Q: “Why Is Western Civilization the Only One Worthy of Leading Humanity?”

Q: Why is Western civilization the only one worthy of leading humanity?

I understand the question, but it is framed incorrectly. Let’s try to reframe it.

If we mean lead as rule or govern, that’s clearly false. It’s clearly false because the indo Europeans disappeared whenever they tried to rule other peoples, rather than decimate and integrate, or exterminate and replace them. The reason being that the cost to Indo Europeans (“Aryans”) of transforming large populations such was tried by the Hittites in anatolia (1600bc), the indo-iranics in India (1500bc), the iranic-Persians in the middle east (~1500bc), all resulted in their eventual reverse-conquest by the majority peoples. The Indian subcontinent (the Indus valley civilization and the Indian subcontinent) and the eastern middle east (Iran, the South-Caucuses, and eastern Anatolia), and especially Mesopotamia, were developed civilizations with long religious histories and large populations. We saw the same consequences for the Spanish in South America, and we are seeing the same problem with the south American recolonization and repopulation of North America – now 20% of our population, and within a few generations half of it.

Whereas the western Indo-Europeans (European Aryans) did not enter more mature territories with dense populations evolved from river-irrigation systems separated by arid ‘seas’ of near-desert. Instead, the early european farmers had migrated from Anatolia, across the Mediterranean, up the Atlantic coast, created the monolith civilization, and then moved eastward again reaching today’s Poland, producing a set of relatively sedentary low density, farms. And when the new West Indo-Europeans (Aryans) arrived, they appear to have killed most of the men, kept the women, animals, land, and tools, then bred with the women at a ratio of something on the order of 17 women to one man – thereby largely replaced the population. In the island of Britain nearly completely replacing the population. Note the parallel with the european conquest of the Americas. These Aryan conquerors spread westward in horizontal bands, founding the Italic, Celtic, Germanic, North Germanic (Scandinavian), Baltic, and Slavic Peoples. Note the parallel with the cultural bands across North America that still reflect the origins of the British, Scotts-Irish, Germans, and French who settled there. Or the (unfortunate) change in New England by the massive immigration of catholic Italians and Irish, and finally Eastern European Jews.

Instead of lead as in rule, if we mean are Europeans the only ones worthing of providing mankind with leadership by which we mean discover opportunities other civilizations can benefit from, then only western civilization has led, and can lead, humanity into transcendence over the limitations of the physical, natural and evolutionary laws, and into a future where we are not under constant threat of extinction by human, as well as natural, geological, solar, and galactic forces that are all but hostile to life.

If we instead or also mean “lead” as in preventing harm to humanity by revolutionary ideas, ideologies, philosophies, religions, states, and peoples, then that is also possibly true – it’s just profoundly costly and risky, as we have found in the past century and a half.

A better framing then, is that western civilization’s primary value to mankind is our rapidity of adaptation, innovation, and evolution, because Europeans and only Europeans and perhaps east Asians, are willing to pay the high cost of rapid adaptation, innovation, and evolution, and that is in part because we are the only people to have institutions that both facilitate that rapidity in the middle and upper classes who are stressed by creating that continuous change, as well as sedate the stresses of that rapid adaptation in the lower middle and lower classes who are stressed by that continuous change.

A worse framing is that, given that all other civilizations failed to pay the high costs of discovery, adaptation to, and application of the physical, natural, and evolutionary laws of the universe, and that in the absence of western civilization humanity might have, and still might, have failed to pass The Great Filter. So one position is to say Europeans are more useful to mankind than the rest, and the other is to say we are the only use to mankind. And this utility is more obvious once we study the geological record, and grasp that man evolved rather quickly due to a very brief, natural, geological, solar, and galactic time period, and that we do not have an endless amount of time to develop mastery of our future – if we are to have one.

So the question is why? Why are europeans uniquely suited to lead by example, and defend ourselves, mankind, and the future.


“We Calculate The Continuous Possibility of the Future”. Because we Pay the Costs Other Civilizations Can’t Pay or Even Imagine Paying: Truth Regardless of Cost, Duty Regardless of Cost, Commons Regardless of Cost, Adaptation Regardless of Cost, Evolution Regardless of Cost, where The Only Solution to internal Conflict is a Superior Solution.


For historical reasons that cannot be duplicated, Europeans uniquely organized the entire society as a militia (voluntary) army, protecting large herds and territories, conducting entrepreneurial (voluntary) maneuver warfare, using horse, bronze, and wheel. The demands of this social organization caused Europeans to develop institutions differently from other civilizations. As such Europeans developed the institutions of self-determination (individual sovereignty), the militia (army), and rule of law by tort law (property) before the institutions of either religion or state.

The combination of technical epistemology(metallurgy, horse domestication, chariot) and military epistemology (unforgiving), military ‘reporting’ (just the facts, regardless of cost to the status hierarchy), and testimony before peers using this form of military reporting (empirical testimony), created the european cognitive framework, language, norms, traditions, and institutions, dependent upon testimony, oath, and reciprocity: realism (material existence), naturalism (causes), and operationalism (action).

