The Roman State and Genetic Pacification

4 posts

kenshiro
Given the parameters the author uses, there is little chance his hypothesis is true because it requires so many things to be happening in one scenario and not the other. Just parse this assertion: pre-state societies reward young men who act violently on their own initiative. From what I understand, that's true for that one tribe in South America, but a lot of tribes focus very strongly on what's good for the group, and as such discourage people from just randomly flipping out because they feel like it. To some extent, state societies encourage youthful ambition more than non-state ones since you have more to gain in terms of land, slaves, glory, womenfolk, etc.., which is why I said earlier that what the author interprets as pacification is just stratification, and he has thus discovered that states have more differentiated roles than hunter-gatherers and/or barbarians, which is something people already knew.

Methinks what the author is really trying to do is explain why the West is declining, and the easiest explanation is because they've gotten really rich and comfortable and have also stopped believing in any sort of higher purpose for their civilization: but no, instead we have a tale of virile savages overtaking the sad cucks (despite the fact that Westerners have higher sperm counts, free test, height, IQ, and lower rates of weird genetic diseases). The author of the paper in question popped-up on race/hist/evo (my favorite blog for this sort of thing) to discuss a study that showed that black Americans had lower sperm counts than white Americans: he was sure the study was wrong. Why? Because it doesn't fit the SCH.

I notice hbd bloggers of a certain age get into this type of thinking and maybe it's because their own test started to experience age-related decline when society started undergoing a rapid demographic shift. Ironically, hunter-gatherers do not experience nearly as dramatic a fall in test as they get older, so there is that.
spigot
That makes much more sense, thank you. Seems fair to assume genetic pacification occurred in some classes, but without knowing more about how genes were flowing (from who and to whom) there's no way to confirm Frost's hypothesis.

You know any good books on pre-state societies?? How they functioned, the classes of which they were composed, etc.
Niccolo and Donkey
A forum favourite is Drews' "The Coming of the Greeks".
Welund
https://archive.org/stream/TheHourOfDecision/HOD_djvu.txt

To this petty and essentially German
mode of thought belong almost all the political ideals and Utopias that have
sprouted from the bog of the Weimar State: the International, Communist,
Pacifist, Ultramontane, Federal, "Aryan" visions of sacrum imperium, Soviet
State, or Third Empire, as the case might be. All parties now think and act as if
Germany had the world to herself. Trade unions see no further than the industrial
area. Colonial policy has always been odious to them because it does not fit in
with the scheme of class war. In their dogmatic narrowness they do not, or will
not, comprehend that it was precisely the working man for whom the economic
imperialism of the years round 1900, with its assured facilities for the sale of
products and the purchase of raw materials, was the basic premiss of existence.
This the English workman had long before grasped. The enthusiasm of German
democracy for disarmament stops short at the frontiers of the French sphere of
power. The Federalists would have their already greatly reduced country split up
again into a bundle of dwarf states of the old sort, thereby giving foreign powers
the opportunity to play off one against the other. And the National Socialists
believe that they can afford to ignore the world or oppose it, and build their
castles-in-the-air without creating a possibly silent, but very palpable reaction
from abroad.

Added to all this is the universal dread of reality. We "pale-faces" have it, all of
us, although we are seldom, and most of us never, conscious of it. It is the
spiritual weakness of the "Late" man of the higher civilizations, who lives in his
cities cut off from the peasant and the soil and thereby from the natural
experiencing of destiny, time, and death. He has become too wide awake, too
accustomed to ponder perpetually over yesterday and tomorrow, and cannot bear
that which he sees and is forced to see: the relentless course of things, senseless
chance, and real history striding pitilessly through the centuries into which the
individual with his tiny scrap of private life is irrevocably born at the appointed
place. That is what he longs to forget, refute, or contest. He takes flight from
history into solitude, into imaginary far-away systems, into some faith or another,
or into suicide. Like a grotesque ostrich he buries his head in hopes, ideals, and
cowardly optimism: it is so, but it ought not to be, therefore it is otherwise.
We
sing in the woods at night because we are afraid. Similarly, the cowardice of cities
shouts its apparent optimism to the world for very fear. Reality is no longer to be
borne. The wish-picture of the future is set in place of facts - although fate has
never taken any notice of human fancies - from the children's Land of Do-Nothing
to the World Peace and Workers' Paradise of the grown-ups.
Compare this with the Trump phenomena in which a guy who barely cares about "reality" (the "record" and totally un-real ideals) dominates in a pool of over-educated morons. How I originally phrased it: "re[garding Trump egging media into supporting an] investigation of voter fraud sometimes i wonder if trump isn't a 105 IQ genius with common sense in a pool of highly educated retards. idiocracy was wrong, opening couple who refused to breed were obama administration subhumans."