Bloody shovel

We shall drown, and nobody will save us

Globalization

I’m still reading Christopher Beckwith’s book.

The guy is still as nuts as I remembered him. Just a little example: back in Ancient China, around 300 BC there was a foreign people living in the Tarim Basin, which the Chinese called 月氏. There are good reasons to think those people were the Tocharians, an Indo-European offshoot. These characters are pronounced in MSM (Modern Standard Mandarin) as Yuezhi (sort of /yoo-eh-jrr/ in American English).

Of course the modern pronunciation has nothing to do with the ancient one. As of now we are fairly confident of how Chinese sounded around 700 AD, the Tang Dynasty days, and those characters were pronounced as /ngwat ji/. Well of course there are 1000 years of difference between 700 AD and 300 BC. But Mr. Beckwith insists that the first character, /ngwat/, was pronounced /Tokwar/. Well, 1000 years is a lot of time, but phonetic change does follow some rules, and it’s seldom, not to say never, that radical. Not to say it’s purely impossible. But then Beckwith comes up with another theory of his. Any student of European history knows of Attila and his Huns, called Hunni (singular Hunnus, probably pronunced as Hunno at the time).  Well it happens that in Ancient China, more or less at the same time frame as the Yuezhi, there was a tribe of steppe dwellers on the northern frontier called the 匈奴. These characters are pronounced in MSM as Xiongnu, which doesn’t ring a bell. But in 700 AD Chinese they were pronounced as Hiongno. Hiongno/Huns, steppe dwellers, good fighters… hey maybe they’re the same people! Makes sense, right? Nah, says Beckwith. Not a chance. So the Ngwatji are the Tokwar, but the Hiongno aren’t the Hunno. Right.

Note that the Chinese name has no need at all to sound like the name we know. The Helenes were called Graeci by the Romans. The Chinese call themselves Han, or Hua. But Beckwith has a theory and he wants you to know it.

That’s not to say that the book isn’t interesting. It is, very much so. And it makes a lot of sense in general, leaving Beckwith’s pet theories aside. One of the most interesting themes of the book is the idea that the steppe civilizations run the Silk Road as a worldwide trade network since antiquity, meaning that to some extent the world’s, or at least Eurasia’s economy was pretty much connected during most of history. Which means that technologies, ideologies, and economic cycles were also transmitted worldwide since much earlier than we use to think. He talks of the worldwide transmission of chariot warfare, of the comitatus military system, of the Axial Age, of universalist religions, all of which became popular worldwide at more or less the same time.

This idea of early globalization has a lot of common with S.A.M. Adshead’s approach on World History. Adshead has also written on Central Asian history, but Beckwith doesn’t refer to him so perhaps he’s not aware of his work. I was thinking on the implications of this theory, when I opened my daily feed and found this op-ed by the Chinese Gobal Times.

Populism trends need to be curbed.

Populism has been gaining momentum in Chinese public opinion following several public events. Though an unconsolidated trend of thought, it is easily stimulated and could flare up in the future.

It is generally held that populism can be traced back to mid-19th century Russia, but it is ubiquitous in modern and contemporary times. With its enormous anti-elite sentiment and insufficient tolerance for different opinions, it seeks for absolute equality for all the people in a country. Though an important driving force for social justice and fairness, the concept, full of ideals and passion, lacks rationality. Populism can hardly find a footing in a Western society that often adopts an indifferent attitude toward it, which faces restraint there.

Populism has limited influence upon China but shows overwhelming power on the Internet. Certain members of the web elite take advantage of populism to advocate liberalism and some liberalist lawyers attempt to expand their personal influence. This leads to the awful consequence that inconceivable values and political groups are shaped in China.

A society is unable to campaign against populism even with huge effort because the idea takes on different variations and always appears with specific ideologies or political targets. Therefore, what a mature society should do is to get a lucid picture of the reality and nature of its objective existence, strive to prevent political forces in support of the thought from breaching laws and regulations as well as make its pursuit a disgrace in mainstream society.

If not maliciously utilized, populism is supposed to be “innocent” in itself since it only expresses some people’s sentiments accumulated in a natural way during the unbalanced development of society with no destructive power.

But such an assumption is all too idealistic, so mainstream society and in particular the government must identify targets in order not to fall into direct conflict with populism and get mired in a passive position in public opinion when cracking down on political extremism.

Given its clear-cut political direction, Internet populism has become politicized populism instead of pure sentiment or thought. Therefore, the general public needs to hold politics back from penetrating into this.

It must be noted that society’s call for order will prevail over people’s desire for catharsis with the gradual expansion of the middle class in China. Furthermore, those manipulating populism arbitrarily shall be given corresponding punishments in accordance with relevant laws.

