Changing Priorities - Cultivating Virtue

'Delaying the peak'

'Flattening the curve'

More like: 'Managing the decline.'

---

It is interesting to see the lines that our various governments are taking these days in this pandemic.

In the UK and Canada, there are newly-crafted laws against mis-gendering trans and non-binary people. The laws were happily used, and people were prosecuted and convicted.

Before the outbreak, the government with its bureaucrats were happy to police private lives of its citizens: developing task forces to target 'mean tweets', to fund and implement studies on bigotry and x,y,z-phobia, to 'call-out' men who didn't call themselves 'feminists', to push diversity quotas, and punish those who strayed from or contravened the new orthodoxy.

Now, in the turbulence of the Coronavirus, we're being told to 'lean on each other', 'not panic', 'be prepared to lose loved ones' - to engage in a stoicism and reasoned deliberation that has been all but bred out of us, and mobilise towards a common cause to act in the favour of the common good.

How, exactly, are we to mobilise ourselves? Around what, exactly, shall we rally? Well, we are in quarantine or self-isolation so that puts a damper on things... We cannot physically meet to rally, or protest, but more the point I want to make: what reason do we have to do anything outside of self-interest and the immediate interests of our families and loved ones? What is the guiding ethos outside of survival?

Our 'leaders' are attempting to cheer-lead for a social fabric that no longer exists, and which, in fact, has been slowly unraveled for decades by their very blithe insistence on 'progress'.

What they've called the 'expansion of the moral sphere' is nothing but the expansion of licence to those who are vain and narcissistic enough to demand it, and back it up under the threat of censure by intolerant human rights legislation.

Culture, patriotism, national identity and character, peoplehood, family - it has all been deconstructed, devalued, and pinned on top with a Pride flag. (To be clear: each of these terms should have as [*] next them reading: 'white cis male' - and I mean this in the technical critical race theory sense.)

But given the mobilisation that has occurred, I wonder if this time is not appropriately paralleled to World War II - not the frontlines, but the homefront.

I know that WWII gets invoked a lot in order to prop up the seriousness of whatever cause one wants to promote, but with the rationing of obvious scarcity, national mobilisation around sacrifice, the odd camaraderie and fellowship that people seem to develop when life expectancy for everyone is cut to a possible 4-6 months... It seems to make things richer, deeper, and people become more grateful.

The analogy is far from perfect: we cannot mobilise production and community nearly as well as in WWII - its baked into the very nature of this crisis that we are to remain in isolation, and I don't want to get sanguine or pollyanna-ish about this: I'm not hopeful for a large communal turn away from the vices that led us here, and towards the virtues that will help build a new future.

In every age, people have thought that they're living in particularly gloomy times. I hear that. One mustn't get too doomy. But this time we find ourselves in is unique, and a sufficient amount of doomy thinking should prompt productive thinking.

The imposition of limits can inspire the imagination: like haikus or one-stroke paintings impressive beauty can be expressed within constraints. And in the past, the sword has been a traditional cure for decadence, and perhaps pestilence, though tragic, unseen, and uninvited, can be as well.

This isn't hope for the light-bulbs to flicker on in the heads of our leaders, and for there to be a serious discussion about the re-orientation of society, globalism, manufacturing and production, supply chains, and global finance. It is not a hope for someone to come down from the mountain with revelations on life.

It is hope that in this trying time, people on the ground will come to terms with that has been lost, damaged, and hidden from sight by censures, demagogues, and post-modern moralists.

People hate each other less when they need each other more and share confidence, and building shared confidence occurs with honesty: radical honesty about objectives, costs, fears, and hopes; as well as shedding the pretenses of our age, hyper-individualism and neo-liberalism, that have been propagated for decades.

This is already being seen in small instances: there are the videos of young people partying on Spring Break, or people going to pubs and bars, or other gatherings. The majority of the public looks on in shock, dismay or disgust at how such people can be so reckless and selfish, and how such disregard for one's communal duties to protect others is being flaunted.

Moving forward, though, we on the ground will have to do more than criticise. We have to be productive and present positive goals and values, and cultivate the possibilities for them to be exercised.

