier plan (ou presque) étaient des convertis : Huysmans, Léon Bloy, Paul Claudel, Jacques Maritain, Francis Jammes, Charles Péguy, Henri Ghéon, Pierre Jean Jouve, Gabriel Marcel, Julien Green (issu du protestantisme), Ernest Psichari… La seule exception que je connaisse est Bernanos.

J’exigerais des femmes ambitieuses qu’elles sussent plus que les autres. (Dans la langue de La Bruyère, l’imparfait du subjonctif est le temps correct pour l’accord avec le présent du conditionnel : « J’exigerais de ceux qui vont contre le train commun et les grandes règles qu’ils sussent plus que les autres, et qu’ils eussent des raisons claires et de ces arguments qui emportent conviction. »)

Le propre de la femme de qualité, c’est qu’elle ne faisait rien, ni dehors ni chez elle. Les auteurs de ces époques nous disent que la politesse s’acquérait à leur commerce. Nos manières se sont épaissies.

L’agent secret, de Rudyard Kipling à James Bond. Dans Kim de Kipling, la fascination bien anglaise pour l’espionnage (Graham Greene, Somerset Maugham, Ian Fleming…), le déguisement (c’est également le cas de Sherlock Holmes), les mots de passe secrets, les signes cabalistiques, c’est du maçonnisme appliqué, et ce n’est pas très noble.

Dans Kim, Kipling, « le chantre de l’Anglo-Saxon » d’après Jack London, n’hésitait pas à flatter l’indigène, à cause de la menace des autres Blancs sur les colonies anglaises. Il fallait convaincre les races soumises que la domination anglaise était préférable à celle des autres nations européennes. Cela donne une œuvre assez hypocrite et puérile, à tendance humanitariste, et manichéenne à l’encontre non des races de couleur mais de tous les Blancs non anglais.

Le mari trompé, dans Thérèse Raquin, est un « égoïste satisfait ». Je ne connais pas de roman d’adultère bourgeois qui ne charge le portrait du cocu. Pourtant, la reine Guenièvre trompait déjà un homme aussi excellent que le roi Arthur.

Si, comme Barrès l’a prétendu, il y a de la « basse pornographie » dans Zola, les Hussards disciples de Barrès ont largement dépassé celui-là dans le genre, rendant rétrospectivement vaines et creuses les critiques de leur maître contre Zola.

Dans Rome, Zola écrit que l’entrée des républicains dans les États pontificaux y a mis fin au règne des femmes car les prélats, « vieux garçons », étaient sous la coupe de leurs vieilles servantes. Les républicains n’étaient-ils pas sous la coupe de leurs femmes ? La femme mariée aurait moins d’influence sur son mari qu’une servante sur un célibataire ?

La Débâcle est un démenti de La Terre. D’un côté, les parasites sanguinaires ; de l’autre, le travail sain de la terre, la vie saine du travail aux champs (dans la personne de Jean) – La Débâcle que Zola, dans le très conservateur journal Le Gaulois (du juif Meyer), appelle « une œuvre de patriote… maintenant la nécessité de la revanche ».

Nombreux sont ceux qui disent chercher la vérité, auxquels il semble qu’elle parle comme Dieu à saint Augustin : « Tu ne me chercherais pas si tu ne m’avais déjà trouvée. »

Ne me dites pas que je n’ai pas de diplôme ou je répondrai que vous valez ceux qui vous ont donné les vôtres.

Aux jeux olympiques de l’Antiquité, la discipline des athlètes comportait l’abstinence sexuelle. Demandant ce qu’ils en pensaient à des amis médecins, je ne pus obtenir d’eux la moindre réponse. C’est comme si la médecine n’avait aujourd’hui rien à dire au sujet de la sexualité : seuls les « sexologues », branche de la psychologie, et les psychanalystes, qui ne connaissent les uns et les autres rien à la physiologie, parlent de sexe.

Herméneutique open data. La connaissance est le traitement quantitatif de l’ensemble des œuvres de la pensée. Toute pensée est un intrant culturel au sens ethnologique ; c’est le traitement statistique qui s’exerce sur elle qui fait sens. (Ne le dites pas aux intellectuels.)

Dans La Force des choses (Folio, vol. I, p. 36), Simone de Beauvoir ne veut pas que son nom soit accolé à celui d’anciens « collabos », elle ne veut « plus entendre leur voix ». P. 35, elle parle de Jouhandeau après-guerre comme si de rien n’était.

Simone de Beauvoir écrit au sujet du procès de Brasillach (ibid., p. 37) : « Quand la sentence tomba, il ne broncha pas. » Quid de la fameuse phrase : « C’est un honneur ! »

J’ai appelé Sartre un « casseur de pédés » (voir JPS : ). Dans La Force des choses (Folio, vol. II), Simone de Beauvoir nous parle de « misogynie pédérastique » (p. 192), de « sadisme pédérastique » à l’encontre des femmes (p. 204), et voir aussi la p. 196. Elle n’oublie pas non plus de souligner sa « conscience chrétienne, démocratique, humaniste » (p. 125). À part ça, le Flore a toujours la cote.

Pour Simone de Beauvoir, en 1949, il ne pouvait être question, avec Nelson Algren, d’aller dans l’Espagne de Franco. En 1959, elle voyage avec Nelson Algren dans l’Espagne de Franco (ibid., pp. 293-4).

Pp. 405-6 (ibid.), Simone de Beauvoir est « stupéfiée » par la « futilité » des « politiciens de carrière », qu’elle découvre à cinquante ans passés (qui plus est en Belgique) ; c’est là que j’ai compris qu’il était plus facile d’avoir une belle « conscience démocratique » dans un monde sans politiciens.

Il est assez ironique que Simone de Beauvoir tire son pessimisme à l’endroit des États-Unis, à cause de leur extéro-conditionnement croissant, d’un livre, La Foule solitaire (The Lonely Crowd), qui est une satire de l’intéro-conditionnement, caractéristique du « barnacled moralizer » et dont les derniers représentants en Amérique sont les fermiers. Dans sa préface à l’édition de 1960, David Riesman exprime d’ailleurs sa surprise que le public ait dans l’ensemble réagi comme Simone de Beauvoir (qu’il ne nomme pas : La Force des choses est postérieur, et Simone de Beauvoir ne semble pas avoir lu la mise au point de 1960), en idéalisant l’intéro-conditionnement.

