I don’t think this is *just* a consequence of immigration either, although immigration has obviously played a huge part in breaking the camaraderie & shared sense of identity between Londoners.

There’s also been a philosophical twist though. Americanised liberal individualism completely conquered civic communitarianism. Self interest & greed became celebrated. Religious morality was abandoned.

Read 4 tweets

Taz

@ItsTaz1989

Apr 3

Men fight in wars to protect their homes; but post-war governments have systematically been deconstructing the homes of Western men. Home communities decimated by mass immigration & economic abandonment, the ability to buy a home made neigh on impossible also by immigration.

1/

The ability to start a family made economically unviable & punishing; men & women inculcated into a dutiless culture of individualistic materialism & shallow self-actualisation; women inculcated into a feminist, don't need men, career first, anti-maternal worldview; ...

2/

the roles of men & women blurred so now "anyone can be & do anything, including fight" –– so why should I have a duty to? You don't need me! All of the greatness of our country & its history inverted into something we should be ashamed of, not that we should fight to defend.

3/

Read 5 tweets

Taz

@ItsTaz1989

Feb 29

Universal suffrage democracy leads to resentment towards elites for trying to keep the average, mediocre person away from institutional power. Eventually the mediocrities demand access to institutional power via the ballot box, which then leads to resentment...

/1

from the electorate because the mediocrities now larping as an elite are unfit to govern the country and end up running it into the ground. Eventually you end up with a series of bombastic populists on your way to ultimate decline.

If you want a stable society, with a stable elite inculcated in a culture of disinterested constitutional governance, you have to have the assumption of a legitimate barrier to entry to political power across the entire system - including access to suffrage.

/3

Read 5 tweets

Taz

@ItsTaz1989

Mar 17, 2023

With the end of the division of labour being based on sex, men & women became more likely to meet each other in situations in which they're competitors for jobs, contracts etc.
This has likely increased mistrust & suspicion between the sexes.
1/

In this context some men came to see not only women's labour, but also women as commodities, & some women celebrated this.
Some women also realised they could weaponise their femininity against men for commercial gain, hence some of the more spurious #MeToo claims etc.
2/

The erosion of widely accepted gender roles, whilst it may have been sold as 'liberation', may have just propelled us into a less free, spiritually & socially stifling world of mutual resentment & suspicion. Imprisonment in liberatory chaos if you will.
3/

Read 4 tweets

Taz

@ItsTaz1989

Mar 16, 2023

@GusCarter

This weeks' SpectatorTV with @GusCarter & @Nina_Compact is very good.
I started writing a piece a couple of month ago arguing boys should be taught Aristotelian virtue ethics and Stoicism at school. Perhaps I should try to revive it?

I think one of the problems with neoliberalism is the widespread homogenisation of gender roles. I don't think it's particularly good for men or women. The sexes need to be complementary, not adversarial or treated as if they exactly the same. That means difficult discussions.

@GusCarter

Also, please do read @GusCarter's article this week:
spectator.co.uk/article/sexual…

Read 4 tweets

Taz

@ItsTaz1989

Mar 16, 2023

https://twitter.com/JesusToThem/status/1636471724785954825

It frightens me that people actually believe this. It's bad sociology, bad economics, and bad history. The money spent on the development of technology didn't come from slavery, in many cases it came in spite of slavery.

https://twitter.com/JesusToThem/status/1636471724785954825

Factories certainly didn't come from slavery, and neither did modern medicine. Good article here:
spectator.co.uk/article/did-br…

It's pointed out:
And for the country as a whole, the Caribbean colonies were not profitable. They functioned because the government levelled tariffs on cheaper sugar produced by competing European powers, and because the costs of naval protection were borne by the taxpayer.

Read 10 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

Taz

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @ItsTaz1989

Taz

Taz

Taz

Taz

Taz

Taz

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!