The WEMP includes a unique set of four characteristics: 1) Absolute monogamy 2) Low illegitimacy and cuckoldry 3) Neolocality (marriage waits until couple can form a new household). This is the most unique aspect of the WEMP. arctotherium.substack.com/p/the-western-…
As a result of (3), in bad times (in medieval/early modern period), you had (4): a late age of marriage (often 24-26 for women) and, uniquely, a large number of never married (up to 25%) women (never married men being common in other civilizations).
The WEMP created a negative feedback loop on population, allowing for population regulation below the Malthusian threshold without family planning/infanticide (East Asia), constant extreme war (Eastern Europe) or extremely high disease burdern (SS Africa).
The WEMP is also eugenic, because gating marriage by independent economic success and children by marriage means those who excel in market economy have more children with smaller generation times. This is one of the mechanisms of the Clarkian selection that led to the IR.
The WEMP also aligns men's personal and reproductive interests with those of society at large better then perhaps any other marriage pattern.
The WEMP is often postulated to be related to Northwest Europe's disproportionate achievement and success even compared to other high-IQ populations by incentivizing large-scale impersonal cooperation thanks to neolocality reducing family support.
This forced the development of impersonal institutions to fulfill the role extended family did in other agrarian cultures, and those who couldn't interact well with these new institutions were selected out of the gene pool. Gene-culture coevolution for large scale cooperation.
The main reason I wrote the post is that there is a misconception I commonly see among the small-but-vocal group of "racist feminists". This is that the high age of first marriage typical of the WEMP means that the post-Sexual Revolution Western status quo is normal for whites.
This is not true. The high age of first marriage is the result of neolocality + poor economic conditions. In prosperous times and places, age of first marriage was lower. These include colonial America (first table), immediately post-Black Death, IR Britain, and the Baby Boom.
Needless to say, every NW Euro country today is incredibly prosperous compared to Medieval Europe. The modern West also fails conditions (1) and (2); we are not absolutely monogamous and illegitimacy rates are not low (>50% in many countries).
The WEMP + modern prosperity + contraception gives you the Baby Boom, not the modern day. The post-Sexual Revolution West is closer to Africa + contraception then the Western norm.
While certainly of historical curiosity for explaining the rise of the West, it's not obvious how important the WEMP is today. I think it's more useful to study the Baby Boom directly (most recent application) for prescriptions. But it's important to set the record straight.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Thread with excerpts from the pre-Columbian chapters of T. R. Fehrenbach's Fire and Blood: A History of Mexico (1973/1995). This is a very dense and detailed book; this thread is not even close to comprehensive.
Meso-American civilization was one civilization; there were no separate Aztec/Mexic/Yucatec/Maya/etc civilizations. The peoples discovered by Cortes were inheritors rather than creators.
For its entire history, Meso-American culture was extraordinarily urban, more like the Orient than that of the European dark ages. But these were not so much commercial or mercantile cities as religious and defensive ones.
Thread with excerpts from Richard Pipes' Property and Freedom (1999). Pipes is a historian of Russia, and the thesis of the book is that private property, as something distinct and protected from public power and sovereignty, is indispensable to human freedom.
One of the fundamental differences between Russia and the rest of Europe lay in the weak development of private property; one of the major themes of Western philosophical history is the benefits and drawbacks of private property; Russian philosophers unanimously condemn it.
Freedom, as used by Pipes, includes political freedom, legal freedom, economic freedom, and personal rights. It does not include the right to public support ("freedom from want"); such 'rights' are at best a moral claim and at worst an unearned privilege.
Red state pension funds tend to vote with management if management is providing good returns (ie, doing their job); blue state pension funds tend to vote with management if the company does leftist things (ie, ESG, or not paying CEOs very much).
This reflects a general difference in attitude towards institutions; rightists prefer institutions do what they were created for (eg police should fight crime, the military should fight wars, companies should make money doing their business, schools should teach)...
...while left-wingers want every institution to have pushing the Party Line as its #1 priority (extremely totalitarian in that regard). The formers produces a better society, the latter is more politically powerful but destroys everything in the long run.
Training an LLM to be more politically evenhanded (as opposed to left-wing, as almost all LLMs are - so more right-wing) makes it more egalitarian in how it values the lives of people of different races without training to do so. PCT = Political Consistency Training.
LLMs trained in this way also value members of different religions, political creeds, and public figures coded left vs right more equally.
Almost all notable LLMs except Grok are left-wing on the US political spectrum, but in a very particular way, sort of like a superhumanly-knowledgeable Redditor or Wikipedia editor from the year 2018.
Since 2009, medical schools have had to prove they sufficiently discriminate against white men ("achieve mission-appropriate diversity outcomes") to get accredited.
White men are now significantly underrepresented among med school students.
Fortunately, competence isn't that important in doctors, so purging white men in favor of "underrepresented minorities" (blacks, LatinX) who can't pass clinical exams shouldn't matter.
European IQ's rising due to natural selection (as measured by PGS) continuing into the modern era whereas it stalled in East Asia could have been predicted from Gregory Clark's genealogical studies in both regions.
Clark found that "survival of the richest" was the rule in England from 1300-1880 or so, with huge differences in surviving offspring by class and this was much weaker in Qing China because higher class women didn't have more kids due to elite polygamy.
(IQ is not the only trait that goes into income or wealth, of course, so selection for wealth is only indirectly selection for IQ and also selects for a package of other traits, some of which are collective goods like IQ and some of which are not.)