Dans La Société de consommation, Jean Baudrillard pompe allègrement La Foule solitaire beaucoup citer l’ouvrage, et quand il le cite c’est surtout pour rapporter une expression (« objectless craving ») ou se porter en faux contre lui (contre le « standard package »). Or le parallèle entre le passage de la population rurale au productivisme urbain et le passage au consumérisme, le « must have fun », la « consommation-socialisation », tout cela est décrit dans le principe même de l’extéro-conditionnement (other-orientedness). Par ailleurs, Baudrillard écrit que Riesman « parle, à propos de la jeunesse américaine, d’un style Kwakiutl et d’un style Pueblo », alors que Riesman écrit en réalité que le caractère extéro-conditionné des jeunes Américains de la classe moyenne (en voie de massification) est Pueblo et que la société américaine dans son ensemble devient Pueblo alors que les jeunes la voient encore Kwakiutl. Baudrillard va jusqu’à citer le même passage de John Stuart Mill qui est dans La Foule solitaire. Mais à partir d’un constat qui est, au fond, celui de Riesman, Baudrillard déplore une perte de « personnalisation » des relations sociales, alors que Riesman en appelle à une re-dépersonnalisation de ces relations en raison de la charge émotionnelle trop lourde que cette personnalisation représente, par exemple dans le contexte fonctionnel du travail au bureau. – Guy Debord a également pompé La Foule solitaire (La Société du spectacle : « De l’automobile à la télévision, tous les biens sélectionnés par le système spectaculaire sont aussi ses armes pour le renforcement constant des conditions d’isolement des ‘foules solitaires’ »), avec la même erreur d’interprétation.

Selon Freud, la dépense psychique occasionnée par la maladie et par la lutte contre ses symptômes et compulsions conduit à une paralysie face aux tâches importantes de la vie. Or on trouve dans La Foule solitaire de Riesman et al. que le conformisme exerce, dans une société extéro-conditionnée, un effet de stimulation et d’accumulation psychiques, tandis que le non-conformisme a au contraire le même effet que la maladie mentale telle que décrite par Freud. La minorité idéologique subit un appauvrissement psychique qui la caractérise réellement comme malade.

« Liberté en situation » de l’existentialisme. La liberté se détermine en fonction de la situation. Si la situation change, la liberté se détermine autrement. Or Sartre écrit que l’on peut créer une situation, la société sans classes, qui verrait disparaître l’antisémitisme (Réflexions sur la question juive). Si je peux prédire, à partir de l’avènement d’une société sans classes, la fin de l’antisémitisme, c’est-à-dire si X alors Y, je nie la liberté. En effet, si je sais comment la liberté se déterminera face à telle situation, c’est que je sais comment elle doit se déterminer ; je le sais d’après une loi déterministe.

J’ai échoué à entrer en classe prépa littéraire car il n’y avait pas encore le baccalauréat littéraire qu’on a créé par la suite (et j’ai eu 5 sur 20 à l’épreuve de maths) et j’ai raté les concours administratifs à cause de l’épreuve de culture générale qu’il est aujourd’hui question de supprimer. C’est ce qui s’appelle être en avance sur son temps.

Dans l’administration française, on passe des épreuves de « culture générale » pour pouvoir ensuite rédiger des appels d’offre de marchés publics et des bordereaux de sécurité sociale. Et ce n’est pas une insulte à la culture ? – Épreuve de culture générale : être quitte avec la culture.

En fait de philosophes, des spécialistes en humanités (avec un « s »).

Il pourrait aussi y avoir une façon de voir les choses que je soumets à l’appréciation de votre radicalité : si c’est dans les journaux, c’est que ça ne vaut rien. Seulement votre radicalité a besoin des journaux pour exister.

Le « sois toi-même » de toute la pensée « émancipatrice » et publicitaire est une « injonction paradoxale » au sens de double bind schizogène.

Avoir des amis est-il compatible avec la liberté de penser ?

« N’écrivez pas des poèmes d’amour, écrivez sur votre quotidien. » (Rilke, Lettres à un jeune poète) J’ai écrit des poèmes d’amour car c’était mon quotidien !

Pour admirer sincèrement un homme politique, il faut n’admirer aucun poète, aucun écrivain, aucun philosophe.

Le raisonnement selon lequel la monogamie permet à davantage d’hommes de s’unir à une femme ignore complètement l’existence de la prostitution, c’est-à-dire de toute une classe de femmes exploitées et non mariées (peu d’hommes acceptent de se marier avec des prostituées), largement inconnue dans les pays de droit polygamique. À l’époque où Schopenhauer écrivait ses Parerga und Paralipomena, on comptait 80 000 prostituées à Londres, autant de « victimes sacrifiées sur l’autel de la monogamie » (Menschenopfer auf dem Altare der Monogamie).

« L’onction du suffrage universelle » est mystique et fétichiste. De même que la médiocrité de l’homme est couverte par la dignité de prêtre, l’homme qu’est l’élu républicain devient tabou en même temps que prophétique, du moins parmi les fonctionnaires, chez qui l’adhésion à cette mystique est requise.

Toute bibliographie sur Kant a ses nationaux-socialistes : Alfred Bäumler, Gottfried Martin, Martin Heidegger (le moins connu d’entre eux)…

La philosophie n’est pas devenue difficile à partir de Kant : voir la citation ironique par Hobbes du scolastique Suarez, dans son Léviathan. C’est seulement que ce qu’on appelait philosophie, dans les universités, avant lui, tout le fatras scolastique indéchiffrable, et « impuissant » (Balzac), de Suarez et autres, a sombré, tandis que le fatras que l’on appelle encore philosophie après Kant, chez Fichte, Hegel, Husserl…, n’a pas encore eu le temps de sombrer.

L’univers du Big Bang s’étend dans le vide ; l’univers en expansion de Kant s’étend dans un chaos de particules qui en viennent à se soumettre aux forces de l’univers (Dissertation de 1770).

Du commentateur et traducteur de Kant, Alexis Philonenko : Kant « ne part pas toujours de définitions exactement déterminées, et il use de concepts sans toujours observer une grande rigueur. » En guise de reproche, alors que Kant explique qu’il n’est pas approprié de partir de définitions en philosophie, contrairement à la pratique des mathématiques ! Il n’y a pas, en dehors des mathématiques, science intuitive pure, de définition possible des concepts (empiriques comme a priori), seulement une exposition ou explicitation. (Kritik der reinen Vernunft, Reclam 2013, pp. 745-6)

Les fréquences infrarouges et ultraviolettes ont pu être mesurées et sont donc indirectement perçues et attestées comme réelles dans notre expérience. En revanche, les dimensions « surnuméraires » de l’espace sont une construction, non une construction dans l’intuition pure comme les objets de la géométrie mais une construction dans l’entendement pur, au risque qu’elles ne soient qu’un jeu de l’esprit. Le champ de notre sensibilité peut être élargi par la technologie : nous percevons des objets de plus en plus petits, de plus en plus lointains, un spectre de fréquences de plus en plus large mais, ce principe de la technologie étant posé, demeure l’impossibilité d’une appréhension, hors de l’entendement pur, de dimensions surnuméraires de l’espace, du fait que l’espace n’est pas une matière mais la forme même de notre expérience sensible.

