The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters - PREVIEW： Brokenomics ｜ Woke Eugenics by Ed Dutton

00:00:00.620 Hello and welcome to Brokernomics. Now, I have been incredibly fortunate on this show to have 0.99

00:00:06.120 some superb guests and quite a lot of them have been writers because of course, you know,

00:00:10.460 writers, you know, if they're good at thinking, they're probably good at writing and they do

00:00:14.260 that kind of stuff. And I always read some of their books, but some of them I get quite

00:00:17.760 hooked on. And one of them in particular has written quite a lot of books and they're really

00:00:22.520 good. They're really conversational. They're full of interesting stuff. So I've been on

00:00:26.840 a bit of a bender working through all these books. And I got to one of them, which is 0.99

00:00:32.160 this one. And I started to realise that it's absolutely sort of jam-packed with good news.

00:00:37.660 I mean, this is, well, this is encouraging, this is. And you guys in the comments, you're

00:00:42.860 always saying to me, Dan, give us some white pills, give us some good news. So I thought,

00:00:46.620 right, I'm definitely going to have to cover this book. I'm going to do a book review on

00:00:50.340 it. And maybe the author might be so kind to come on. So I popped him a question. He's

00:00:54.640 very kindly agreed to come on. So the book that I'm talking about is Woke Eugenics. And

00:01:00.560 the author is, of course, Ed Dutton. Ed, thank you very much for coming on.

00:01:04.560 Hello. It's good to see you again, again.

00:01:06.760 Yes, absolutely. Well, thank you very much for taking time out of, you know, your busy

00:01:12.400 Finnish evening of yodeling and sauntering and, you know, whatever else.

00:01:16.460 Yeah, I've been jogging. That's why I'm looking at it. I've just been jogging.

00:01:20.780 Right. Well, yes, but you've got to keep yourself in shape.

00:01:24.380 You've got to keep yourself in shape for the winter, for the winter, where there's no

00:01:27.540 life. Right. So rather than me butchering it, maybe you should explain to me, why did

00:01:33.740 I read this and get so excited? What's all the good news about that?

00:01:37.000 The essence of it is that wokeness is not that we, on the right, it's become a cliche

00:01:42.800 that we criticise wokeness. A lot of GB news and whatever is focused on making fun of

00:01:48.580 wokeness and so on. And my argument is that maybe we should have a more sympathetic attitude

00:01:53.020 towards wokeness. Maybe, in fact, we should be woke ourselves. Maybe people that are woke

00:01:58.500 are actually crypto nationalists that are trying to bring about a better, conservative, brighter,

00:02:04.920 more reasonable, more traditional future. Because the argument in the book is that wokeness

00:02:11.120 is basically a kind of a selection event. In essence, what wokeness does is it takes all

00:02:18.600 but those who are extremely genetically healthy. And being genetically healthy, physically healthy,

00:02:25.660 correlates with being genetically mentally healthy, with being genetically conservative,

00:02:32.180 with being genetically religious. These are all highly genetic or significantly genetic.

00:02:35.740 And with being ethnocentric, let's say group oriented, positively ethnocentric, oriented

00:02:41.320 towards a group negatively, ethnocentric, propelling the outsider. These things all cluster together

00:02:45.200 into a kind of a fitness factor. And what wokeness does is it takes everybody who is not genetically

00:02:52.980 resistant to it, to these anti-conservative ideas, and it really kind of induces them, in the case

00:03:00.420 of the more intelligent ones, to not have children. So those people, people who are

00:03:05.300 intelligent, but also genetically liberal, and this is associated with poor genetic health,

00:03:11.500 mental health and physical health, they are removed from the gene pool. So among the more

00:03:16.720 intelligent, therefore, what you have is an ethnic group that remains that is going to be the same 0.71

00:03:22.620 as the people that were before the Industrial Revolution, when harsh Darwinian conditions were

00:03:28.020 impactful, and when the child mortality rate was 50% rather than 1%. And what it does to those who are

00:03:35.080 low in intelligence, and people who are low in intelligence are people who are, that's

00:03:39.460 associated, again, with poor genetic, mental and physical health and so forth, those people are

00:03:43.740 induced by wokeness to essentially resign from the English group or the European group or whatever.