Their military success created a tradition of heroism (for the common good), converted them from agrarian mythology to, the primacy of man, the self-determination of man, and the ability of man to compete with if not defeat the gods (archetypes).

Their law of individual self-determination, individual sovereignty, left the only means of action possible as reciprocity, including reciprocity in speech, left only markets (voluntary associations) for association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons (government), polities, alliances, and war. Or conversely, their universal militia, of relatively equal professional warriors financed by families and clans, left no alternative other than rule of law of tort (property) as the means of self-organization (political order). As such General, King and Judge are functional synonyms.

They then conquered and ruled agrarian peoples (from the Anatolian expansion) and domesticated (whether they killed, ruled, enfranchised, enserfed, or enslaved) man for profit the way that they had domesticated themselves, cattle, and horses.

With this metaphysics of naturalism, operationalism, the primacy of man, of discovery rather than regularity or cyclicality, of continuous adversarialism (competition) in all walks of life, demonstrating one’s excellence (heroism), Europeans converted the entire civilization into the continuous calculation by trial and error of evolution of man at the fastest pace possible.

So Europeans have been fastest (if fragile) even if not first. This is the secret to european genetic, cognitive, cultural, institutional, and military superiority: the application of maneuver to all walks of life, creating rapid innovation and adaptation as the group’s evolutionary strategy. It’s not a secret why Europeans use the OODA loop in war – it’s what we have always used in every aspect of life.

While other civilizations sought to avoid adapting to physical, natural, and evolutionary laws. Europeans discovered, adapted to, and applied the laws of the universe: the physical, natural, and evolutionary laws. Over 98% of discoveries were made by Europeans for these reasons. And in just a few hundred years prior to the bronze age collapse; in just a few centuries before the Semitic Dark Ages of Ignorance (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) sought to reverse those advances. But once Aristotle and literacy were restored to Europe, Europeans created the revolutions we call empirical, literacy, agrarian, commercial, financial, scientific, technological and biological, in just a few centuries in the modern world.

But just as the Jews invented Christianity in the ancient world, the Jews invented Marxism, socialism, postmodernism, and feminism and sought to reverse those modern advances by the false promise of freedom from physical scarcity (marxism, communism, socialism), reciprocity (positive law, social democracy), evolution (feminism, market eugenics, regression to the mean). Just as they had used the false promise of life after death in the ancient world for the same reasons: to undermine and reverse european (and Persia, and Chinese, and Indian) innovations.

Europe was able to recover from the dark ages because while ‘intellectual’ (clerical) thought had abandoned european tradition and adopted Semitic supernaturalism, the military aristocracy, the law, and to some degree the majority of people outside the urban centers, retained european (west indo european) traditions. So when Aristotle was restored, our intellectual and legal and technological traditions were re-harmonized. And we are still in the process of re-harmonizing religion (if that will ever be possible I am uncertain.).

However, the postwar jewish program to undermine western civlization, by repeating bolshevism here, by repeating christianity in the ancient world, and be repeating judiasm’s hostility to empires in the egyptian and mesopotamian eras, has been successful in this age for the same reasons it was successful in those previous two ages: because there are large numbers of peole readily willing to fall for the false promise of freedom from physical, natural, and evolutionary laws, and the high costs of doing so, by claiming thaat ruling empires oppress them rather than defend mankind against those who destroy civlization from wihin by hyperreproduction, hyperconsumption, and the consumption of all surpluses so that proceeds cannot be directed to the production of capitalizing commns that produce returns for all over generations.


There are terrifying lessons here:

  1. Only Europeans managed to develop law and rule of law of reciprocity in demonstrated interests, as their first institution, preventing ‘authority’, that produces stagnation.
  2. Only Europeans managed to institutionalize military reporting, court testimony, and church ‘confession’ as ‘truth before face regardless of cost’, and that’s why only Europeans had (until 1960) a high trust truth first civilization. (the Japanese and Koreans are close).
  3. Only Europeans managed to develop and maintain a military (militia, army) of everyone, under entrepreneurial warfare, so that status was available to anyone who demonstrated investment in the community – causing competition for enfranchisement by demonstrated investment (at risk) in the community.
  4. Only Europeans managed to develop evolutionary order using Adversarialsim (demonstrated competitive advantage), realism( Realism, Naturalism, Operationalism, Testimonialism), Natural Law (rule of law by test of reciprocity) and markets in everything, and a non-static, no- regressive worldview (metaphysics).
  5. Only Europeans and East Asians managed to institutionalize agrarian eugenics (suppression of underclass reproduction), and the resulting expansion of the genetic-middle class. This combination of law first (Europe) and state first (china) military orders, in homogenous polities, or at least, polities that were ethnically close enough to integrate, and the suppression of reproduction are necessary to reduce the drag on civilization by the underclasses.
  6. In this sense – which again is terrifying – all other civilizations failed. All other civilizations sought to escape physical natural and evolutionary laws. All others either disappeared. Or declined. Or stagnated. Worse, the most effective political system in the world – Islam is antithetical to human progress. It destroyed the genetics, knowledge, arts, institutions, traditions, and cultures – everything- in five great civilizations. As first the Arabs peaked and failed, then the Mongols, then the Turks. The Indians are interesting but they developed healthy religion, weak states, and weak law. In other words. It is extremely easy for life to fail to pass thru the great filter. And at present, the current threat is that the eugenicists were right.
  7. We see the inability to adopt european ‘sensemaking’ across the world. We see it in programmers, in scientists, in authors, in every civilization – outside of Europeans, academic works are imitations of academic work. We see it in Einstein and Bohr vs Hilbert and Brouwer. We see it everywhere. We see it in Jewish jurists and anglo jurists. We see it in Jewish economists and anglo economists.
  8. What is that european sense-making: the reduction of answers to all questions to material first causes under realism, naturalism, operationalism, and reciprocity in display word and deed – and not to desirability. Europeans solve for true, then try to create desirable circumstances based upon that truth. In other words, europeans pay all costs.


So we can choose: To disappear. To defend ourselves rather than lead. To lead oursleves rather than others. To lead ourselves, and others by example. To lead ourselves and ‘sell our services of rule’ to others, whle maintaining home territories. To lead by example while maintaining defense of mankind. Or lead by rule, example, and defense of mankind. Or lead by extermination of resistance in mankind. And the question is which of those choices is possible given the costs involved, our resouces, and our numbers? There are three choices that are not suicidal, and we can achieve, and that we can achieve without disappearing into the peole ruled: To lead ourselves, insulate ourselves, and not lead others; or to lead our elves, and others by example; or to lead by the gradual extermination of resistance in mankind.

So it’s not that Europeans must ‘lead’ it’s more that Europeans must remain and compete since all other civilizations are adopting our technology but are in the process of regressing to pre-European colonial organization – by whatever institutions that they had before.

Their weakness, which is why the Hittites, Spartans, and Romans are lost to us, is that domestication of the population worked exclusively in from their own numbers, and achieved scale only northern Europe, because the numbers of the aristocracy do not scale. As such the only solution is to enfranchise the middle, and eliminate, enslave, enserf, or religiously domesticate (Christianity) the peasantry.

So Greece overextended into territories with vast underclasses (the middle east), Rome repeated the mistake. The Europeans decimated the Americas temporarily limiting the problem. But the postwar Jewish program to undermine western civilization from within by marxism, neo-marxism, postmodernism, feminism, human difference denialism, and saturation of the population with self-hatred of their history was successful – if only because immigration and the defection of single european women was enough to end intergenerational transmission of those traditions of western civilization. (just as the Jewish Christians had done to Rome.)


Europeans: Europeans move fast, and like Rome seek to ‘mature’ ruled (colonized) people into market participants.

China: China moves slowly and seeks to genetically culturally and institutionally transform genetic near neighbors into pseudo-Han. The Han ruling peoples have been exceptionally successful. Second only to Islam. With beneficial rather than Islam’s catastrophic consequences. China’s problem is limited to face-before-truth, failure to develop rule of law, the corruption that results, and Chinese disregard for human life, as well as irresponsibility for others and commons that results. Chinese developed the state and bureaucracy as their first institution. So Confucius directed all Chinese to focus on the family and harmony and Sun Tzu to “delay and deceive” and the Chinese have formalized those three strategies – and they understand they are using them. They have zero tolerance for ‘internal conflict or competition’, zero tolerance for ‘un-Chinese’, and are just as racist as Indians and Jews. This is the optimum strategy for expansion over time at the cost of innovation.

Russians: The Russians have tried to copy the Chinese strategy, albeit defensively, first by reversal of the Mongol conquest Russia, then through the Russian expansion, then through the soviet expansion, and now through the Russian re-expansion (Belarus, Ukraine, and maybe more).

Judaism/Islam: Islam raids until collapse, then colonizes from the bottom up using religion. Judaism undermines from the top down. Christianity (oddly enough) prepares people for market society (treating all others as customers, with exhaustive forgiveness).

Judaism: The Jews seek to undermine host people’s group cohesion under the auspices of making the world safe for jews – but the result is making the world safe for Islam. They seek to destroy european martial tradition, masculinity, meritocracy, capitalization of commons, truthful reciprocal speech, dependent upon realism and naturalism, and limited to physical (scarcity), natural (reciprocity), and evolutionary (regression to the mean) laws.

India: India will continue to pursue ethnonationalism in order to prevent further increase in the cancer of islam.

Japanese Korean: Ethnonationalism, and yes, pre-Marxist Germanosphere and Anglosphere were on parallel with the Japanese and Korean.

Leave a Reply