Un « espace vectoriel à n dimensions » ne décrit pas l’espace objectal (forme de l’intuition sensible) mais une représentation des dimensions d’un problème.

Pour décrire l’espace, on peut toujours poser n à la place de 3 (dimensions) et voir ce qui en résulte logiquement (en recourant aux opérateurs logiques), mais de ce que les opérations logiques ou formelles soient possibles pour toute valeur arbitrairement choisie il ne résulte pas qu’il soit permis pour toute valeur de tirer des conclusions sur l’étant.

Les mathématiciens retombent en enfance, sauf qu’au lieu de jouer avec des cubes, ils jouent avec des hypercubes.

Le concept d’un triangle est sa pure et simple définition, et les énoncés qui exposent celle-ci sont analytiques ; synthétiques a priori sont les énoncés qui exposent les propriétés du triangle. Les concepts de l’entendement ne sont pas une connaissance synthétique a priori ; il faut, pour une connaissance synthétique a priori, le recours à l’intuition (Anschauung) et à ses formes, l’espace et le temps. C’est parce que l’espace est une forme a priori de notre intuition que la géométrie possède des axiomes apodictiques. – Ce ne serait pas possible si l’espace était une condition objective de l’existence des choses en soi. (Quod est demonstrandum)

La dimension duale « quantitative-visuospatiale » des tests d’intelligence est conforme à la conception kantienne des mathématiques comme science intuitive pure.

Qu’au moins une autre planète soit habitée est plus qu’une opinion (Meinen) : une forte conviction (starkes Glauben). (Kritik der reinen Vernunft)

L’état de nature de Rousseau est la réplique qu’appelait le chapitre XIII du Léviathan. Je veux dire par là que c’en est tantôt la copie et tantôt le contrepied. Son état de nature, Rousseau l’a trouvé dans Hobbes, mais il en a retiré les passions pour les faire naître avec la propriété, c’est-à-dire avec la fin de l’état de nature.

De même, Spinoza est un imitateur de Hobbes. Diderot écrit : « Son dieu [à Hobbes] diffère peu de celui de Spinoza. » (Article Hobbisme de L’Encyclopédie) Il faudrait plutôt dire, par respect de la chronologie, que le dieu de Spinoza diffère peu de celui de Hobbes.

Tous les droits de l’homme sont contenus dans l’habeas corpus.

Rousseau ne veut pas que son Émile devienne forgeron ; il le veut menuisier. Il y a des métiers impurs, réservés aux intouchables.

L’homme à l’état de nature, solitaire, rousseauiste, ne peut même pas cueillir le moindre fruit car les bandes de singes lui interdisent d’approcher des arbres, qui sont leur propriété. Il se fait chasser dans les déserts, où il meurt de soif et de faim. («cuando los cristianos van por la tierra adentro a entrar o hacer guerra a alguna provincia, y pasan por algún bosque donde haya de unos gatos [‘gatos monillos’=monos aulladores] grandes y negros que hay en Tierra Firme, no hacen sino romper troncos y ramas de los árboles y arrojar sobre los cristianos, por los descalabrar; y les conviene cubrirse bien con las rodelas y ir muy sobre aviso para que no reciban daño y les hieran algunos compañeros.» Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo, Sumario de la historia natural de las Indias, 1526)

Selon Galbraith (Le Nouvel État industriel), un principe de la technostructure est la « décision par le groupe ». Corollairement, le diplôme, gage de connaissances spécialisées et surtout de normalisation, supplante l’expérience. Il se pourrait que les deux soient liés, que le mode de décision par le groupe au sein des organisations implique pour bien fonctionner un formatage des individus qui y participent, formatage dont la meilleure garantie serait le diplôme, bien plus que l’ancienneté, laquelle ne compenserait qu’imparfaitement une normalisation initiale insuffisante.

Tous les grands penseurs ont souligné la nécessité du loisir pour penser. Or la « société de loisir » est celle du loisir pour le loisir, c’est-à-dire de la compensation pour un travail absorbant toute l’énergie humaine, du loisir comme temps de vie qui ne peut, pas plus que le travail, être consacré à la pensée.

Quand j’avais douze ou treize ans, le mot « blasé » revenait souvent dans les conversations de mon groupe d’âge, où il ne pouvait tout simplement pas s’appliquer. Petits singes.

Dans les mauvais romans didactiques, c’est toujours une femme qui joue le rôle de Candide, comme si la femme était un éternel sauvage au milieu de la civilisation.

Grincements de dents. Le martyr de l’homme d’esprit en société : il attire l’attention des dames et suscite ainsi la haine de leurs cavaliers. Le martyr du penseur est pire encore : il suscite la haine des dames, donc aussi de leurs cavaliers.

Les sophistes, comme les psychanalystes, se faisaient payer.

Les femmes travaillent pour que les hommes puissent les quitter sans remords.

Ceux qui entrent dans les grandes écoles, écoles d’élite, et pour qui dès lors « toutes les portes sont ouvertes », savent qu’ils ont une vie de robot devant eux à moins qu’ils ne se lancent à leur tour en politique, auquel cas ce sera une vie de robot tempérée de bassesse. C’est pourquoi, tant qu’ils ne font pas de politique, personne ne les envie, aussi enviables que soient leurs conditions matérielles d’existence, car il n’y a pas de raison d’envier des machines. Ceux que l’on envie, ce sont les individus vulgaires qu’animent de basses passions.

Les grandes écoles emprisonnent dans un esprit de corps.

Liste des philosophes et penseurs grecs initiés en Égypte, d’après Cheikh Anta Diop : Thalès, Pythagore (passa vingt ans en Égypte, selon Jamblique), Démocrite, Platon (passa treize années en Égypte, d’après Strabon), Eudoxe de Cnide, Orphée de Musaeus, Dédale, Homère, Lycurgue de Sparte, Solon d’Athènes. (Antériorité des civilisations nègres)

Selon Cheikh Anta Diop, il existe en Afrique une polygamie non patriarcale.

Les séries causales indépendantes rendent a priori impossible une prédiction exacte des événements à venir, mais s’il y a eu une cause première il n’existe pas de séries causales indépendantes.

Mes études en province (trois ans) m’ont permis de comprendre que la France tout entière est une « province ». Il n’y a plus que les médias français pour ne pas le voir. – L’intérêt de l’étranger pour la France est purement ethnographique.