00:03:49.680 They miscegenate. They become part of the growing, we've got good evidence for that,

00:03:53.500 who does that, of the growing non-British, non-whatever, non-European group. And so what you are left with

00:04:01.020 then is a European remnant group that is going to be highly conservative, highly ethnocentric,

00:04:07.260 highly group-oriented, and is able to combat other groups in harsh group-oriented conditions.

00:04:14.760 The second thing wokeness does is it collapses civilization. It helps to bring about, it induces 1.00

00:04:23.280 people, particularly more intelligent people, because it creates this evolutionary mismatch where

00:04:28.140 you're surrounded by foreigners and there's dysphoria and whatever, and it doesn't promote

00:04:32.340 the best, and it just basically encourages intelligent people not to have children through

00:04:36.700 materialism and so on. It therefore collapses civilization back towards harsh Darwinian levels,

00:04:43.380 which again makes us genetically healthier. And the third thing that it does, and this is very

00:04:49.280 important, is that the species must, what the species cares about in evolutionary terms is staying

00:04:56.020 healthy across time. That's what, that's, that's crucial. It's surviving. That's what Darwin,

00:05:01.920 Darwin's cares about. At the group level. Not, yeah, not the civilization who cares about that. That's just a

00:05:07.400 function of certain evolutionary pressures. It's surviving across time. So that when the

00:05:13.320 next comet hits and wipes out civilization, like Comet Enk that wiped out, that probably wiped out

00:05:19.480 civilization in 10,000 BC and probably did it again many times before, many times since, when that

00:05:24.540 happens, if the group is totally unhealthy and deracinated, the whole species dies out. But what

00:05:30.600 wokeness is ensuring is that the species is being forced back to genetic health. Because all those who are 1.00

00:05:39.720 not highly genetically healthy are being induced via wokeness, via the runaway virtue signaling,

00:05:46.060 where therefore you do things for the good of other groups or whatever.

00:05:49.260 So if I'm understanding this, if I'm understanding this correctly, it doesn't make us all healthy. It

00:05:54.420 makes most of us much less healthy, but it forces a certain group to become more healthy. And that's the

00:06:01.800 group that survives the event. In a context in which people are very, very, very genetically unhealthy, 0.78

00:06:07.680 which they are, it is being genetically unhealthy that is associated with being woke. People who are

00:06:15.180 genetically highly healthy will be also religious and conservative for genetic reasons, because these

00:06:21.360 things all bundle together, things that are genetically selected for all bundled together, and therefore

00:06:25.300 they will be resistant to wokeness. And therefore what wokeness does is it indoctrinates those who are not,

00:06:31.020 who are anything other than extremely genetically healthy and conservative and religious to not have

00:06:36.660 children. And therefore they are removed from the gene pool. And therefore all that is left is this highly

00:06:43.440 ethnocentric, conservative, religious, mentally and physically healthy population, which is able to survive in the

00:06:51.980 group selection battle of harsh Darwinian conditions, which wokeness also brings about because it brings down

00:06:57.380 civilisation by encouraging intelligent people not to have children. And then as a whole, this group will be able

00:07:03.020 to survive the next time there is a catastrophe, which there inevitably will be. As such, wokeness is a selection

00:07:10.460 event and indeed a crucial selection event, which helps us, helps our group, the English, helps our race, the European, and helps our species to ultimately survive.

00:07:22.020 Okay, so there's fascinating stuff there. And there's so much that I want to pick up on. And, you know, one of them is, and maybe we

00:07:30.500 come back to this, it's the whole idea that actually, the these genetic events precede social change, not the other way

00:07:38.880 around, which is something. But before we do, can I go slightly sideways and ask you about the gaze? Because there was this

00:07:45.180 absolutely fascinating bit in here, because I always assumed from, from a, from an evolutionary perspective, 0.96

00:07:51.040 that, you know, if you were, if you declined the vagina, you would, you would not be having children 0.99

00:07:58.220 passing on your genes. So that was just, that was just a sort of a hard stop, right? But you've got a bit 0.98

