"But ironically, better execution of this at a small-unit level, such as a clan, makes it difficult to execute this at a large-unit level."
I think you're essentially referencing how multi-level selection (MLS) works. The body doesn't want its heart doing its own thing, rebelling against the body's needs. The corporation doesn't want its Des Moines sales office to be too independent. A nation doesn't want each city to go off and do their own thing
The higher level organization (body, corporation, nation) functions better when the parts align their actions to the higher goals. If survival depends on the success of that higher level, i.e., if the corporation goes bankrupt then the Des Moines sales team loses their jobs, then higher level entities that keep their parts in line will have longer term success
I don't mean this in an exclusive sense. There are other models, but you see this one repeated over and over.
If a Somali tribe wanted greater long term wealth and security (for instance), it probably has to subordinate some of its desires to a larger, more internationally competitive organization
But will other values important to the West continue to thrive?
It’s like self-loathing, despair: these are ultimately sins of pride, so I have been told.
There is something similar at work in an eagerness to pre-emptively jettison Western civ because “Somalis et al are so strong, look at how boldly and well they defraud” …
Maybe so but they are parasitic, and if they’ve come up with anything worth preserving, I’ve not heard of it.
You might just as well have said the same thing about Arabs, how marvelous they are in their fierce ethnic or gang-like loyalty, the day after 9/11 ….
There can be an element of truth in all this without pretending the last several thousand years of history didn’t happen, and that out of it all the West furnished, or when it didn’t furnish, frequently adopted and adapted many worthwhile ideas which by rights the rest of the world should take at least as much interest in, as the West does in scrutinizing other cultures for their small signs of success.
I was reading about the Dowayo people the other day.
And thinking: the West should study *them*. They were independent, not very numerous, had developed some way to keep their population in balance all this time. (Whether this has been overturned and destroyed by the utopians of the West, I don’t know; it was not a recent book.)
How did they do this?
Even when the left looks at Africa, it mistakes what success really looks like.
Yes, the west generally does that and tribal cultures like the somalis generally don't. Fortunate for us, not so much for them, though there's something to be said for the camaraderie of the stronger and typically longer lasting family bonds of tribal cultures.
What Mir describes as “engagement avoidance” is actually a far deeper concept. Tending to one’s garden (i.e. focusing solely on matters within one’s sphere of influence and ignoring the rest) is an excellent source for happiness and tranquility. For example, what is the latest Current Thing in the news? I actually have no clue, but I’m reasonably certain from previous experience that I wouldn’t be any happier or productive as a parent and husband by knowing about it.
My personal rule regarding modern media is that if you read the headline for an article and a logical reaction you or some other sane person could/would have upon reading it is to say to yourself "Argh. That damn [person or thing named in the headline]!!!!" then you should not bother reading the article. It works pretty well.
I just accessed google news to see what might be of importance in the world. Apparently, someone who must be very important, has a missing mom. What am I to make of this? Should I click through?
I see an apparent contradiction in what you say. I point it out not in disagreement but to not that I don't fully understand.
I agree that clan rule is inherently faulty for complex, robust, large society to function at its best. But you previously pointed out how our non-clan-based society is also misfiring via radicalization of a large group who have hijacked the dominant "shared understanding." Is this an anomaly? Is it a temporary event that will hopefully soon pass? Is it relatively minor compared to clan-based societal ills?
See my other comment that I wrote without seeing yours. Sorry
But I don't think you should think of this as an anomaly so much as just recognizing that the world is very complex, there are lots of things pulling groups in different directions, and no approach solves all problems
"But ironically, better execution of this at a small-unit level, such as a clan, makes it difficult to execute this at a large-unit level."
I think you're essentially referencing how multi-level selection (MLS) works. The body doesn't want its heart doing its own thing, rebelling against the body's needs. The corporation doesn't want its Des Moines sales office to be too independent. A nation doesn't want each city to go off and do their own thing
The higher level organization (body, corporation, nation) functions better when the parts align their actions to the higher goals. If survival depends on the success of that higher level, i.e., if the corporation goes bankrupt then the Des Moines sales team loses their jobs, then higher level entities that keep their parts in line will have longer term success
I don't mean this in an exclusive sense. There are other models, but you see this one repeated over and over.
