Gene-culture dual inheritance theories suppose that stabilization to major polity size changes occur as a result of stabilized gene-cultural traits. In other words, Scots accept English rule once enough fiercely independent people get selected out of the population (due to war) and a critical mass of more compliant traits stabilize in the population. Stabilization may occur just on the cultural level. But long term polity size stabilization usually requires a decent amount of selection at the genetic level (i.e. a sufficient frequency of "agreeableness" genes (or at least the genes which directly or indirectly correlate with agreeable personalities) in the population).
Covid lockdown compliance has sown us just how compliant modern populations are to hitherto egregious authoritarianism. It's hard to imagine a 17th century Scot agreeing to Sydney's "only one person can leave the house each day" policy. Nor can one imagine 1940's American's agreeing to universal mask mandates for an illness with a 0.002% fatality rate for 20-49 year old folk. The Swedish epidemiologist responsibilty for that country's voluntary restriction strategy was stunned at how easily people across the classically liberal world went along with Covid authoritarianism. I have to say, it stunned me as well. You think there would have been at least a few spectacular immolations as crazed individuals were fined and jailed. Indeed, the most chilling part of Covid is the awareness that 1930-1950 illiberalness wasn't an aberration.
Indeed, I think it is safe to assume that Covid compliance suggests that the gene-cultural traits required for a new level of governmental authoritarianism are broadly prevalent in Western society. Some countries, like the US, remain uncertain, but that is likely a function of US's de facto status as a dual confederacy under a dying weak federal empire.
This has some major implications. It means that the next polity shift, presumably into pan-nationalism, is more ready than almost everyone supposed. Meme's like "there is no planet B", and "we're all in the climate fight together", have unexpectedly fertile ground upon which to play and evolve.
But the gene-cultural shifts which enable higher polity size changes don't unidirectionally produce benevolent governances. Indeed, I'd suspect that insight into the "progressive" world's compliance means that a both good AND foul intentioned authoritarians will use newfound population level compliance traits for rather nefarious ends.
This seems to be the fear of "Great Reset" folk. There is a real fear that a Trudeau fop will pull a Covid lockdown for "climate change" or some other pan-national issue. The goal may be good. But it will be hard to disentangle moral intent from its illiberal smokescreens. "We'd love for you to all travel to the polls to vote, but because of Climate, you'll all have to do it from home. And trust us on the results... We know BIPOC folk don't have tech access, so we'll just have to excuse some equity corrected fudges..."
In fact, I'd imagine there are hundreds of ways authoritarians will leverage newly discovered compliance limits. The "my body my choice" wall is basically broken. Adult seatbelt laws come to my mind as where this line first died.
Indeed, I wonder if in 20-50 years we might not look back on Nazi Germany, Communist Russian, and Maoist China as the first big signals into a new era of compliance enabled authoritarianism. If so, Orwell's ideas of pan-national leagues "newspeaking" draconian policy changes at the drop of a hat isn't so far away. You'll just believe it is for the greater good. Most of those who would see otherwise are probably genetic relics who are only partially able to overcome the cultural pressure put on them to shut up. But, even if their resistance comes through on occasion, the social platforms they need to be heard are locked up. Even physical "town squares" are now locked up and permitted according to "right think" identities. Proud Boys (or equivalent) can't protest, because "safety"! You know what Antifa (or equivalent) will with your identity-based instigation. It's your own fault for being so extreme!
No comments:
Post a Comment