{"id":90948,"date":"2024-08-09T04:00:16","date_gmt":"2024-08-09T08:00:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/?p=90948"},"modified":"2024-08-08T17:16:58","modified_gmt":"2024-08-08T21:16:58","slug":"domicidal-maniacs-in-charge","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/2024\/08\/09\/domicidal-maniacs-in-charge\/","title":{"rendered":"Domicidal maniacs in charge"},"content":{"rendered":"

Lorenzo Warby<\/a> provides an oh-so-useful word to accurately capture what the diversity-at-all-costs elites running most western countries these days are actually up to<\/em>:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Domicide<\/a> is the destruction of home. It comes in the “hard” version \u2014 the physical destruction of houses and infrastructure.<\/p>\n

Domicide also comes in a “soft” version \u2014 flooding localities with new people, separating people from, and otherwise degrading, their heritage. When folk say Britain is becoming “unrecognisable”, it is the domicidal effect of mass migration they are referring to.<\/p>\n

The UK is suffering from a domicidal elite, one that uses mass migration to break up working-class communities; asymmetric multiculturalism to elevate incoming cultures over those of native English (the Celtic fringe get minority brownie points); favours non-“white” faces in advertising; asymmetric race-swapping in entertainment against the native English; denigration of British history as racist, white supremacist, imperialist, colonialist, etc.<\/p>\n

Much of this is insulting virtue-signalling allied to, or presenting, cartoonish (simplified) and caricature (distorted) history. It all undermines social cohesion. But it is the use of migration policy as a systematic weapon against the resident working class which does the most damage. Though two-tier policing \u2014 obviously treating Muslims in particular with a deference not shown to the natives, especially when it comes to policing speech \u2014 is also highly corrosive of social cohesion.<\/p>\n

Many working-class communities in Britain were already fairly dysfunctional \u2014 though the British state is not innocent in those dysfunctions1<\/sup> \u2014 and sections of the British working class are very far from admirable. None of this justifies the use of mass migration to make things worse for such folk, however much it may help to explain the moralised class contempt that underlies so much of modern progressivism and modern managerialism.<\/p>\n

To improve such things, to “level up”, requires a strong sense of how to create and maintain social order. Modern progressivism is strongly antipathetic to such understanding. To “level up” also requires a strong sense of custodianship, which managerialism typically lacks: particularly progressivist managerialism.<\/p>\n

Indeed, modern feminist, progressivist, managerialism\u2014in its lack of custodianship; lack of social solidarity;2<\/sup> in its antipathy to taking the problems of social order seriously \u2014 is running the British state into the ground. The post-medieval British aristocratic and mercantile elite did a much better job of state management. But those elites had mechanisms \u2014 such as duelling, that forced men to defend their reputation at the risk of their life, and grand country houses, that turned into expensive investments in social isolation if you behaved badly \u2014 that selected for character.<\/p>\n

Nowadays, the British elite only selects for capacity and even that is being degraded by DEI undermining the signals of competence. It turns out, over the longer term, character matters more than capacity. For capacity without character selects for manipulative, anti-social personalities that degrade institutions over time.<\/p>\n

\n