If a Somali tribe wanted greater long term wealth and security (for instance), it probably has to subordinate some of its desires to a larger, more internationally competitive organization
Somalis might continue to exist when the West has ceased to be.
Inter-clan conflicts are nothing new and nothing to be freaked of. They were in Scotland, everywhere else in Europe and Asia.
But will other values important to the West continue to thrive?
It’s like self-loathing, despair: these are ultimately sins of pride, so I have been told.
There is something similar at work in an eagerness to pre-emptively jettison Western civ because “Somalis et al are so strong, look at how boldly and well they defraud” …
Maybe so but they are parasitic, and if they’ve come up with anything worth preserving, I’ve not heard of it.
You might just as well have said the same thing about Arabs, how marvelous they are in their fierce ethnic or gang-like loyalty, the day after 9/11 ….
There can be an element of truth in all this without pretending the last several thousand years of history didn’t happen, and that out of it all the West furnished, or when it didn’t furnish, frequently adopted and adapted many worthwhile ideas which by rights the rest of the world should take at least as much interest in, as the West does in scrutinizing other cultures for their small signs of success.
I was reading about the Dowayo people the other day.
And thinking: the West should study *them*. They were independent, not very numerous, had developed some way to keep their population in balance all this time. (Whether this has been overturned and destroyed by the utopians of the West, I don’t know; it was not a recent book.)
How did they do this?
Even when the left looks at Africa, it mistakes what success really looks like.
Yes, the west generally does that and tribal cultures like the somalis generally don't. Fortunate for us, not so much for them, though there's something to be said for the camaraderie of the stronger and typically longer lasting family bonds of tribal cultures.
Dan Williams has earned my official "Underrated" designation.
"a modern nation-state cannot be built on tribal loyalty"
But can it be built on no loyalty? On pure self-interest alone, however enlightened it may be?
"Il faut cultiver notre jardin"
- Voltaire’s closing line from Candide
What Mir describes as “engagement avoidance” is actually a far deeper concept. Tending to one’s garden (i.e. focusing solely on matters within one’s sphere of influence and ignoring the rest) is an excellent source for happiness and tranquility. For example, what is the latest Current Thing in the news? I actually have no clue, but I’m reasonably certain from previous experience that I wouldn’t be any happier or productive as a parent and husband by knowing about it.
First published in 1759. Is European Buddhism a thing?
My personal rule regarding modern media is that if you read the headline for an article and a logical reaction you or some other sane person could/would have upon reading it is to say to yourself "Argh. That damn [person or thing named in the headline]!!!!" then you should not bother reading the article. It works pretty well.
I just accessed google news to see what might be of importance in the world. Apparently, someone who must be very important, has a missing mom. What am I to make of this? Should I click through?
That damn missing mom!
I’m sure that Keith Morrison will be all over it once he finally solves the case of the purported mugging of Arnold Kling back in 2024.
https://arnoldkling.substack.com/p/a-libertarian-gets-mugged
Possibly relevant to the marriage gap—see Figure 3: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/rsos/article/13/2/251428/479919/A-new-measure-of-issue-polarization-using-k-means
I see an apparent contradiction in what you say. I point it out not in disagreement but to not that I don't fully understand.
I agree that clan rule is inherently faulty for complex, robust, large society to function at its best. But you previously pointed out how our non-clan-based society is also misfiring via radicalization of a large group who have hijacked the dominant "shared understanding." Is this an anomaly? Is it a temporary event that will hopefully soon pass? Is it relatively minor compared to clan-based societal ills?
See my other comment that I wrote without seeing yours. Sorry
But I don't think you should think of this as an anomaly so much as just recognizing that the world is very complex, there are lots of things pulling groups in different directions, and no approach solves all problems