Le hadith sur le petit djihad et le grand djihad, que des commentateurs occidentaux bien intentionnés citent volontiers pour émousser la rhétorique islamophobe, n’est, selon les critères islamiques, pas recevable (« baseless »). (Shaykh Muhammad ibn Rabi’ al-Madkhali, professeur à l’Université islamique de Médine, The Reality of Sufism: ‘’Likewise they have removed the spirit of jihad, which is to fight in the way of Allah, with what they claim to be the greater jihad, i.e. striving against one’s own soul. Whereas this is a baseless hadith and has provided the opportunity in the previous two centuries for colonialist powers to occupy most of the Muslim lands.’’ [p.14])

Le postulat de la phrénologie (Gall, Spurzheim) est confirmé si l’on peut répondre par l’affirmative aux deux questions suivantes. 1/ Une bosse crânienne est-elle due à la pression du cortex cérébral sur le crâne ? (Intuitivement, je pense que oui.) 2/ La localisation fonctionnelle étant admise (LeDoux, 1998), existe-t-il une corrélation positive entre le volume de telle partie du cerveau et sa capacité fonctionnelle ? (Intuitivement, je pense que oui.)

Dans Walden Two de Skinner, l’intellectuel Frazier crée une communauté utopique en expliquant que les intellectuels sont sensibles au ressentiment des classes laborieuses. Ce ne sont pas les envieux qui créent des utopies, mais les enviés, qui souffrent de l’envie des envieux. – Peut-être l’envieux pense-t-il quant à lui qu’il serait envieux sous n’importe quel régime.

Marshall McLuhan : Le clownesque est la destinée de la personnalité totale dans le monde des mutilations linéaires.

Kant et Hegel partagent un même fétichisme de la Révolution française alors que l’événement fondateur est la Révolution américaine. La Constitution fédérale américaine est rédigée en 1787 et, soumise à la ratification des États, devient effective après la ratification du neuvième État sur treize, en juin 1788. Le Bill of Rights (les dix premiers amendements de la Constitution) est ratifié par le premier État en novembre 1789 ; la Déclaration des droits de l’homme et du citoyen, en France, datant d’août 1789, elle est donc antérieure. Cependant, il existait des Bills of Rights dans les Constitutions de plusieurs États avant la Constitution fédérale : Pennsylvanie, Caroline du Nord, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Delaware, Maryland. En outre, l’auteur collectif des Federalist Papers (1787-88) énumère les dispositions de la Constitution fédérale qui rendent en réalité superflu un Bill of Rights (The Federalist, 84). Par conséquent, les événements déterminants de l’une et l’autre Révolutions sont, d’une part, l’adoption de la Constitution fédérale en Amérique et, d’autre part, la proclamation de la Déclaration des droits de l’homme en France, celle-là précédant celle-ci.

Le film Le Prêteur sur gages (The Pawnbroker) de Sidney Lumet (1964) a été, avec sa paire de seins nus, la première entorse au Code Hays définissant des lignes de conduite pour le respect de la décence et de la moralité par l’industrie cinématographique. L’entorse fut justifiée par un impératif pédagogique à montrer les atrocités des camps de concentration nazis (en l’occurrence, des femmes juives violées ou prostituées par les gardiens des camps). Elle devait rester une exception mais les entorses se sont ensuite multipliées, jusqu’à la suppression du Code en 1968. Plus tard, La Liste de Schindler de Steven Spielberg (1993) s’est également servi de la Shoah, pour vendre alcool et cigarettes dans un contexte où la publicité pour ces produits est de plus en plus contrôlée et restreinte : le héros du film est dans quasiment toutes les scènes en train de fumer et/ou de boire de l’alcool.

Surveiller et Punir, de Michel Foucault : une analyse minutieuse d’archives, puis, sans transition, les assertions les plus échevelées sur les délinquants produits par le système pour servir de vivier d’hommes de main occultes aux politiciens, sur le fondement d’aucune preuve documentaire.

Les riches puent. Les pauvres crânent.

Une personne sur cinq reste sans enfant (un ratio qui serait demeuré plus ou moins stable au cours des siècles, si le nombre d’enfants par femme a quant à lui varié). Pour que la population ne diminue pas, 80 personnes, soit 40 couples doivent faire 100 enfants, donc chaque couple doit faire 2,5 enfants.

Il est plus difficile de robotiser un salon de coiffure que le ministère de l’économie.

Puisqu’il est poli, chez les Arabes, de roter à la fin du repas, je ne vois pas pourquoi on ne rote pas dans les restaurants des hôtels à Dubaï. Moi j’ai roté. Une serveuse philippine (ou une cliente occidentale) a poussé une exclamation, mais la cliente bédouine m’a souri.

Mon général n’est « pas maurrassien mais »… il n’a rien lu en dehors de Maurras.

L’univers nous semble si grand parce que notre vie est si courte. Pour une espèce où les individus vivraient des milliards d’années, les distances interstellaires seraient peu de chose.

BNB-Baribas la banque d’un monde qui pue.

Juillet 2017

XXXVI The Evolutionary Roots of the Clash of Civilizations

The relations between Islam and the West have been hotly discussed for decades. Milestones in this debate have been books such as The End of History and the Last Man by Francis Fukuyama (1992), Jihad vs McWorld by Benjamin Barber (1995), The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order by Samuel Huntington (1996). In his work Conflicts of Fitness: Islam, America, and Evolutionary Psychology (2015), Dr A.S. Amin (MD) brings new insights in the discussion by making fruitful use of the findings of evolutionary psychology (EP), and I will review his ideas at some length while broaching the evolutionary roots of the clash of civilizations.

Although “Jihad vs McWorld” has become a kind of catchphrase, in the 1996 afterword of his book Barber explains that it is a misnomer: “I made clear that I deployed Jihad as a generic term quite independently from its Islamic theological origins (…) While extremist groups like Islamic Jihad have themselves associated the word with armed struggle against modernizing, secular infidels, I can appreciate that the great majority of devout Muslims who harbor no more sympathy for Islamic Jihad than devout Christians feel for the Ku Klux Klan or the Montana Militia might feel unfairly burdened by my title. I owe them an apology, and hope they will find their way past the book’s cover to the substantive reasoning that makes clear how little my arguments has to do with Islam as a religion or with resistance to McWorld as the singular property of Muslims.” So much for the catchphrase.

By opposing these two objects, Barber sometimes appears to mean an opposition between globalization and parochialization; yet Islam is hardly a good example of parochialism, since it is itself a globalism. In fact, all civilizations, inasmuch as they possess an inherent tendency to expand, are global; it’ just that some are more global than others, and the Western world is to date the more global of all inherently global civilizations. In some other places, Barber explains that he is defending democracy against both McWorld and Jihad, against “globalizing commerce” and “the populist reaction” to it – “Demopoulos vs McJihad’s” could be the phrase – but I do not find in his book convincing evidence that would allow us to dissociate democracy from McWorld; the inevitability of their connection has not been disproved, and the democracy Barber is talking about looks more like another Utopia, a Lubberland for the intellectuals, if the discourse is not Pavlovian appeal plain and simple. Barber means that, McWorld being far from humanistic, it deserves not to be associated with the concept of democracy, because, if I understand well, anything that has something wrong about it is undemocratic. If this does not build on Pavlovian conditioning, I don’t know what does.