00:08:05.340 in here. Well, first of all, first of all, a few pages before you explaining how, how, if you look at these

00:08:09.600 things at the group level. So, so for example, it makes sense for an aunt and uncle to, to raise

00:08:15.180 their, their nieces or nephews, you know, if something should happen to the parent on the

00:08:19.380 reason being that your nieces and nephews, they share 25% of your genes. And yes, it's not 50%

00:08:24.900 like your own children, but 25% is still not bad. So therefore, you know, if you look at these

00:08:29.740 things at a group, even if you don't have children yourself, caring for the group, still get those

00:08:36.280 genes passed on. So I got that bit. That made perfect sense. And then, and a few pages later,

00:08:40.980 you talk about, it has been suggested that a low level of homosexuality may be adaptive for the 0.78

00:08:46.320 group because it leads a cast of men who do not have children and therefore funnel their energies

00:08:51.800 into activities, which is useful for the group. I thought that was fascinating. Yes. This may well be

00:08:58.320 the case. Yes. But it has to, it has to be in a context of homophobia. So if you have, if you have

00:09:04.200 people who are sexually attracted to people of their own sex, and it is utterly unacceptable for

00:09:10.940 them to have sexual relationships with people of their own sex, then the argument is, and there is

00:09:17.080 some experimental data for this, that if you suppress your sexuality, you will, it's a very

00:09:23.780 Freudian, but it seems to be true, then you will funnel that energy into something else. And what that

00:09:30.220 will normally, that could be art. And there was, there was some novelist, I forget his name. Every

00:09:35.200 time he had sex, he used to say, oh God, there goes another novel. A French novelist. And that sort 0.98

00:09:42.880 of thing. And so that's, that's the argument. They'll have this sexual energy, but they won't be

00:09:47.600 able to express it. And so therefore it will be pushed into some group selected work, whether it is

00:09:53.800 genius, and there's elevated levels of homosexuality among scientific geniuses and people like that, 0.90

00:09:58.340 or whether it's being a shaman or a priest. And there's anthropological evidence that these

00:10:02.740 shamans are often highly effeminate. And so they're, they're passing on their genes at an 1.00

00:10:07.480 extended level. And it makes sense because if you look at Frank Salter's research in his book

00:10:11.440 on genetic interests, if you divide the world between, if the world is just English and just

00:10:17.220 Danes, then the random English person compared to another random English person is the seventh 0.93

00:10:21.500 cousin. So, yes. And what that means in real terms is that if he prevented 20 English people from being

00:10:32.940 killed by 20 Danes, that would be the equivalent of him have preserving one child. 0.88

00:10:40.700 Okay. Now, if it, the, the, the more genetically distant the interloper is, the fewer, the fewer

00:10:46.700 other things are in, are in, are involved. So if he, if it was, if he prevented four, uh, Japanese

00:10:52.780 people from replacing four English people, that would also be one child because of the genetic 0.96

00:10:58.780 distance.

00:10:59.020 Well, hang on, that's, that's a big, going from, so you went from a thousand to four.

00:11:02.740 I went from 20 to four.

00:11:04.760 Oh, 20, 20, 20, 20 to four. Because, well, presumably.

00:11:08.400 Because the genetic similarity between English and Danes is much higher than between English

00:11:13.580 and Japanese. Because I might reasonably expect to share a common ancestor with a Dane somewhere

00:11:19.180 in the middle ages or something. Whereas with a Japanese person, it could be, well, a hell 1.00

00:11:23.220 of a lot longer. It would be 40,000 years ago. Whereas, whereas with a Dane, it would, yeah, 0.99

00:11:28.200 it would be probably at least a thousand years ago. So that's the difference.

00:11:31.940 Right. Okay. So, so on, on the, on the homosexuality thing, it's, it is, it is group positive because

00:11:39.300 you take all of this sexual energy that would normally be spent, you know, running around

00:11:43.180 nightclubs and, or, you know, whatever. And, and you put it into your mathematics or whatever.

00:11:48.000 So, so presumably somebody like Alan Turing is a good example of this.