People should be open and honest about abilities, skills and talents. Differences have to be recognised and acknowledged - a tough one, in our age, will be complementarity between men and women. This should be acknowledged in order to create coherence in families, couples, and groups. There has to be the cultivation of the reliable person: the nurturing mother, the providing father. There isn't time for chatter about what we've come to know as 'equality', 'equity', 'diversity' and 'inclusion'. Those are distractions that people can toy with when times are comfortable - what has such chatter done to keep us out of this situation? It is a time to focus on cultivating autonomy, freedom, and dignity. 

Self-reliance and self-sufficiency, even in small things, will be important. From growing plants and herbs, to learning to pickle (lacto-ferment!) vegetables to extend shelf-life. These can be easily done in a home during isolation.

Make beef jerky - or liver jerky: it is tasty, nutritious, and is very cheap. Try buying offal - cook up a beef heart. You won't believe it isn't steak. And if you cannot cook: for God's sake, now is the time to learn. Same goes for tools - buy some, borrow some, and learn to use them.

People who can be counted on to care for others who need help will have to step up and create others like them. This can simple like grabbing groceries for an elder or a friend in need. Who knows what will happen come Spring time, but possible repairs to homes may need to be done, and the person who needs help may be a friend, family member, or neighbour who has been laid off work and cannot afford to pay a contractor. Laying a helping hand can make a big difference, if you have the skills and resources. Finally, just sharing information one has with a curious friend and family member can go a long way in spreading information for skill acquisition in a time of quarantine and isolation.

Families will have to be valued more. There is security in a family, as well as love, care and belonging. (Of course, not every family is loving, and some families are broken, etc., but families shouldn't be like that. If you don't have a salvageable family, then there are going to be other issues to deal with. I'm no doctor, and the spread of this virus is fairly clandestine with its long incubation period and asymptomatic spread, so take this with caution: is the virus worse than living with your broken family? Do you have another safe place you can go? Talk to the folks there. Wait a bit to check for symptoms, and then, if you all feel certain enough, go there.)

Contacting family and friends during this time will be important - not only are you checking in on them to see if they are OK or if they need help, but people will know who to rely upon, and who is more or less extraneous.

Start up a book club with family and/or friends.

Pick a book you all enjoy, or pick something new. What comes to my mind are books like The Road, I am Legend, and Jaws, or perhaps something less morose like The Count of Monte Cristo, Swiss Family Robinson, Time Machine, or Old Yeller.

Try picking one of the Classics - one of those books by old dead white men that the academy has tried to throw out of their curricula: Plato, Aristotle, Conrad, Melville, Chaucer, Milton, Wordsworth, Homer, Cicero, Dante, Ovid, Dickens, Tolstoy, and so on are ripe pickings. 

Like the underground educational networks in Eastern Europe under communism - building shrines in the catacombs to venerate the memory of their culture - one can cultivate deep interest and perhaps devotion to the timelessness of things.

Though many people are isolated and/or have lost their jobs and have claimed unemployment, there are those who are still working and yet are doing double-duty as workers and parents, or as care-givers to the elderly, or those who are sick, themselves. Making time can be difficult - but the difficulty is the constant, here, and how one deals with it will illustrate one's commitment or desire to making the best of this situation.

I'm not trying to get all high-minded about this: reading a good book and chatting about it can really pass the time, and sadly most people will just binge-watch whatever NetFlix throws their way.

If reading books is too cumbersome then try a film - a good one. But when the comics become dull, when the irony ceases to elicit a smirk, and when the formulae become predictable there is always the option to turn to things more rich, sincere, and illuminating. These are stable in an unstable world. 

Replacement - Conspiracy, Reality.

In the West: 

1) Native birth rates are below replacement;

2) Life expectancy is increasing;

3) People are getting older; thus:

4) The native young of the country is decreasing as a proportion of the population - or in other words, the population is 'aging'.

5)We need to import other young people to work, get taxed, and contribute to pensions, and;

6) The majority of these people being imported happen to be of a different race and culture than the native population.

[Edit. We'll have to see what changes given the Coronavirus outbreak]

This is replacement.

The point isn't that there is the white race being replaced by a particular race, but rather that white-majority nations in Europe and North America are having their native white populations dwindle as a proportion of the population as the foreign-born population increases due to immigration and birthrates.

It needn't be done intentionally by a cabal of elites conniving to erase the white race from the world, but regardless of intention the proportion of white people is decreasing as a percentage of the population of their countries whilst the proportion of non-white people in increasing as a percentage of the population, and the increasing non-white population is occurring, in part, due to the policies and incentives set up by leaders and decision-makers. So, there are people in charge, and they are making decisions, so there is at least some weak claim to 'intentionality'.

There are also some complicated issues about WHY native birthrates are so low. Reasons range from education, to abortion, to unstable economic conditions, to fear of climate change, to materialism and consumerism, the cost of raising children, as well as the promotion and acceptance of 'non-traditional' families, as well as changing gender norms and expectations. These all serve as explanations of (1) and (5), additionally, some of these are used simultaneously as achievements of a progressive society.  There is little to no discussion of pro-natal policies, and what to do about low birth rates. 

But what are we supposed to believe? Points (1-5) are consistently stated in the news and other media, and (6) is touted as an achievement by our leaders and elites: 'diversity is our strength', after all. Coupled with media and corporate campaigns that target and dilute the native populations national identity, character, and history whilst bolstering the prominence of the non-native; one cannot help but smell something is rotten. 

I won't believe bullshit. And I don't like being told to believe conflicting things without explanation.

When facing the evidence one is told: a) replacement isn’t happening, but when pressed, one is told b) it is happening, it is good, and you are a bigot if you think otherwise; or even c) it would be good if it did happen, oh, and you are still a bigot if you think otherwise.

This approach won't work. 

Instead of talking about the issue seriously, and addressing concerns honestly, the discourse around replacement reads like a series of A/B tests wherein media figures, politicians and pundits throw out shallow, poorly thought-out denialism, or even insults to dismiss critics. 

When someone asks about replacement or expresses a concern about it, they're told that there is no evidence for it and that one should ignore claims saying its happening. When stats are used to back up the claims about replacement, they're then told that such reasoning is conspiratorial, or, finally, that is its racist. I reckon that doubling-down on the reality of replacement will become more common amongst certain circles of people in the media.

Now, one can ask, 'why are you concerned in the first place?' But that's not my point, here. That is another issue, and I'll be happy to get into it later. The point, here, is modest: replacement isn't a conspiracy theory, one needn't be a hateful bigot to think it is happening, and there are arguments to show that replacement is happening.

If one reads the six (6) points, and agrees that they're true, then one agrees that replacement is happening.

Corona-chan, Globalism, and Living

Why didn't we just close the borders and stop air travel, Dad?

Our thought-leaders and politicians have come out to tell us of the real problems with Coronavirus: racism, xenophobia, nationalism, and borders. Pretty much anything that challenges the neo-liberal, cosmopolitan orthodoxy.

French President Emmanuel Macron has stated that: 

"Two pitfalls must be avoided, one is the nationalist withdrawal because this virus has no passport."

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stated that: 

Closing Canada's borders and restricting travel is a knee-jerk reaction that will not slow the spread of the Coronavirus. 

(If closing borders in March in response to an viral outbreak that started in January is a 'knee-jerk' reaction, then that is the slowest knee-jerk I've seen. [Oh,and now his wife has tested positive for the virus after coming back from the UK]. I guess if you let your wife get Coronoavirus, you win.)

Steven Pinker says: 

"The Coronavirus Pandemic is one of many reasons neo-nationalism is destructive & ultimately futile. Viruses (like greenhouse gases, cybercriminals, dark money, terrorists, pirates, & technology) don’t care about lines on a map."

Richard Dawkins chimes in: 

"Nasty FOREIGN virus. Lock it up! Lock it up! Keep America safe. No FOREIGNERS from Europe allowed. Except Brits of course. They’re not really foreign. They speak English. Don’t they? I think they do, I went to London, I met the Queen, they love me there."

It's almost like they're getting out there to fend off an anticipated reaction... 

First, they must know that they're viciously equivocating fears of foreigners with fears of the virus - particularily Pinker and Dawkins. Its not the case that people who want their nations' borders shored up and inter-national travel restricted because they just don't like those dirty foreigners. They don't want travel to and fro because foreigners are people and people carry the virus. 

The cute quips about viruses not caring about borders is so obviously stupid, that it sounds like a joke. 

Also, Pinker's neologism 'neo-nationalism' is also dumb. Nationalism, first of all, is more of a default setting for national and international understanding than Pinker's globalism, so there isn't anything really 'neo-' about it. The very fact that Pinker and others feel like they have to 'in before' nationalistic approaches or motivations to the viral containment shows that nationalism is baked into people's assessments. 

It is also an opportunistic word that he can use to cast aspersions at his political and social opponents whilst also attempting to turn his own ideological framework of 'globalism' into the default setting. It is the language of global capital, finance, industry, complex global supply chains, and technocracy. It is the language of our age's orthodoxy. 

Oh, and it sound a little like 'neo-nazi'. So, he can slide in nazi insults while he pontificates.

Now, these are difficult times with tough decisions. Closing borders means serious economic impacts, and serious economic impacts can exasperate medical issues as goods, services, and money become increasingly unavailable. But easy travel and porous borders brought the virus to our shores in the first place. 

I wouldn't argue for a full, air-tight travel ban - though situations will differ - but platitudes and moral hand-wringing won't work. In fact, they could just reinforce the opposition to globalisation - so, in some sense, the Pinkers and Macrons of the world are welcome to spout their talking points. 

I don't know how much entropy Coronavirus will throw into the system. Inertia is a powerful force. But this pandemic, like climate change, will require tough decisions and strong, honest, clear leadership: traits that are sorely lacking in our litter of leaders. 

I do think that globalism will be undermined. 

People will have to be locked out. Mobility will have to be reduced. Supply chains will have to be truncated. Costs and advantages will have to be reassessed. Time horizons for planning with have to be lengthened. Medical and military priorities will have to be realigned. But those are challenges for our nation's leaders. Us, here on the ground, have to exercise caution and become more self-sufficient - re-discover old knowledge and reduce external needs. Learn to make and preserve foods; fish, trap or hunt. Get healthier and stay that way. Reduce reliance on global supply chains; get local. Increase production, not consumption - if you need something, try making it yourself. Keep friends and family close, and stay in touch. Communication with loved ones is important in unstable times, and you should all have each other's backs. Stay mentally engaged and stable, and try to enjoy the life you are trying to create. There are many things out of our control, but those things that we do control should be fashioned out of intent, and deliberation. 

This isn't just the calm before the storm. This could be the beginning of an age. And we're in it for the long haul. 

I'll leave this ramble with a quote by CS Lewis:

"In one way we think a great deal too much of the atomic bomb. “How are we to live in an atomic age?” I am tempted to reply: “Why, as you would have lived in the sixteenth century when the plague visited London almost every year, or as you would have lived in a Viking age when raiders from Scandinavia might land and cut your throat any night; or indeed, as you are already living in an age of cancer, an age of syphilis, an age of paralysis, an age of air raids, an age of railway accidents, an age of motor accidents.”

 In other words, do not let us begin by exaggerating the novelty of our situation. Believe me, dear sir or madam, you and all whom you love were already sentenced to death before the atomic bomb was invented: and quite a high percentage of us were going to die in unpleasant ways. We had, indeed, one very great advantage over our ancestors—anesthetics; but we have that still. It is perfectly ridiculous to go about whimpering and drawing long faces because the scientists have added one more chance of painful and premature death to a world which already bristled with such chances and in which death itself was not a chance at all, but a certainty.

This is the first point to be made: and the first action to be taken is to pull ourselves together. If we are all going to be destroyed by an atomic bomb, let that bomb when it comes find us doing sensible and human things—praying, working, teaching, reading, listening to music, bathing the children, playing tennis, chatting to our friends over a pint and a game of darts—not huddled together like frightened sheep and thinking about bombs. They may break our bodies (a microbe can do that) but they need not dominate our minds."

— “On Living in an Atomic Age” (1948)