This is not to say that more humanistic tendencies should not be encouraged in the society, but perhaps clinging to the word “democracy” is not the best way to prepare for a humanistic future, since historically democratic institutions have contributed much in preventing counter-powers to commercial interests from being more effective, and if the future is different from the present, then new words are needed to describe it. As far as I am concerned, deeming the existence of a political class, even appointed by universal suffrage, as exploitative, and suggesting that people vote for ideas, not for men (just vote on your computer and let the administration apply the programme), I am rather inclined to drop the name altogether.

In the present essay I draw a double-entry matrix of civilizations (picture). Entry 1 is reproductive climate: long-term (“committed”) / short-term (“hedonistic”). Entry 2 is material wealth: affluent / nonaffluent. These concepts will be explained. The Western world is defined as affluent and short-term. The Far East, and especially the continuum China-Korea-Japan, is defined as affluent and long-term. For practical purposes, Islam is defined as nonaffluent and long-term. We shall not deal with wealthy Gulf states, which I call “leisure nations” due to the extreme forms of welfare state they provide their nationals with; no matter how important on the world stage, they owe many of their current attributes to the accident of the oil rent. Black Africa is defined as nonaffluent and short-term.

Capture d’écran (71)

Reproductive climate and wealth are considered independent. A certain tendency present in the West sees in short-term (“hedonistic”) mentality the engine of affluence. The idea is that, as the constraints on production, hence scarcity, have been overcome by technology, the sustenance of abundance and of the affluence that abundance makes possible now depends on mass consumption or hedonism, the lack of which would provoke the collapse of affluence. If our assumption that East Asia is both affluent and long-term (“committed”) is correct, the preceding reasoning, albeit cogent, is unwarranted (the main impetus of mass consumption may well have nothing to do with hedonism, even broadly defined.)

The matrix is descriptive and applies to the present instant only. It does not imply, for instance, that the West is inherently affluent and short-term; in fact, the West used to be poor and long-term – and the historical conjunction of its newly accrued affluence and short-term outlook is the reason some people hypothesize a relationship of causality.

Institutional Vs Cryptic Polygyny

To understand the evolutionary roots of the clash of civilizations, one must keep in mind three basic ideas grounded on the Darwinian theory of evolution.

1/ Humans, like other animals, are designed by their genes to aim at reproduction. This is an axiom of the theory of evolution and of evolutionary psychology (as the theory applied to human behavior specifically). As a consequence, humans are involved in sexual competition, by which they intend to maximize their numbers of descendants. Maximization is said to happen usually through optimizing one’s number of children and their rearing according to the level of one’s resources, in order that the children grow up in environments that allow them to reproduce successfully in their turn.

2/ In sexual and reproductive matters, men and women are not alike. The biological costs of making a child are higher for women. It costs women a nine-month pregnancy whereas it costs merely an ejaculate to men. After parturition the woman feeds the baby, whereas it costs nothing to the man if he decides so. In some animal species, males are not involved in parenting at all. In humans, the burden of parenting is shared by both sexes.

3/ Men are sexually less discriminate than women because the cost of reproduction and the consequences of mating are not as great for the former.

Institutional polygyny, as practiced for instance in Islam, is limited polygyny, that is a departure from unlimited polygyny by which one dominant male inseminates all women in a given group. Gorillas display such unlimited polygyny. The alpha male lives with most females in the area and he is the only one to inseminate the females in the group. Other adult males live alone at the periphery of the group; their aim in life is to seize the first occasion to kill an infant gorilla belonging to the group, because then the grieving female leaves the group after a few days and mates with the killer of her infant (see Wrangham & Petersen, 1996). Groups expand and shrink according to the results of this endless infanticide. Amin explains that, in human societies, limited, as opposed to unlimited, polygyny deflates occasions for violent behavior: “Unrestricted polygyny increases the likelihood of a situation where it becomes next to impossible for even an average man to find a wife. Having many men who are unable to find a mate can be a destabilizing force in society, and it may be important that a marriage institution works to insure this type of situation does not occur.” (pp. 6-7). By insuring access to mating to a greater number of men, restricted polygyny benefits the group overall.

Considering this, it would be logical to go one step further and postulate that, as monogyny insures access to mating to the greatest possible number of men, it is the one best solution. It is perhaps the best solution for men, but Amin claims that monogyny does not benefit women overall and that limited polygyny is the best compromise. We must here take into account the notion of a man’ desirability. There is a flavor of objectivity about this notion that may put off some readers, for whom in matters of love and passion desirability would be the most subjective thing in the world. In fact, as far as evolutionary theory is concerned, things are not as subjective as they are usually fancied to be; people’s choice is determined by objective preferences and competition, i.e. one’s ranking and value on the mating market. We can therefore assume men’s desirability to be something objective. Men of a given group or population can be ranked from most to least desirable, and the same is true for women. For a man, capacity to secure resources and status is deemed particularly important; for a woman, markers of fertility and health (beauty) are.

If a woman’s fitness optimization depends on her mating with a richer and more desirable man than the man whose value equals hers on the mating market, she will mate with that man rather than with her equal. As to the more desirable man, he will mate with the less desirable woman willingly because men are less discriminate (basic idea #3 above), and as long as he has got the resources, he can provide for both (or more) women and the children they give birth to without jeopardizing their fitness. Admittedly, the most desirable woman is the loser in this scenario – she is the one loser.

As Amin explains (pp. 5-6), with polygyny a greater number of women have sexual access to men more desirable than they are; conversely, a greater number of men must accept mating with women less desirable than they are (some men even having none). Polygyny thus benefits women more than men overall, and it is advantageous to a woman as long as the advantage of mating with a more desirable man exceeds the drawback of sharing him – and his resources – with other women. The latter provision allows us to predict that polygyny is more advantageous where social inequalities are greater.

The West practices institutional monogyny, Islam has institutional polygyny, but perhaps the real difference is between institutional vs cryptic polygyny. In order to compare the two systems, we should add to the picture the advantages or drawbacks of cryptic polygyny. On which point I quote a previous essay of mine (xxxi): “The plight of low-income single mothers is the rich man’s deed [as a result of cryptic polygyny]. It is the rich woman’s also, because, in some other societies, rich men marry several women, and all these women’s children are his legal children, to whom he is bound by law to provide support during their bringing up; in our society, the rich woman doesn’t want resources to be scattered among so many children.” In terms of Amin’s thought, the more desirable woman doesn’t care to share her mate’s resources with less desirable women – and, yes, under institutional polygyny the most desirable women fare less well than their counterparts under monogyny. & “A number of the rich man’s children, perhaps most of them, are thus [as a result of cryptic polygyny] raised in low-income homes or by low-income single mothers. When a single mother finds a partner who wants to live with her, the children she had before they met are much more likely than other children to suffer abuse from the partner (see xxviii). A child raised by a single-mother is also more likely to become a delinquent (see The Bell Curve, a book already dealt with in xxx). With the acuteness of deprivation rises the likelihood of abuse, molestation, rape, and murder of children by their ‘parents’.”