Although populism should in no means be encouraged, the government must be prudent in tackling it to avoid defining such a trend as a complete opposition force. In a society with open public opinion, authorities have to remain resilient to a certain extent regarding populism, which constitutes a complicated topic in the realm of social governance.

Mostly unrelated to this, Hong Kong has already its own Occupy movement, which is growing increasingly important.

Any careful watchers of the US are seeing the trend is towards the death of the middle class, and a new social order where property is increasingly concentrated in the hands of a small elite, and government outsources most of its functions to private contractors, while strengthens the surveillance and inquisition apparatus to quell dissent before it reaches critical mass. China has made a great effort to isolate itself from global ideological trends, but the overwhelming power of World History just can’t be fought. We truly are the mimetic ape.

About these ads

30 responses to “Globalization

  1. Farooh Ghomzajadeh October 14, 2013 at 22:24

    Hello, My name is Farooh Ghomzajadeh. I am writing from Iran. I want to acquire the European technical talent power for my country. There is genetic power. Please direct me to some one who can give me their technical power. We will take IMF loan to put in place eugenics project in all of iran to raise IQ. We need this power before the other races destroy us. The israel is preparing to destroy us. Please direct me to HBD people studying IQ. The iranian government will pay money for IQ-raising in iran. We need nuclear weapons for defense. I beg.

      • Farooh Ghomzajadeh October 15, 2013 at 10:05

        Why you lol? I serious.

        • spandrell October 15, 2013 at 10:09

          If you insist, I think you should rather go ask China for help. They are doing research on the genetic basis of IQ in the Beijing Genomics Institute, and they are more likely to help Iranians.

          • Farooh Ghomzajadeh October 15, 2013 at 12:08

            No, I was not serious, I was just joking. I am iranian but live in England (my family ran away).

            I do take the prospect of raising IQs seriously as I don’t want to be killed by either White nationalist governments or insane yellow supremacists. They are on every forum and they all seem to want to kill “brown” people first as they are more dangerous than blacks. First of all iranians aren’t brown….

            • thrasymachus33308 October 15, 2013 at 12:41

              The Persians did pretty well for themselves back in the old days. Not well enough to successfully invade Europe, but not bad. A Persian return to greatness might include the elimination of Islam and Arabic influences, expelling and keeping out the Jews (no end of trouble, see Esther) and returning to the old Persian monotheistic religion.

              I read someplace that the mullah’s revolution of the 70′s was in alliance with merchants, against an aristocracy they regarded as immoral and corrupt, which would make it much like the Puritan revolution in England. If so you’re screwed.

            • spandrell October 15, 2013 at 12:47

              Well some Iranians are pretty white, others do look quite brown. You guys kinda invented the melting pot.

              White supremacists are little danger to your kind, and will probably never be. The yellows are pussies, don’t believe half of what they say.
              There’s quite a lot of Iranians in Japan, and they aren’t doing so bad given that many coethnics started a pickpocketing racket in the Tokyo subway in the 80s. I have fond memories of dating an Iranian girl. She wouldn’t put out tho.

              • Farooh Ghomzajadeh October 15, 2013 at 13:55

                You should have threatened to tell her parents.

              • Farooh Ghomzajadeh October 15, 2013 at 14:01

                Yeah some look brown. Dienekes says there some south asian admixture from the days when darius recruited soldiers from the Sindhu/indian provinces.

              • The Slitty Eye October 15, 2013 at 14:10

                ” Well some Iranians are pretty white, others do look quite brown. ”

                Or yellow like the Hazara. Iranians are fine, and Zoroastrianism is cool.

                Just for the sake of entertainment, I managed to convince an Iranian chich with whom I made out to have a taste of the Jamon, she seemed liking it.

            • anon666 October 15, 2013 at 17:08

              For the record, I think HBD is true, but also consider most Iranians I’ve met in the US to be solid bros! So here: http://i.imgur.com/i4E0ESD.jpg

            • Jan October 16, 2013 at 08:53

              That’s the premise of the “Chung Kuo” sci-fi novels by David Wingrove. They’re about a future dominated by China in which the blacks and browns are exterminated except for some fugitive remnants in the Martian outback.

              I don’t think you should worry about extreme scenarios, but as a general matter, I definitely do think there will be outbreaks of racial violence in the future. Basically war, violence, “fascism”, etc. is how more K-selected populations react to more r-selected, more fertile, more polygynous, etc. populations.

              This is from a review of a book by the evolutionary biologist W.D. Hamilton:

              http://racehist.blogspot.de/2010/04/william-d-hamilton-on-differential.html#more

              Hamilton is an unabashed, no-fig-leaf naturist. He believes that genetics, not nurture, accounts for a large and important range of human behaviour — from racism and xenophobia to differences in intellectual abilities between men and women — and that only by admitting and understanding this, only by casting aside hypocrisy on the matter, can fundamental human problems be tackled. As an example, he argues that a basic cause (emphatically not a justification) of racism — and, particularly, of ethnically motivated genocide — is a differential birth rate between groups. And, yes, he does extend this to the Nazi extermination of Jews.

