A long but interesting article. The author hypothesizes that the rulers of the West have focused on ideological purity, which has had the side effect of driving the minority of human beings who have high competence out of positions where their talents are most needed.
“General competence requires three necessary conditions:
a) High general intelligence or IQ,
b) the ability to be objective, even in situations where the result of your conclusions may not be to your liking, and c) the ability to reach conclusions without being influenced by others (i.e. independent thinking).”
However, people like that are a threat to our rulers – a threat they are dealing with quite successfully, from their limited perspective. But that leaves the West disadvantaged relative to Russia, China, India, …
“By putting its societies on an ideological footing the western elite has backed itself into a corner. They can’t compete; they can’t develop their economies or societies; and they can’t go back”.
Great article nd I agree with it all, but: “conflict is the only remaining option”……what does the author mean, exactly? Does he envision a shooting war? Wherein the people with higher IQs will mow down the mediocre? I mean just because they’re dumb doesn’t mean they may not be better shots…
…but OTOH mybe the author means armed conflict between the elite ideologues who are pushing this disastrous war on merit, and the rest of us. In that case bring it on, I doubt those nerds could hit a barn door or even a barn!
Taking the full quote: “Conflict is therefore the only remaining option for the ruling class to hang on to power.” The question is – Conflict with whom?
Referring back to an earlier quote:
“The current clash between the West and Russia – and increasingly between the West and the rest of the world - is becoming a clash between the incompetent and irrational and the competent and rational. The result is obvious – but what happens when an irrational person who is backed into a corner has access to nuclear weapons? That’s anybody’s guess.”
My interpretation is that the author expects the Biden MalAdministration to keep doubling down in the Ukraine, Taiwan, Syria, Mali, wherever. If we are lucky, this over-extension will lead to our economic collapse, which might prevent Our Guys from starting WWIII. But if we are unlucky, Our Guys will trigger that global thermonuclear war.
If the rest of the human race is lucky, that same lack of competence which is obvious in our leadership will extend to the people responsible for the maintenance of our nuclear arsenal – and then at least the rest of the world might not suffer too much damage.
While the author may be correct that “Conflict is therefore the only remaining option for the ruling class to hang on to power.”, that doesn’t necessarily mean conflict is inevitable. History provides plenty of examples of “Great Powers”—Portugal, Spain, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, for example, which, for a variety of reasons, found themselves demoted from that exalted rank, shorn of their imperial possessions, and reduced to the “B” or “C” league on the world stage. While this may be result of cataclysmic defeat in a war (Germany), in other cases it’s the result of internal decline or being out-competed by a rising power.
If the U.S. is in competition with at least two rivals, China and Russia, who are not circling the toilet bowl of incompetence and fantasy-based policies while furiously paddling and shouting “faster, faster!”, then the U.S. may, after reaching the point where its credit card is maxed out and nobody will take its funny money any more (think the UK around 1965), simply slip to the second or third rank and reduce its ambition. The same idiots, thieves, and murderers may still be in charge, but nobody will take them any more seriously than Ed Heath’s views of geopolitics and the world economy in the 1970s.
Well, it kind of does mean it’s inevitable. But the format of said conflict can take many shapes.
?How about starting riots in rich neighborhoods. ?How about rioting and burning rich malls and stores. ?How about a campaign of besmirching, rightfully or wrongly, the rich/ruling/“successful” segments of the country. ?How about targetting Teslas. ?How about a campaign of “UnAmericanism” against users of Teslas, those against nuke plants, those against oil drilling.
Conflict has many shapes. It does not have to, and often isn’t open combat. THAT’S the mistake the Serbs made, and the German and Austrian banks, with American help, gobbled up the country AND its resources.
It’s a good thing we know, with certainty, the cause cannot possibly be DEI naturally unfolding in critical undertakings as DIE. Oh, the “gatekeepers” he discusses are subject to pressures from above, which can threaten their own positions. That’s how marxist systems work.
I thought it was rather disingenuous that no mention was made that these “gatekeepers” (line check pilots) are members of labour unions whose bosses work out the details of hiring, training, and qualification with airline management and are, almost certainly, as bought into the woke agenda as management.
The Air Line Pilots Association, Int’l (ALPA) strives to promote a diverse, inclusive culture where all pilots can be their authentic selves and are motivated to do their best. We are focusing efforts to foster a future generation of commercial airline pilots that better reflects the composition of the communities we serve.
⋮
These efforts are coordinated through our Diversity, Equity, Belonging, and Inclusion Committee, which is composed of ALPA members who represent different cultures, experiences, and backgrounds. This committee is guided by the core values of Respect, Responsiveness, Inspire, Show Compassion, Equality, Equity, Unity, and Passion (RRISEEUP).
What do you think the career prospects are for a check captain whose evaluation of pilot competence evidences “disparate impact”?