Cryptic polygyny increases existing social inequalities. The man’s urge to reproduce is largely wasted for those of his children born out of wedlock after acts of unlawful insemination, because even if they inherit his genes their bringing-up in deprived or worse-off environments is likely to be harmful*. As polygyny is predicted to be greater in unequal societies, and as inequalities in Western societies have increased during the last decades with the globalization of markets and the development of the knowledge-based economy (see, for instance, Brynjolfsson and McAfee, The Second Machine Age, 2014), one may assume that cryptic polygyny has been on the rise in the West.

Whereas cryptic polygyny is triggered, in an institutionally monogynous society, by social inequalities and at the same time further increases inequalities, on the contrary institutional polygyny is more egalitarian. On this point I have found my intuition confirmed by Amin. I had written (Comment to xxx): “As the rich man, when impregnating a poor woman, obligates her to scatter her scant resources among a greater number of children, he increases the adverse pressures of the environment on their future status. The rich man’s children would be better off if brought up by him. In the abstract, providing the number of wives be a positive function of the man’s wealth [which is the case, as we have seen while dealing with a man’s desirability], legal polygyny is more egalitarian than monogyny, because the rich man’s resources are spent on a greater number of children (his legal children).” I have then found the following under Amin’s quill: “Polygyny [institutional polygyny] enables a society to utilize a man’s desire to maximize his reproductive fitness to achieve a more balanced distribution of wealth. For example, a man who makes $500,000 a year can provide financially for ten women twice as well as a man making $25,000 can for just one woman.” (p. 7).

Whether or not there is also cryptic polygyny in Islamic countries where institutional polygyny exists I cannot say based on data, but the following section about the concept of reproductive climate will show that these countries are serious in their attempts to prevent it.

Reproductive Climate: Long-term Vs Short-Term

Based, again, on the evolutionary basic ideas presented above (1-3), Amin explains how “the reproductive ideal for women” is best served when men’s commitment to their pair is strong: “Forbidding men to have sex while offering little or no commitment is to their reproductive detriment. Furthermore, forcing men to make a commitment to their mates and to support any children that result approximates the reproductive ideal for women.” (p. 4). The notion of patriarchy is far off the mark, given that matrimonial bonds serve women’s reproductive interests rather than men’s; of which Schopenhauer already had a clear notion, concluding on the subject by these words: “By reason of the unnaturally advantageous position conferred to women by the monogamous arrangement and corresponding laws of matrimony, because they posit the woman as the man’s whole equal, which she is in no way, intelligent, prudent men are very often wary of committing so great a sacrifice and of engaging themselves in so unequal a compact.” (Parerga and Paralipomena).

A reproductive climate, that is, the overall outlook of mating and parenting practices in a given population, can be defined as long-term when males are committed to raising their children together with their female mates, and short-term otherwise. Rather than separate worlds, the two notions are in a continuum; when we ascribe one of the two to a given group, it is only in relative terms. In this view, gorilla males (mentioned above) are long-term strategists, whereas tigers, for example, are the most short-term possible insofar as tiger cubs never meet their father, unless by accident.

Among humans, one adaptation evolved to cement the bonds between a pair, so that both partners provide good cooperative care to the children, is love, and the more enduring the more efficient, hence the romantic (but nevertheless true in an important sense) view that love is everlasting or it is not love. Another saying is that love is blind. To be more precise, love is blind to opportunity costs; when in love, a man does not leave his partner for a more desirable woman when given the occasion. (Hence the universal idea that desirability is something subjective.) I say “a man” on purpose, for a man in love is more important to a woman than a woman in love to a man, because the problem this adaptation solves is how to pair-bond men, whose instincts incline them to remain free from bonding and parenting.

In order to maximize their fitness, each person needs to assess the reproductive climate in which they are living, because their success depends on it. The more long-term the climate, the more advantageous it is, as a rule, to adopt long-term strategies, and vice-versa. Sex being secretive, one needs to rely on cues. Hence gossip: “Although far from completely trustworthy, gossip can offer at least some information on the reproductive strategies being employed by others” (p. 26). Clothing, makeup, and behavior also serve as clues (pp. 26-7).

Amin then goes on explaining the dilemma women are facing: “Before a woman can hope to get a man to commit to her, she must first attract him. Attracting a man is made easier by displaying sexual receptivity, thereby appealing to his need for promiscuity and low commitment. On the other hand, getting a man to commit is made easier by displaying sexual restraint, thereby appealing to his need for paternity confidence.” (p. 29). In long-term climates, commitment is a given, for women, but they have to attract a partner. Considering what has just been said about cues, in long-term climates at the same time women’s clothing and makeup are conservative, so if a woman takes the step to make her clothing and/or makeup slightly more appealing to the sexual urges of men, she gets an edge over her female competitors (p. 30). This fact triggers a seduction arms race between women, in the course of which women’s behavior evolves towards more and more encouraging men’s shorter-term strategies, and men are given an ever greater number of opportunities to access females without committing to them. Amin contends this is what has been happening in the US these last decades (pp. 32-3). The arm’s race is reinforced by the media, advertising, and pornography. Catering to women’s need to attract men, at the same time advertising is permanently spreading cues that a woman’s reproductive interest lies in appealing to men’s sexual short-term urges. Same with pornography, “providing the brain with false information which it then uses to come up with an inaccurate assessment of the prevailing reproduction climate” (p. 43). As the race goes on and on, the levels of paternity certainty that women are able to offer decrease and men are consequently ever more incited to decline commitment since they naturally expect paternity certainty must be part of the deal (evolutionarily speaking, it does not make sense to provide resources to a stranger’s offspring; and studies show that stepfathers are many times more abusive with their step-children).

Hence, according to Amin, the media and pornography exert a reinforcing effect. I have argued elsewhere that this effect could be more warping than reinforcing, but for the time being I will stress that I find Amin’s description of what is occurring in the West plausible. If the role of mass eroticism in the media is consumption first and foremost, consumption itself, in the EP view, is ancillary to reproductive pursuits, such as when women buy clothing and makeup to attract men. In short-term climates, part of conspicuous consumption on the part of men is aimed at making known to women who are not expecting commitment that they will receive great amounts of resources fast during the short time of an uncommitted relationship.

