WHAT CONSTITUTES “ETHICS” AND WHAT MAKES CERTAIN ETHICAL STATEMENTS UNIVERSAL?
—” what constitutes ethics and what makes certain ethical values it universal?”—
[C]ooperation (forgoing opportunity to use violence) is non logical under conditions of parasitism, imposed costs, or free riding. Voluntary exchange is only rational if mutually productive, and free of negative externality.
Now, if one exists in a tribal family structure (say levantine or arabic) or in an outbred family structure (northern Europe), whether one is ‘free riding’ on whom may constitute different ethical preferences. One group may prefer a less moral and ethical society, and another may prefer a more moral and ethical society. In other words, in a low-trust in-bred polity (Jews, gypsies, arabs) one is expected to act on behalf of the family at all costs. (See Banfield’s The Moral Basis of a Backward Society). However, this inbreeding is a reproductive strategy. (See Emmanuel Todd) Just as jewish and Gypsy near breeding is a reproductive strategy. (See Macdonald) These groups practice dual ethical systems: high trust-in-group and low-trust out-group. Only northern europeans, who practice the absolute nuclear family, evolved high trust ethics – a total prohibition on parasitism, imposed costs, and free riding. Because only northern Europeans succeeded in breaking the family and tribal fealties through manorialism, outbreeding and property rights. It was an economic advantage for westerners to develop universalism. But that universalism independent of separatism, is uncompetitive.
Ethical rules are universal. We choose a m ore ethical society or a less ethical society given the diversity or heterogeneity of the population.
(Period. End of Argument. Much to the displeasure of many.)
Curt Doolittle
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev Ukraine