00:11:51.880 You know, he had all of this sexual energy. 0.87

00:11:53.240 They play this up too much as if like all gays are geniuses or all geniuses are gays. 0.71

00:11:57.580 But he, he would be a genuine example of it. Yeah. He's obviously a genius and he's obviously,

00:12:02.960 obviously homosexual. He was forced to express his sexuality, which he was. And, and then you 0.89

00:12:08.340 see him push this into this kind of genius, genius work. And so that, yes. So, so he, yeah,

00:12:17.300 because of course, you know, cracking the Enigma code makes it more likely that 20 English people

00:12:22.660 are not going to be killed by German. And therefore, you know, it's, it's, you know, his work for him,

00:12:27.960 he probably saved many, many children.

00:12:29.660 Indeed. He, he, he, he passed on his genes substantially. Yes. At the group level effect.

00:12:36.640 So, but, but, but, but were the constabulary a bit over the top with, because of course he,

00:12:42.560 he would enjoy a little bit of, of the gaying at the pub in the evening. 0.74

00:12:47.460 The argument is that the, the research was that you have to suppress the sexuality. So it has to be 0.98

00:12:52.480 seen as something shameful and taboo and all. Right. And so from an evolutionary perspective,

00:12:57.240 I would suggest to you that no, they were not over the top. A problem. You could argue that they

00:13:01.140 went too far because in the end he committed suicide. And perhaps if he hadn't committed

00:13:06.500 suicide, he could have come out with some more brilliant genius stuff. So they went too far in

00:13:10.000 that sense. But in terms of, in terms of suppressing it from any, I remember, I'm not saying either that

00:13:14.820 homosexuality is good or not good. I'm just telling you the theory for people that seem to get 1.00

00:13:19.660 confused about these things. It had to be suppressed. And because it was suppressed, it's very interesting

00:13:25.980 by J.D. Unwin called Sex and Culture. And he argues the same thing, that as cultures develop,

00:13:31.120 they become more sexually repressive. And this causally precipitates greater creativity,

00:13:37.900 both artistically and scientifically. Yes. So, so the other thing on sex that was quite

00:13:42.540 interesting was the Victorian era, because, you know, we all know the Victorian era was very

00:13:46.480 sexually repressive. And I can't find the quote right now, but it was, it was something along the

00:13:50.580 lines of industrial revolution leads to concentration in towns and cities, leads to cramped living

00:13:59.280 conditions, leads to more opportunity for pathogens to spread, leads to more sexually transmitted

00:14:08.760 diseases, leads to the response being sexual repression. To disgust. To disgust, yes. Which then leads,

00:14:19.100 so the Victorian era of repressed sexuality was a evolutionary level response, and not just

00:14:27.180 something that they did because they thought it was a good idea.

00:14:31.140 That is, that is what, well, you could, you could, you could see it in two ways. One is that we tend to

00:14:35.020 rebel against what that, what comes before, and what was before, i.e. in the 18th century, was a very

00:14:40.040 licentious kind of period. So therefore, Charles II, all that, yes.

00:14:43.720 Right, precisely. So therefore, you might expect to be more puritanical for that reason alone. But, but,

00:14:48.600 but certainly, I would suggest that a big part of what, what explains why the Victorians were so much

00:14:54.200 more sexually repressed, even compared to the Tudors, even compared to the Puritans in the 17th 0.74

00:14:59.240 century, even compared to people that, I mean, they were, as they were, boulderising Shakespeare and

00:15:05.080 Chaucer and whatever, because it was so, they were so repressive on these things, was probably

00:15:09.400 that there was a disgust response to, to these illnesses that all became endemic at exactly the

00:15:14.280 same time, and in which you could suddenly die. You could just drop dead within a day. If you've got

00:15:18.900 something like cholera, you could, you could basically, you just die very, very quickly.