That the West has become short-term may be confirmed by current divorce rates in the US: “American divorce rates now approach 67 percent for those currently getting married, up from the mere 50 percent figure that alarmed many over the past two decades.” (David Buss, The Dangerous Passion, 2000). Given such figures, why people even keep marrying is difficult to understand if that is not make-believe for women’s expectations of commitment.

Another characteristic of long-term climates that is addressed by Amin are matchmakers and arranged marriages. The practice is used as an indictment against Muslim countries (and against the past of the Western world), but all long-term patterns of behavior for which Islam is being blamed from a Western point of view exist in the long-term, affluent Far East (see Matrix) as well, as we shall see. Quoth Amin: “In a long-term climate, being shy benefits both men and women when dealing with the opposite gender [men’s shyness advertises commitment, women’s shyness advertises paternity certainty]. Obviously, a situation such as this makes the formation of new relationships quite difficult. Arranged marriages offer a solution to this problem. Rather than meddlesome interference, matchmakers play a vital role in bringing together couples whose long-term reproductive strategies act as an impediment to starting a relationship by themselves.” (pp. 50-1). This insight can help us assess the reasons why numbers of Westerners renege on their civilization and convert to Islam and even to Jihad – having being dismantled, in the Western short-term context, the very institutions that would allow shy men to find a partner. No matchmakers, no whorehouses (where one can gain experience and confidence, see xxix), and sexual competition and pressure as high as ever: You can expect a good deal of men to understand they will not be able to thrive in our “emancipated” society.

Two other characteristics Amin ascribes to short-term climates are: a/ less concern for women’s age; b/ women’s careers.

a/ “Men in short-term reproductive climates do not put the same emphasis on youth than men in long-term reproductive climates do. This is often viewed as enlightened, since such men seem to be focusing more on the woman herself rather than her baby-making abilities. However, the real reason men in short-term climates do not place the same emphasis on youth is they have less reason to concern themselves with long-term reproductive utility. Instead of focusing on long-term reproductive utility, men pursuing short-term strategies are more concerned with signs of immediate fertility.” (pp. 48-9).

b/ “The more short-term a reproductive climate becomes, the less likely it is that men can be relied on, making it extremely important for women to be economically independent. Therefore, women in short-term climates place a huge value on their careers, feeling sorry for women who do not have the same opportunities that they do. Women in long-term climates tend to see things differently. Such women are often glad they have husbands who provide them with the opportunity to stay home and take proper care of the children, pitying women who are forced to play the role of provider and caretaker at the same time.” (pp. 51-2). The role of provider is all the more to be pitied that in many cases it is a dehumanizing one; and there is something frightful about business experts’ demanding “passion” for his or her repetitive toil from a worker.

Now that we have familiarized ourselves with the concept of reproductive climate, let us see how it applies to current civilizations.

The Double-Entry Civilization Matrix

We will say a few words on 1/ Islam; 2/ the West; 3/ Black Africa; 4/ the Far East.

1/ I have defined Islam as both long-term and nonaffluent. That it is long-term is evidenced by institutional polygyny, whereby a man commits to all his wives’ children, by its stance against eroticism and pornography, by standards of decency for women that impose conservative clothing, makeup and behavior, by relative eviction of women from the workplace, and in some cases (perhaps as an inherent tendency) by seclusion of women. According to Amin, the Quran has been in several instances interpreted in a manner that suits the interests of extremely long-term male mentalities, to the point of distortion (p. 56). For example, passages from the Quran on women’s share of inheritance would be ignored because they might promote women’s independence and thus trigger the seduction arms race that leads to short-term climates. Moves towards a greater independence for women are resisted because they are perceived as jeopardizing long-term climate.

As to affluence, many Muslim countries belong to the developing world, and recent international events in several Arab countries, which have plunged them into chaos, are reinforcing this situation by impoverishing them further. The Gulf states are a different case, which, however interesting, we shall not discuss here. (For those interested, and fluent in French, see my essay “Saudi Arabia the Leisure Nation,” here.)

I suggest with Amin that Jihad is not only the hostility of the have-nots against the haves, but also of the long-term against the short-term. The current appeal of Islam to some non-Muslim young people in the West (among whom many young women), and to formerly secularized second or third-generation immigrants, lies in its extreme long-term stance, as opposed to the short-term ideologies of these young people’s countries of birth and residence. The appeal of Islam lies first and foremost in his advocating of long-term strategies, not in the daily prayers nor in the ritual slaughtering, etc. The best way to dry up the stream of Westerners’ conversions is consequently to liberalize Islam and make a ritualistic empty shell of it, to which fundamentalists, of course, are firmly opposed; this opposition is predictable in the framework of sexual competition and reproductive climates.

2/ With respect to the West, as already said I have intended elsewhere to cast some doubt on the depth of our promiscuity, bringing into the picture a possible warping media effect, but Amin’s approach is convincing enough.

Another objection can be raised in case reproductive strategies were inborn, which is the contention of J.P. Rushton, based on sociobiologist E. O. Wilson’s r/K model. According to Rushton, blacks would be more short-term (r), mongoloids more long-term (K), whites being in the middle. The trouble with aggregating clues and data from various groups if their reproductive differences are inborn is that it makes an accurate assessment of reproductive climate impossible. A person is advised to assess the behavior of people from his or her own group, because assessing people’s behavior from other groups is misleading (you don’t want to mimic the behavior of a person whose idiosyncrasies are inborn). Mere aggregation would tend, if Rushton is correct, to make believe the climate is more short-term than it really is as far as the white subgroup is concerned and conversely more long-term as far as the black subgroup is concerned.

3/ This leads us to the Black African civilization in the Matrix. I have defined it as nonaffluent, which can hardly be denied, and short-term relying in part on Rushton’s use of the r/K model. Black men’s virile endowments (penis and testes size) suggest greater sperm competition, lesser paternity certainty, and shorter-term strategies.

To the credit of this classification, Senegalese scholar Cheikh Anta Diop describes ancient black civilizations, and their contemporary rests, as matriarchal and matrilinear, which suggests a lesser commitment from men. In short-term contexts, the woman’s brother is more committed to her offspring than the father himself; according to C. Anta Diop, that is the case in sub-Saharan Africa. Quoth: “African men designed matriarchy in accord with African women with a view to the greatest might of the clan. … Contrary to the social order of the Indo-European clan, it is progressively with the dislocation of the clan that lineage through males has been admitted in African matriarchal societies. In these societies this kind of linage has kept up to the present day the character of a weak kinship, less strong than that derived from women. … Among Indo-Europeans the patriarchal family structure excluded any alternative notion of authority deriving from the maternal uncle; the latter term did not even exist originally.”*** (For a short exposé on some others of Cheikh Anta Diop’s ideas and an annotated wolof glossary, see here, in French.)