              A footnote from Narrow Roads of Gene Land, Volume 2, p. 280:

              Increase of Ashkenazi Jews in eastern Europe in the span of the nineteenth century is said to have been almost fourfold (S. Jones, In the Blood: God, Genes and Destiny (HarperCollins, London, 1996)). This implies a doubling about every generation. Very surprisingly this fact seems almost never to be discussed as part causative background to the holocaust, an omission that continues even when claims of group competition are the focus (K. MacDonald, Separation and its Discontents (Praeger, Wesport, CT, 1998)).

    • spandrell October 15, 2013 at 14:23

      You should have threatened to tell her parents.

      Heh. She wasn’t that hot to be honest.

      Anyway if you are scared of wild nationalists, well you can always not live in their countries. A Nazi awakening is very unlikely, but as things are going, particularly in the UK, you’ll probably be better off going back.

      • anon666 October 15, 2013 at 17:10

        I suspect the mainstreaming of HBD would probably be pretty liberal/libertarian: “Yes, there are average differences between population groups, but we should still be meritocratic when evaluating individuals.”

        • spandrell October 15, 2013 at 17:28

          That would dismantle affirmative action, disparate impact and pretty much the whole edifice of welfare.

          • anon666 October 15, 2013 at 20:13

            Perhaps, but they could just as easily conclude that “basic humanitarianism holds that all individuals deserve a minimum standard of living regardless of intelligence, ability or motivation”, and thus institute some sort of basic income guarantee for all. HBD doesn’t seem to mandate an adherence to any particular ideology.

            • peppermint October 16, 2013 at 06:47

              Absolutely.

              But it will be honest, instead of including the lie that they’re just like us, and therefore we need to babysit them playing pretend at our workplaces instead of doing our jobs. Affirmative action wastes a huge amount of resources.

              White flight also wastes tons of resources. What if the Blacks were just properly policed and potty-trained so they won’t use the stairwells of their futuristic housing complexes as toilets? Disparate impact theory is the guise under which White ethnic cleansing was effected through having Blacks wallow in their own filth in the ruins of cities that were great a few years ago.

              Furthermore, the biggest lie progressives tell themselves is that by not explicitly choosing who will reproduce, they do not make that decision. Instead, they choose dysgenics by default, which will ultimately destroy the kind of low corruption/nepotism/kin preference, long time preference, low aggression, high IQ community that makes it all remotely possible.

            • spandrell October 16, 2013 at 07:11

              That would work if racial groups didn’t exist, but they do. And because they do, there is a need to punish the overachievers so that everybody is actually equal. A basic income will not change the fact that most blacks are worthless in a modern society, and that white men will run the show. That is what progressives are fighting these days. I don’t see them coming at piece with the idea that women and NAMs are just not cut out for achieving anything.

              • Baker October 16, 2013 at 11:13

                Indeed. Since “basic human need” / “human rights” is arbitrary, it still boils down to progressives/democracies shouting the loudest to get their need defined as basic human need. In particular, as “right to freely breed” and “right to life” are human rights, you cannot stop dysgenics or Malthusian trap (China takes away the former right) save some genetic engineering miracle; as “human dignity/status” are human rights, you cannot stop affirmative action since feeling unequal is an attack on human dignity/status.

    • Grotto October 15, 2013 at 19:22

      This guy readily admits the existence of genetically-inherited IQ, sees geopolitics as a zero-sum contest for power, and sees the role of the state as furthering the interests of its native citizens (and, to a close approximation, advocates ethno-states).

      This man is already superior to the current Western leadership in three respects.

  2. Davis October 15, 2013 at 00:30

    Why the “moon clan”? Was it just for phonetic reasons?

  3. Bobbity October 16, 2013 at 02:49

    Off topic. Interesting vid on Tocharians by Mallory:

  4. Alrenous October 27, 2013 at 11:33

    One of the most interesting themes of the book is the idea that the steppe civilizations run the Silk Road as a worldwide trade network since antiquity, meaning that to some extent the world’s, or at least Eurasia’s economy was pretty much connected during most of history. Which means that technologies, ideologies

    Ah, ideologies.

    So the Americas were colonized from top to bottom in 1000 years. Crazy, no? But then we go over to classical Greece and think it’s impossible for an idea can move to the Middle East in fifty years.

    Specifically, the ideologies of philosophy and sophistry. Philosophy, which reliably gives its host great power, and sophistry, which reliably leads to a bad case of democracy.

    I recently read somewhere that the Axial age came to Thales from Egypt. I for one am certainly interested in tracing the strain further into the mists of history.

Please comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s