One of the states I find most fascinating, after Rhodesia, of course, is Singapore
Why?
Because, it, in its undemocratic nature and drive for excellence, shows how we can escape our current decline and build a future of greatness even as decline surrounds us
A short 🧵👇
Why is it a glimpse at a good future?
It, much like Rhodesia, embraced the functional aspects of our civilization without the egalitarian insanity
As such, it shows what me must avoid to have a thriving society
It is undemocratic, and thus practical rather than ideological, prosperous rather than race communism obsessed, and gleaming rather than covered in the usual refuse of the Third World and increasingly Third Worldified West
It is, in other words, the opposite of South Africa
It embraced excellence rather than equality, and prospered for it, creating a world in which one would like to live rather than some steaming, Third World hell
Further, it's a glimpse at the Network State concept
It is, of course, a locality, not a network
But it is a city-state, and in that shows what can be achieved when the focus is on success in a small, relatively likeminded grouping rather than on wealth redistribution across a vast, continent-sized country
It's a repudiation of the Twentieth Century in that respect; it embraces excellence rather than mere bigness and democratic scale
That too is part of a successful future; whatever we achieve will be because of excellence, not mere scale.
Fraternal networks, network states, Singapore-style city-states, all of it is potentially possible as the Westphalian system declines and something different emerges in its place
Notably, President Trump seems to recognize that such are the tools and pathways to success in the 21st century, as show by his "freedom city" concept
These aren't fully sovereign city-states, of course, but would be a space where excellence could be the goal rather than compliance with the Civil Rights Act and regulatory regime
In any case, what Lee Kuan Yew achieved with Singapore is a so far more permanent version of what was achieved in Rhodesia
Living standards and per-capita GDP are some of the highest on the continent, the city is now gleaming and futuristic rather than a fetid swamp, and the various constituent ethnic groups work (somewhat) together rather than being at each other's throats, as happens in its neighbors
He, in short, turned it from Third World to First
That's not to say it's without issues.
It is sterile, as has been noted, which can be offputting and tiresome
It is overcrowded; being an island is limiting, in many respects
And the TFR is a measly 1.04, making it one of the great "IQ shredders," as Steve Sailer put it, and potentially endangering its future. Even in a cosmopolitan city-state, immigration can't preserve a people
But there is reason to hope that those problems can be overcome because of its strengths
As an undemocratic center of excellence, it can draw talent, it can build, and some sterility is far preferable to looking like the Congo, or even the NYC subway
So, we'll see, but there's no reason for despair yet
There is much for us to learn from that, and much off which we can build
Namely, the lesson is that excellence, in any and all fields, matters. There's a reason Singapore, despite being a tiny island, is a beacon of prosperity, while Indonesia, a land of 100 million, is known for achieving nothing
Singapore, particularly under Lee, wanted to achieve. There was no messing around with mass democracy. Communism was crushed. Ethnic resentments were suppressed. Education was geared toward creating bright and competent citizens. In short, the usual gunk that clogs up countries was eliminated, and public investment used to grease the wheels of competence.
Indonesia, meanwhile, had ethnic feuds and attempts at communism. It achieves as little now as it did then.
So, how to emulate that?
That, broadly, is what @extradeadjcb and I discussed in today's podcast on fraternal networks
Yes, we're not the state. No, we can't build Orania in America. No, joining the Masons won't get you anywhere now
But we can find likeminded men of excellence and build a network alongside them.
Men of greatness, competence, and vitality are the future. Why? Because we need to build something new to prosper, not just bureaucratically maintain rotting systems. Because the social ties that bind and create communities died in the postwar world, and need to be rebuilt. Because most of the population is obviously incompetent, and isn't going to be able to figure out clean water, much less making it to Mars. Because what existing institutions there are want Global Zimbabwe, so the only way to do something notable is to EXIT them and build something new that obviates them. That is a task calling for networks of the competent and of the great, not for the grey and bureaucratic mass man
This isn't new. It is, in (very) broad strokes, how the Hospitallers (along with the Templars) became a leading force for centuries nearly a millennium ago.