00:15:22.920 And so, and so it was, in a sense, there was higher mortality salience, even than there have been

00:15:29.000 before, when, in a sense, there was more child mortality, but that was predictable, you could

00:15:34.200 tell the baby wasn't healthy, and it would die slowly, and whatever. But no, this was just like

00:15:38.380 sudden death. And so you, and, and of course, you had syphilis becoming endemic, very much so at

00:15:43.500 around that time, and other STDs. And so you can see why there would be a disgust response, and that

00:15:48.300 disgust is associated with a highly conservative response. And so you end up with sexual puritanism,

00:15:54.460 repression of sexuality, which would, could be seen to causally precipitate higher levels

00:15:59.020 of creativity, even on top of the fact that the Victorians were, compared to us, probably

00:16:04.540 15 points more intelligent as well. So all of, all of these things coalesce to bring about

00:16:10.340 15 IQ points, something like that. Yeah, that's a hell of a difference. That's a hell of a difference.

00:16:15.640 Yes, well, based on reaction times, yeah, we're losing something like one, one IQ point per decade.

00:16:21.780 So it makes sense that between 1880, when we were measuring reaction times, which correlate

00:16:26.780 negatively with IQ at about 0.3, when we were measuring those in 1880, which we were doing in

00:16:32.680 the same way that we do now, by the way, we can see that the reaction times have lengthened,

00:16:38.500 consistent with about a 15 point IQ decline. And there are other measures as well, which indicate

00:16:44.640 other proxy measures, because we didn't actually have proper IQ tests in about 1912. And there's

00:16:49.320 problems with them across time anyway, that indicate the same kind of decline. So this means

00:16:56.200 that basically the average person of Victorian England would be capable of being a high school

00:17:00.420 science teacher these days.

00:17:02.300 Right. Okay. So yes, yes, that was, that was fascinating. And I forget how you frame it now,

00:17:12.240 but you then go on to talk about how, because we talked, okay, so the Victorian sexuality repression

00:17:20.700 was a response to an evolutionary mechanism, not wanting to die and discuss response and that kind

00:17:25.560 of stuff. And I forget how you explain now, but you then go on to talk about how the, the 60s and

00:17:32.000 the liberalism that came out of it, that could also have been driven at a largely genetic level.

00:17:37.840 So it wasn't that people just suddenly decided that they wanted to get more liberal or whatever

00:17:42.120 it was, but there was some sort of mechanism that was pushing people towards behaving in a more

00:17:48.500 liberal way, which then starts to sort of become a bit runaway in the same way that Victorians

00:17:53.880 probably overdid their sexual repression. 0.56

00:17:55.540 Yeah, it became runaway and you get to a point where in the thirties, someone like

00:18:00.580 Sir Cyril Smith or earlier Catherine Cookson, someone that was illegitimate, would be shunned

00:18:07.220 in shops because it was somehow considered that just by interacting with them, you would be

00:18:11.920 polluted by, by their, you know, their, their, their, their sick bloodline. And so you get

00:18:19.140 runaway in that sense. And then by the, by the fifties, children that are born to affairs

00:18:23.940 between a lawyer and his secretary or whatever, are being adopted by other families, things

00:18:29.340 like this are going on. So you get runaway the other way, but yeah, the argument is, I think,

00:18:34.700 oh yes, the argument is that we were under half Darwinian selectory until 1800. We were selecting,

00:18:41.320 as we know, as I look at in the book in detail for conservatism, which is basically all five

00:18:46.480 moral foundations, that is to say, obedience to authority, sanctity versus disgust, in-group

00:18:54.280 loyalty, equality, and harm avoidance. We were selecting for conservatism. We were selecting

00:18:58.460 for religiosity, which tends to take that which is adapted and make it into the will of God

00:19:01.960 and associated with fertility and other adaptive traits associated with mental health and physical

00:19:05.180 health. We were selecting for mental and physical health. We were selecting for ethnocentrism.

00:19:09.020 And so as the Darwinian conditions of selection pressures are weakened from 50% child mortality

00:19:16.820 to 1%, there's going to be a huge buildup in mutation. And because things which we are selecting

00:19:22.420 for become bundled together, they become playa-tripically related to each other, then what that means

00:19:27.820 is that any deviation from that pre-industrial norm is almost certainly going to be in the direction

00:19:33.900 of liberalism, atheism, poor mental health, poor physical health, and so on. And those things indeed

00:19:39.220 are all correlated with each other in the modern day. And so you get then a buildup in, the only

00:19:45.780 acceptance is intelligence, but we can look at that separately. You then get a buildup in mutational load

