—“CURT: WHY ISN’T WINSTON CHURCHILL DEMONIZED FOR STARVING INDIANS TO FEED EUROPEANS DURING THE SECOND WORLD WAR”— A Hindu (Indian)
A REPRIMAND FOR ASKING THE QUESTION
(Part of my ongoing effort to make people look in the mirror rather than blame others)
**The following is what I tell every ethnic group on earth. You aren’t special.**
Your question is typical of a failed people wishing to blame others for their condition …
1 – Who grant themselves a social, economic, political, military and intellectual equality that does not exist. The very idea that all humans are equal is anti-empirical, and merely a means by which to encourage economic cooperation and competition rather than violent conflict. It is an ambition in cooperation not an existential property of humans, or human groups. Quite the opposite.
2 – Who assume that we grant each other equal standing for anything other than utilitarian reasons – in order to increase trade and reduce opportunity for conflict.
3 – Who assume that the utility of cooperation is endless, when it is merely whenever it is more rewarding than not cooperating. Or in the case of the primitive civilizations, when it is more profitable to “Mature them out of superstition(india), destructive traditions and customs (india), ignorance(india), illiteracy(india), poverty (india), overbreeding(india), child mortality, early death, systemic filthiness (india), disregard for maintenance of the commons (india), resistance to truth telling (india), pervasive self-justificationary excuse making (india), pervasive familial corruption(india), inability to develop a middle class (india), vast asymmetry between the size of the classes (india), who cannot defend themselves (muslim gunpowder empires), – than it is to rule them, profit from ruling them, and like a good parent, try to raise them out of that current state.
4 – Why should we pay any cost of parenting a primitive people unless it is profitable? History demonstrates quite clearly that extermination is more profitable than cooperation.
5 – When we are at war, why would we not favor family, kin, and civilization over primitive peoples? Isn’t that the reason for pervasive indian corruption? Favoring family over commons?
6 – And why should we treat undomesticated human animals any differently than any other undomesticated animal? The answer is, we don’t until we can trade with them. So the problem is, parenting a people until we can trade with them.
LOOK IN THE MIRROR
Whenever you want to blame someone else, exhaust your opportunity to blame the person, the family, the tribe, the nation, the civilization **in the mirror**.
Despite having one of the three early great civilizations, and despite amassing capital (not wealth, but capital), why did India and indians consistently fail? Why could she not resist Whites? Why couldn’t she resist the mongols? Why couldn’t she resist the muslims? Why couldn’t she resist the british? And conversely, why did east asia and the west europe succeed? Why do indians always fail?
West Europe probably exceeded china for the simple reasons of geography and culture. Had china not had to resist barbarians at her walls, she might have continued her expansion into the new world.
On the other hand, once China explored the rest of the world, they saw nothing worth bringing home. Once the west saw the rest of the world, they saw opportunity for expansion.
And so the west dragged primitive peoples out of primitivism (ignorance, superstition, poverty, starvation, hard labor, infant mortality, early death, disease, corruption, tyranny, the vicissitudes of nature, and a universe hostile to human life.
**We are not family, we are not kin, we are not friends, we are at best trading partners of convenience,** that fight by population, religion, means of government, and economic productivity, rather than fight by violence.
And if you think otherwise you are simply fooled by your ability to absorb 3000 years of western civilization, and profit from doing so, while the british empire establishes the world trade destroyed by the muslims, and the americans pay the high cost of policing that system of world trade against primitive peoples of all civilizations, not the least of which were the russians, the chinese, the communists, and now the muslims. ANd no doubt, had india been powerful enough to mount a resistance, her also.
We are all compatible at the feast. When in famine, it’s self, family, and kin we defend.
No man is a hero to his debtors. Yet you are our debtors.
Do not assume any equality whatsoever. All equality is merely a useful means of maturing you so that you’re profitable rather than a risk or cost.
TRUTH: EVEN DARWIN AND MALTHUS WERE TOO KIND
Territory is what you hold because you can.
You can hold territory because you produce a people who can fight, and an economy to arm them against competitors.
The purpose of ‘human rights’ – which are nothing but property rights – is not to produce human rights per se, but to demand states produce wealth by internal reformation rather than achieve wealth through conquest. In other words, it is a means of self defense. A form of cost reduction.
The purpose of directing states to produce internal reformation and wealth so that they join the world economy, is to prevent another world war, and in no small part to convert from war by violence to war by commerce. For the simple reason that war by commerce tends to produce the opposite effect: continuous self improvement. This is the paradox of economic competition.
If you do not understand this then you are still of a religious rather than scientific disposition, and believe in comforting falsehoods.
**So stop blaming other people, and look in the mirror.**