Sunday, May 29, 2016

Vulture of Critique, gaikokumaniakku, Wolves, r/K, where does it all end?

Whenever it comes to wolves, I tend to overdo it, and Vulture of Critique has to set me straight. Some time back, I made a complicated but romantic comparison of humanity and wolves [link], and Vulture of Critique (who moonlights as gaikokumaniakku —That's complicated, too) called me on it, showing that I needed to be a little less Kiplingish and a little more Konrad Lorenzish when it comes to ethology [link]. (That link doesn't work right now. Vulture! Where's your original post?) Now I'm confused. Want something even more confusing? —gaikokumaniakku/Vulture of Critique's original post I can't find, but Uncabob reprinted it some time ago, and you can read it here [link]. Uncabob also, BTW, dissents from the notion that human females instinctively follow the K strategy.

What all this comes down to is that I have a tendency to over-romanticize wolves* in particular, and zoology in general. It probably comes from reading too much Robert Ardrey [link] and Hugh Lofting [link] when I was a kid. If any of you out there, BTW, know of a really thorough analysis of the r/K theory with respect to human society, do let me know.

At any rate, this is his reply to this [link].  At the very least, his point that White European leaders (aristocrats), don't necessarily fit the K paradigm is revealing. Enjoy.


Fornicator Immensus et crudelis – Human aristocrats are neither r nor K

White aristocrats are interesting people – or rather, they were interesting, when they existed.
Here is a description of a Mighty Whitey, lightly edited from a book blurb:
Endowed with exceptional talents as a warrior, diplomat, and ruler–not to mention a temperament that earned him the epithet fornicator immensus et crudelis … –Vladimir of Russia (960?-1015) began his career at the age of twelve as Prince of Novgorod, rising to be known as “The Red Sun.” … years of conquest, violence, polygamy, and pagan ritual as the remarkable prince seized his brother’s throne, expanding his rule over the whole of Russia. A shrewd, hospitable, and progressive ruler, he adopted the Christian faith from the Greeks, bringing Christianity to Russia. A “second Constantine,” he was later canonized as a saint.
Now, by contrast, Ex-Army has a different idea of aristocracy, and as usual, I am going to disagree with him (and Baloo):
there are 5 r-rabbit traits: 
Aversion to competition (as there are lots of resources, rather than compete, rabbits just move to eat; fighting takes energy and rabbits lose all fights anyway)
Tolerance for promiscuity (as all rabbits are the same, it makes no sense to distinguish between potential mates – r folk don’t do morals)
Single parenting (rabbit life is simple. There is nothing to teach. So quick birthing and leaving is sufficient)
Early onset sexuality (early menarche makes more rabbits)
A lack of in-group loyalty (rabbits who go to protect other rabbits get eaten. There is no payoff for rabbit group solidarity). Liberals!
There are 5 K-wolf traits: 
Accepting competition, (and that there are winners and losers)
Rejecting promiscuity (wolves must select mates with the best genes if they’re to have offspring capable of hunting)
High investment parenting (cubs must develop skills in order to pass on their genes)
Delayed sexuality (you must wait for a wolf with means or at least see his skills prior to mating with him)
Fierce in-group loyalty (they hunt and fend off predators as a team, so cannot carry lukewarm adherents, this is why wolves are found in packs). Conservatives!
White people produced a lot of aristocrats for about 3000 years of recorded history.
White aristocrats did not reject promiscuity. They killed their competitors when possible, and they had as much sex as their circumstances allowed. White people had harems. Even when the majority of whites were locked into monogamy, white aristocrats had mistresses, concubines, and harems. Many white men tried to maximize the number of their children, regardless of parenting investment.
White aristocrats had moments of “fierce in-group loyalty,” but mostly they were just fierce. The history of Rome doesn’t show a whole lot of long-term in-group loyalty; even the Roman Republic enjoyed “competition” so much that they undermined collective loyalty. The history of Christianity (and before it, white philosophy) shows fierce loyalty to abstractions, not to people.
The theories of r and K may apply well to wolves and rabbits – I’m not a zoologist, so I’m not an expert on that topic. But the theories of r and K don’t apply very well to white history, particularly to the history of aristocrats.
Read the rest here:
----------
Quibcag: I've used a lot of anime versions of Athena, and it's time for a cute one.
----------
*And now rabbits. That probably comes from reading too much Richard Adams [link].

1 comment:

  1. Hey!

    I've been pretty busy and I may have poked the wrong button and trashed a few posts by accident. I will try to restore any missing posts from the trash.

    Sorry I can't come up with something more witty.

    I just posted some sci-fi stuff that you will like at VoC though.

    Enjoy!

    ReplyDelete