00:19:51.280 and in that direction. And eventually what you would expect is that a tipping point would be reached,

00:19:56.800 where it would be so high that the culture itself would tip over. And when that happens,

00:20:03.560 and there's studies indicating that when 20% of a group defer from what, sorry, disagree with the

00:20:11.860 viewpoint previously held, then the rest of the group see them as the up and coming new thing and

00:20:16.860 tip over very quickly. And when that happens, it's going to be intelligent people that are going to

00:20:23.560 spearhead that change, because this is why intelligence is an anomaly. Intelligence was

00:20:27.720 also under positive selection until the Industrial Revolution. But intelligence is associated with

00:20:32.840 social conformity. And that means that in a religious society, intelligent people are going

00:20:39.300 to be more religious, probably, and more conservative. And there's evidence, actually,

00:20:44.200 that in somewhere like Brazil, intelligent people are more conservative. And there's evidence that

00:20:51.020 intelligent people were more conservative at the beginning of the 20th century. But then

00:20:55.660 they're also more socially conformist. Intelligence is associated with noticing the norm mapping,

00:21:02.020 with noticing the dominant set of values and forcing yourself by ethical control to conform to them.

00:21:07.480 And then once you do that, then you competitively signal your conformity to them.

00:21:11.440 And so what happened around about, I suggest, 1963, is that we, that tipping point was reached.

00:21:17.400 And so we tip over from being a broadly group-oriented society that's interested in,

00:21:22.160 in those group-oriented values I mentioned earlier, to being an individually oriented society that's

00:21:27.120 associated, that's interested in equality and harm avoidance. Because if you're at the bottom of the

00:21:31.220 pile in prehistory, you're interested in equality, because that means you get more, you get more of

00:21:37.300 the pie, basically. And you're interested in harm avoidance, which is that, you know, then you don't get

00:21:42.800 harmed, rather than necessarily the good of the group, which could mean that you're harmed and

00:21:47.180 that you're sacrificing things. And we know that if you are, obviously, if you're at the bottom of

00:21:52.580 the pile, if you're physically weak, which will put you at the bottom of the pile, or you're mentally

00:21:56.420 unstable, which will probably put you at the bottom of the pile, then you're going to fear a fair fight.

00:22:02.140 And so the only way that you will be able to attain status will be via signalling.

00:22:06.980 Now, there's two ways that you can signal. In a conservative society, you're going to purity

00:22:11.900 signal, the church ladies, ugly old spinsters signalling how purely religious they are, right? 0.72

00:22:18.140 And in a more liberal society, you're going to signal equality and harm avoidance, i.e. you're 0.97

00:22:23.900 going to virtue signal. So that's what you start to get. And then you get runaway virtue signalling.

00:22:29.280 Now, once you get that, it gets quite interesting, because what does it actually involve to virtue

00:22:34.660 signal? The conservative, his worldview is a series of concentric circles based around self.

00:22:41.340 And his moral circle is stronger the more genetically close it is to self. So he loves his family more

00:22:49.620 than his kin, his kin more than his class, his class more than ethnic group, ethnic group more than his 0.90

00:22:54.180 race, his race more than his species, his species, whatever. With the liberal, it doesn't work like

00:22:59.320 that. The liberal is attracted to a more distant group over his own, let's say a different class

00:23:05.120 over his own, a different ethnic group over his own, whatever. This is brilliant if he's an 0.97

00:23:09.440 individualist, if he's because individualists are about power, remember, they're individually oriented,

00:23:14.180 they want to get to the top of the group, they're about power. And if they're if they're weak kind of

00:23:18.800 people, mentally or physically, then they will do this covertly by virtue signalling, which is what the

00:23:23.280 left do. So they're individually oriented. And so what they will do is they will, let's say, like the

00:23:29.480 left is a good example in 100 years ago, a different social class over their own, they then collaborate

00:23:35.000 with that social class against the interests of their own social class, in order to gain power over

00:23:40.940 their own social class, and thus society as a whole. To watch the full video, please become a premium

00:23:46.720 member at LotusEaters.com.

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters - August 27, 2024

PREVIEW： Brokenomics ｜ Woke Eugenics by Ed Dutton

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript