If even Bhutan is importing temporary workers now (after descending into civil conflict in the C20th over large numbers of Nepali ‘temporary’ workers it imported and later deported) it really shows the triumph of apathy in politics - a powerful ideology of ‘Nobodycaresanymoreism’
Bhutan and Sikkim are two culturally and historically similar Himalayan Mountain Kingdoms that both experienced large influxes of Nepalese labour migrants but which met with very different fates. In Sikkim, Nepalese migration was so great that eventually the Nepalese migrants were able to successfully lobby for the dissolution the country. In Bhutan, the King ordered the Nepalese migrants to be deported after open conflict broke out between the Bhutanese and Nepalese guerillas. Sikkim was absorbed into India. Bhutan still exists as an independent country today. Presumably this historical experience would be enough to dissuade Bhutan from beginning the process of importing labour all over again
Proliferation of slop online ie content of poor or middling taste is a product of the ‘Coca Cola Effect’ - it is the majority’s revealed content preference because it is the content it finds most accessible. Algorithms now dominated by the tastes of third world middle-aged women
If you want to ‘fix the algorithm’ you have to understand that most people like this kind of slop content so-called, you can’t scold them out of it. That is also assuming too you are a manager at X or elsewhere with actual taste able to properly discern slop. Mentioning no names
When you encounter the worst excesses of the present-day dispensation (‘Gay Race Communism’ some call it) it is easy to imagine that the ideology is, in its various manifestations, motivated by resentful sentiment. In many cases it is, for sure, but it is a mistake to think it is always like this in its conception. The material consequences of the ideology are, if you are being precise, a confluence of multiple competing aesthetic and moral visions
In this sense, is interesting to ask why it has taken root so deeply in the Anglosphere. While there are a large number of far left sympathetic politicians, creatives etc in these countries it would be incorrect to say everyone who has ever been pro-mass migration there is far left. For a certain cohort of well-intentioned pro-mass migration ‘Anglos’ it is more correct to say that their actual ideology is ‘in their heads’ something closer to a utopian ‘Star Trek Liberalism’ rather than a more sinister ‘Gay Race Communism’
There is a good ‘Bronze Age Pervert’ line that what ‘Anglos’ really want is ‘Anglos at the head of a rainbow coalition of all the races exploring space together’-ism AKA ‘Star Trek Liberalism’. Actually on a phenomenological level this is often true; this is the WEIRD Anglo disease; this is ‘just what they’re like’; in many ways this is actually what they imagine is happening in their heads when they advocate for de facto ‘Gay Race Communism’. This vision of the end telos of the ideology (which is not even really seen as an ideology, just ‘basic decency’) is a far more compelling vision than the visions presented by the nastier far left strains of it it transmogrifies into in more democratic practice (especially alongside continued demographic change). In this form ‘Star Trek Liberalism’ is quite easy to become attached to, people are often very emotional about it. When you argue against people online who defend a version of this position you will sometimes be arguing against a person who genuinely believes they are defending ‘John Lennon Globalism’
‘Star Trek Liberalism’ then is the best, most utopian version of the present-day so-called ‘Liberal’ settlement, its end telos, ‘the kind of future its advocates actually want to bring about’. You could describe it as something like ‘Highbrow Multicultural Utopianism’. Some of its advocates might describe it as ‘Humanism’. This is in essence high-functioning utopian ‘Liberalism but only for 130IQ+ Anglos’ with the assumption that everybody on Earth (and in space) is also a ‘130IQ+ Anglo’ or that they can at least be uplifted to the state of middle-class anglodom with the right kinds of education
Gene Roddenberry articulates one of the best versions of this ‘humanistic’ vision in Star Trek. At least in earlier series you have what is essentially a Colonial British Office class emulating the culture & standards of their historical predecessors but in space. They wear uniforms and went to officer school and are all preoccupied with hierarchy and honour and fairness and discovery etc etc. It is ‘Master and Commander’ except the crew are a rainbow coalition of nationalities and species. They are out together ‘exploring the Final Frontier’, overcoming problems with intelligence and resourcefulness. The original Star Trek is in this way unapologetically liberal, would be incorrect to call it woke. Modern Star Trek should grasp that ‘The Next Generation’ presents an importantly liberal utopia! Please note how much more formal and sober Starfleet command structures are presented as in the earlier series of Star Trek vs today here too
This vision of ‘Liberalism’ more broadly conceived is obviously attractive. Ofc though, when you start to open it up to the ‘tasteless flyover state masses’ it devolves into the more familiar ‘Reddit Liberalism’. In that kind of tactless, degraded state it becomes a conduit for the worst kinds of ‘GRC’, often even just folds into it completely as you see today
Actually personal story a version of ‘Star Trek Liberalism’ is ‘what I actually believed’ when I was 16. One of key factors WRT how committed to it you continue to be after is really how much exposure you get to behaviour, outcomes, attitudes etc that would undermine the vision
For a certain cohort of well-intentioned pro-mass migration ‘Anglos’ their actual ideology is ‘in their heads’ something closer to utopian ‘Star Trek Liberalism’ rather than the more sinister ‘Gay Race Communism’. A compelling vision which it is easy to become very attached to
This is in essence high-functioning utopian ‘Liberalism but only for 130IQ+ Anglos’ with the assumption that everybody on Earth (and in space) is also a ‘130IQ+ Anglo’. Gene Roddenberry articulates a version of this, but then because you start to open it up to the ‘tasteless flyover state masses’ this is when it starts to devolve into the more familiar ‘Reddit Liberalism’. (See also eg Carl Sagan’s Cosmos, Doctor Who, Hitchiker’s Guide to the Galaxy etc. as sort of spiritual expressions of this sentiment.) In that kind of degraded state it really becomes a conduit for all the worst kinds of ‘GRC’ - as you see today. Aside, please note how more formal and sober the Starfleet organisational command structures are presented as in the earlier series of Star Trek vs today
Other aesthetic variants of the same sentiment include ‘Utopian Scholastic’ and ‘Primary School Globalism’
You are a 130IQ+ Anglo. 135IQ WASP-coded Mark Carney appears and politely says non-patronisingly: “Let’s replace that migration restrictionist populism with star trek anglos at the head of a rainbow coalition of all races exploring space together-ism.” Can you resist his allure?
There was a good BAP line that what ‘Anglos’ really want is ‘Anglos at the head of a rainbow coalition of all the races exploring space together’-ism AKA ‘Star Trek Liberalism’. Actually on a phenomenological level this is true; this is the WEIRD Anglo disease; this is ‘just what they’re like’; in many ways this is actually what they imagine is happening in their heads when they de facto advocate for ‘Gay Race Communism’. Mark Carney I think has a very broad appeal for this demographic because he is a relatively intelligent, articulate and measured polite WASP-coded advocate of this ideology. Not offensive, actually endearing insofar as he gels with the natural sensibilities of the cohort. Mamdani is a weird off-putting cultural alien without much tact so is naturally going to be more offputting, provoke more resistance. Not so with Carney - the anxieties start to melt away, he is ‘one of us’. Much better to advance this ideology with Carney-type figures, it is far less offensive on a personal level
Keir Starmer is too stupid and patronising to be an effective British equivalent. I find Keir Starmer deeply offensive on a personal level because his tone and approach is highly insulting to my intelligence