That which cannot continue must end. Thus one way or another, the movement ever leftwards, ever faster, is going to stop, going to be stopped, probably after the fashion of Stalin, if we are lucky after the fashion of conspiracy of 9 Thermidor, if really lucky after the fashion of Cromwell.
That does not necessarily mean things will get better, merely that, as in Stalin’s Soviet Union, they will stop getting even worse. But when China recovered from Maoism, it not only had a pretty good restoration, but came out of a dark age. And today’s Russia is not doing too badly.
So here is what is going to take to clean up the Augean stables:
Cannot stop a left singularity. unless you get real serious about stopping it. Hence the end of a left singularity is apt to lead to a restoration – though it may instead merely lead to the execution of a remarkably large number of leftists, suspected leftists, potential leftists, and suspected potential leftists. (Yey Stalin! Go Stalin Go!)
The inability of King George the Fourth to divorce of Queen Caroline was lunatic barking mad leftism in charge, frothing at the mouth, and biting crazy, and it has been going downhill ever since, getting crazier and more extreme every day, faster and faster. This is damaging technology through rule by consensus. Peer Review means that instead of experimentalists telling the scientific community what they see, the scientific community tells experimentalists what they would see. Science died when peer review was introduced in the nineteen forties, and in the seventies, technology began to follow.
To fix the left singularity needs military force and martial law. Warriors on top, so warrior status has to be raised, priest status lowered. Confiscate the Ivy endowments, and completely destroy Harvard, totally bulldozing every trace. Symbolically pour salt upon the earth, then redevelop the Ivy campuses for housing, shopping malls, and offices.
Deflate academic credentials, with the school leaving exam, taken at the age puberty begins, discriminating between those above and below IQ 105, and the school matriculation exam (high school, taken at completion of puberty) discriminating between those above and below IQ 115. University entrance begins at IQ 125. Some people fail university, quite a lot fail university, about half of them, so that pretty much everyone with a two year or more degree is IQ 130 or above. Four year degrees, however, should not be significantly smarter, just more academic. Above common IQ levels, above IQ 130, we don’t use academic credentials, but rather deal with individuals case by case. So if you are really smart and leave school at school leaving age, then self educate, you will still do fine. We cease to force people to waste their fertile years in zero sum competition for credentials of little value. Post deflation academic degrees are given new names to differentiate them from inflated academic degrees. The net effect is that far fewer people go to university, and those that do go to university for a far shorter time.
To lower priestly status, we make sure that there is a non academic path into every career, often built around apprenticeship – that there are no careers where academics have a legal monopoly of licensing people to perform certain tasks. Well established and successful practitioners can also license people to perform those tasks.
School years should be tied to puberty, so that people with the same physical development are taking the same exam, so as not to discriminate in favor of blacks and against whites, and so as not to discriminate in favor of females and against males, and to create an expectation that completion of puberty means getting a job, a wife, and having children.
The Mad Max scenario – trade and specialization of labor collapses as at the end of the Bronze age – is unlikely. That social technology is too widely known and too well understood. However, we are losing, have lost, the scientific revolution and the scientific method. In place of Nullius in Verba, we are now required to believe in the scientific consensus established behind closed doors on the basis of secret evidence. Reflect for example on the endless and generally unsuccessful lawsuits attempting to get the Universities to reveal the evidence for Anthropogenic Global Warming, even though all the older journals have rules theoretically in place requiring full data and evidence for any published article to made available. Double entry accounting is under attack, with Sarbannes Oxley replacing accounts that reflect reality, with accounts that reflect official reality.
We have also lost the important reproductive technology of marriage -that a man and a woman could make a contract to stick together and raise their children, and be socially and legally forced to stick to it. The concept of marital rape – that the thought seems meaningful, that the concept exists, is incompatible with the existence of marriage as marriage has been understood for the past few thousand years. If either party may withhold sex or reproductive sex at any time for any reason or no reason, then either party may cancel the marriage at any time for any reason or no reason, which is a profound deterrent to having children.
Patriarchy is also necessary for marriage. If one person does not have final authority over the household, you don’t have one household.
Without marriage, marriage as it was understood up to 1950 or so, whites are not going to successfully reproduce.
Before 1972, not only was “marital rape” legal, but people had difficulty understanding what feminists were talking about – the combination of words made no sense to most people. Feminists had to talk around the topic in long winded ways. Legally the right of a man to compel his wife to perform her marital duty had been quietly abolished early in the nineteenth century, but socially, people continued to pretty much take it for granted until the nineteen seventies.