> Hidden Payoff of Civilizational Ruin - Dr. Dani Sulikowski

Why civilizations fail

(It's women)
> The evolutionary prize is enormous for bringing your own society to its knees, if you can be there at the end.

So basically: Acting normally and preserving your nation will mean your genes spread as normal. BUT, destroying your nation and preserving yourself means your genes will be one of the few bloodlines to pass through the bottleneck and then spread to everyone in the country that comes after... So the evolutionary payoff for this is massive. So it's an instinct that is selected for.
Men don't generally discourage other men from reproducing because it's just not effective. You can convince 20 men to not reproduce, and one that remains can still have 20 children.

But women discouraging other women from reproducing DOES work. And this is not just theoretical, the instinct is in fact real. Women are observed doing the following:

* Recommending bad haircuts to other women - studied and proven statistically significant
* Giving bad parenting advice which they would not do themselves - also studied and proven

The first example could be explained as mating competition, but the second is very clearly undermining reproduction.

Also while not formally studied, pretty much everything labeled as "feminism" can be explained as undermining reproduction.
LGBT for Palestine

And why the left is very friendly to Islam, despite Islam being a very conservative ideology.

The implication, though not said expressly, is that the instinct to discourage reproduction amongst your peers is linked with the instinct to let in the barbarians - because surviving the fall of your nation when most others don't is very good for your genes because they will be reproduced in a future baby boom during the rebuilding cycle.
> Can we save civilization by rolling back women's liberation?

The counter-argument is NO, because this would just roll us back to the previous state of society which evolved into this one.

My opinion: What's best is a world of many small monarchies where people can migrate between them.
Follow

@cjd You mean like a federation of between 13 and 52 sovereign states?

Yes, as long as taxation is proportional to representation - once the 16th amendment gets passed, all is lost.
Well it's flat on the states because it's based on population.
The states can do what they want to get it out of the people. One can imagine that the states will settle on an optimal method because if they intentionally choose suboptimal, then people will run to other states.
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.