But it is increasingly relevant as the system rots around us
And, of course, Dr. Bennett is the guy drawing attention to the TFR issue, which we talked about
The future belongs to those who show up, and right now Singapore's greatest issue is that the next generation isn't going to show up
The same is true of much of competent America
We need people interested in building dynasties again, and Lee Kuan Yew shows what can be accomplished when you think like that
Finally, Singapore's story is critical to learn because it is a reminder that you can build in the ruins
When Lee Kuan Yew began to transform his island, he did so in the face of not only near-total domestic poverty, but a collapsing British empire that couldn't and wouldn't protect him and his island. The Japanese had conquered, the British were a basket case, predatory neighbors looked on and licked their chops, and lesser men would have succumbed to despair and cried amongst the ruins
Lee, instead, built one of the most prosperous states in a hemisphere
So yes, the empire in which we live is declining. But that means that their is opportunity, particularly at the fringes, not that we should despair
The trend for the past century and a quarter, one partially shown by this superb video, is that houses prices in gold got cheaper, but priced in fiat they've gotten hugely more expensive
The truth, then, is that Houses Aren't Getting More Expensive, You're Getting Poorer
🧵👇
This chart provides a good showing of the gold trend, though it only goes until 2020, after which the trend accelerated
Priced in gold, which is useful because it represents the cost in a relatively stable fraction of global production, houses have gotten noticeably cheaper while growing larger and more complex
Priced in fiat, they've become unaffordable to the majority of the country
So, what happened? Why don't they seem cheaper?
Because income hasn't kept up with real inflation
As Forbes noted: "The bottom line is that, in terms of gold, wages have fallen by about 87 percent. To get a stronger sense of what that means, consider that back in 1965, the minimum wage was 71 ounces of gold per year. In 2011, the senior engineer earned the equivalent of 63 ounces in gold. So, measured in gold, we see that senior engineers now earn less than what unskilled laborers earned back in 1965. That’s right: today’s highly skilled professional is making less in real, comparative terms than yesterday’s unskilled worker."
Time for a very short 🧵with some of my favorite memes about the Rhodesian Bush War
First up, of course, is this about Operation Eland, the amazing raid on ZANLA in Mozambique in which 4 Selous Scouts were injured, and 2000 "terrs" left "slotted"
The rest 🧵👇
Up next: always remember what's possible
The Rhodesian security forces never had more than a few thousand first-line fighters, yet they fought a nearly successful, 15-year war against terrorists backed by not just the communist bloc, but the "free world" as well
Few things are impossible to those willing to go all out fighting for them, as the valiant efforts of the Rhodesians in the Bush War show, and thus even their loss is inspiring. If they, a small and landlocked country of ~250k whites and a few million blacks, could almost win a fight against the whole world, we can surely rescue our country
Then there's: your average Joe has no idea about any of this
People frequently ask what I do and I end up telling them I generally focus on the history of "decolonized" Africa, with a focus on the tragedy of Rhodesia. They're shocked to discover America aided communists destroy a free and prosperous state in the name of race communism.
Further, it seriously changes their view of not just the Cold War, but also the American Civil Rights Movement, which was backing Mugabe and Nkomo even as they launched terror attacks on Rhodesian civilians
Never forget that despite the mythology of the Cold War being that it was a global fight against communism, America aided communist terrorists who attacked free and prosperous Rhodesia
Thatcher shows what the Cold War was really about
A short 🧵👇
Why did they do that? Because Rhodesia stood for what they hated: hierarchy amongst men
Namely, though it had no apartheid, it had propertied voting; to vote, one either needed to be highly educated or have a certain amount (about $60k USD in modern money) of Rhodesian property
That common sense law screened the incompetent out of the voting pool
Only stewards could vote, and thus those controlling the direction of the country were better able to steward its prosperity and future
I'm often asked why I find the Rhodesian story so compelling
Much of the answer lies with this short clip, as I'll explain in the 🧵👇
The thing is, when faced with fighting the whole world in a desperate attempt to defeat "democratic" race communism, the Rhodesians took that plunge
They did what was honorable rather than easy, and spent a decade and a half battling nearly the entire West plus the entire communist bloc
Their enemies had Soviet advisors, Chinese training, brand new Communist-bloc weaponry, and total moral support from the democratic "free world" which meant the UN was on their side and the Rhodesians were cut off from world trade
But still the Ian Smith-led government didn't give in. Despite being surrounded on three sides by 1975, being grossly outnumbered, and having the South Africans stab them in the back in the name of detente, they didn't give in until all was lost in 1980
America isn't, and has never been, a Catholic country
We don't have to listen to the Pinko Pontiff as he attempts to push Gay Race Communism: Catholic Edition on the world, and have our ancestors' refusal to embrace Rome to thank for that
I remain shocked by how many people are like "this is good, actually, and America should listen to him"
Many of our Catholic brothers are great guys, I don't have anything against them and wish them well
But I find it absurd to 1) pretend America is a Catholic country, 2) say we should listen to what some communist in Rome says, and 3) describe Protestantism as heresy at the same time as the Catholic Church pushes race communism
Yes, some Protestant churches are full of heretics. But the Anglican Church of America, for example, is certainly far closer to accurate than whatever Francis is prattling on about