Incidentally, given the basic ideas 1-3 above, such a situation is a bit of a puzzle. The current view is that our ancestors were very polygynous and a little bit (if at all) polyandrous – albeit I have stated elsewhere (xxxv) that this overlooks sperm competition. Yet, it really looks as if black men were not much concerned about paternity certainty (the reason is “the greatest might of the clan”?). Usually, short-term men adopt mixed strategies; even rap singers, whose lifestyle and lyrics exemplify, according to Amin, the most extreme forms of short-term mentality in the West, have a “wifey” (p. 75) from whom they expect certain standards of behavior upon which they can build a sense of paternity security. Conversely, the Quran allows for concubines, mostly slaves, that is, for men’s indulging their short-term urges; however the practice has fallen into disuse, although it seems to have been restored by newcomers such as Daesh.

4/ The Far East, namely a continuum China-Korea-Japan, including Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore, offers the example of an affluent and long-term civilization. To describe it I will make use of the book Order by Accident: The Origins and Consequences of Conformity in Contemporary Japan (2000) by Alan S. Miller and Satoshi Kanazawa. (For a discussion of Kanazawa’s “Intelligence Paradox,” see xxxv.)

Japan has long been an industrialized, affluent country. Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore all belong to the NICs (newly industrialized countries), and China, formally a communist country, is on the verge of becoming world power number one.

The continuum China-Korea-Japan is built on Miller & Kanazawa’s model. China is the oldest civilization in the world, they argue, and its institutions are characterized by high levels of cooperation. Its culture has spread; in the process, it is the most cooperative groups from China that have taken the culture abroad, first to Korea, then to Japan: “the social institutions that the Korean inherited from the Chinese were more cooperative than the average social institutions in China, because some groups in the latter, still in the process of being replaced, had less cooperative social institutions. … These social institutions were later transmitted from Korea to Japan by the ascendant and dominant groups in Korea. Then, by the same token, Japanese social institutions should be slightly more cooperative than Korean social institutions at any given point in history.” (p. 131). Accordingly, we can see Japan as the purest example, in the sense of most thorough, in the continuum.

That Japan is a long-term country is clear from the place Japanese women occupy in the workplace. In the main, Japanese women do not work; to be precise, the workplace is replete with women employed on short-term jobs up to about age 25, when they are supposed to marry and leave (p. 47). This allows companies to provide their male employees, much overworked comparing to Western standards, with a pool of potential partners, in which they actually find a partner. This reminds one of what Amin says on “arranged marriages” and the role of third parties in long-term reproductive climates: Here the matchmaker is the company. “This, of course, provides a very practical solution to an otherwise difficult problem. With men spending all of their time at work or in the company of coworkers, they have no time to actively search for a spouse. By hiring a large number of young, single females, the company can provide their single male employees with potential mates and can also exercise some control over the types of women their male employees meet and eventually marry.” (p. 48). Moreover, divorce rates in Japan are very low (p. 57).

By comparison, in a rather rigorous Islamic country such as the Sultanate of Brunei Darussalam, women make up 40.3% of the workforce (Marie-Sybille de Vienne, 2012). This is perhaps not representative of other Muslim countries, especially where an extreme long-term mentality actively pursues women’s dependence, but I mean that, if some are truly concerned about the improvement of women’s position on the workplace, they would do well to broaden the scope of their indictments, for Japan holds a prominent position among long-term nations that evince women from work. I expect the same to be true, perhaps not to the same extent, though (given what has just been said about the cultural transmission inside the continuum), for South and North Korea and China.

Japan has been flooded with its own pornographic production (videos and manga comics) for decades, without its long-term mentality seemingly being altered. This could cast doubt on Amin’s view about the media’s reinforcing effect.

More recent than the West’s, East Asia’s affluence has fueled among these countries’ elites a discourse on Asian values, typically contrasted to the “decadent” West, like when Singapore’s prime minister Lee Kuan Yew told Australians they would become “the white trash of Asia” (cf. Huntington). Huntington advises Australia to coalition with Western countries, specifically with US, Canada, and New Zealand, rather than trying to define herself as an Asian nation – the latter move was all the more awkward, by the way, that Australia had only recently abandoned her decades-long “White Australia” policy (1901-1973) barring Asian immigrants from entering the country. The 2005 Cronulla riots, where rioting flaxen-blond surfers could be watched on TV beating up immigrant Lebanese pushers that had been dealing dope on the beach, has perhaps confirmed the white trash image in the eyes of Asians – yet, to my knowledge, you don’t find Lebanese pushers in Singapore (3rd richest country in terms of GDP per capita). In fact, Asian authoritarians are likely to have been confirmed in their views about the weakness of Western institutions, and on how weak institutions lead to riots and the Lynch law, among other unwanted turmoils. Undemocratic states in East Asia are at the date of today: China, North Korea, Singapore (debated), Vietnam, Laos, Thailand, Brunei Darussalam, Burma (in transition).

In conclusion, evolutionary theory has provided us, thanks to Dr A.S. Amin, with a theoretical model for categorizing current major world civilizations, in terms of reproductive climates. The roots of the clash of civilization are the same as those of human violence; what is new in Amin’s thinking is his treatment of these groupings called civilizations.


*“Even in a developed country like Britain, a child born into a low socio-economic group has twice the chance of dying during childhood than one born in a high socio-economic group. Wealth means health, both at the individual level via diet and lifestyle and at the national level via medical services.” (Robin Baker, Fragile Science, 2001, p. 166)

** « bei der widernatürlich vorteilhaften Stellung, welche die monogamische Einrichtung und die ihr beigegebenen Ehegesetzte dem Weibe erteilen, indem sie durchweg das Weib als das volle Äquivalent des Mannes betrachten, was es in keiner Hinsicht ist, tragen kluge und vorsichtige Männer sehr oft Bedenken, ein so großes Opfer zu bringen und auf ein so ungleiches Paktum einzugehn. » (Parerga und Paralipomena)

*** « L’homme l’a conçu [le matriarcat] en accord avec la femme pour la plus grande puissance du clan. (…) À l’inverse de l’ordre social du clan indo-européen, c’est progressivement avec la dislocation du clan que la parenté par les hommes sera admise dans les sociétés africaines matriarcales. Aussi dans ces sociétés cette parenté garde jusqu’à nos jours le caractère d’une parenté affaiblie, moins forte que celle issue des femmes. (…) Chez les Indo-Européens, la famille patriarcale régnait à l’exclusion de toute notion d’autorité découlant de l’ordre maternel ; ce terme n’existait même pas à l’origine. » (Antériorité des civilisations nègres. Mythe ou réalité historique ? 1967)

April 30, 2016