Too Much Civilization Can Kill Civilization

The French government was too civilized thus lost to the savage, cruel, and self-righteous British plutocrats and land speculators (the so-called “free enterprise”), fully supported the British monarchy: such is the best and most faithful description of what happened in North America, when France, once smartest mistress of the continent, lost Canada, and then Louisiana. 

There was no slavery in the gigantic continental lands controlled by France, Native Americans were not genocidized, and colonization was very low key. Something similar happened in India. Collaborator Pshakkottai, himself of Indian descent, points out that: In India…”The French were too civilized and lost to the British“. Civilization in excess can kill!

India was conquered by a plutocratic British company, the East India company, gone rogue… And deliberately so, a method inaugurated in Ireland in the 16C, and then pursued in America… And it would give enough propellent to racist German fascism to destroy European supremacy… in a trick which has not been officially observed yet by paid historians from the most prestigious plutocratic universities…

Once in Africa, as a child, I travelled from Senegal, an ex-French colony, to Gambia, an ex-British colony. In a ferry station of the Gambia, on the main thoroughfare, there were two large sets of toilets. I was stunned: a hundred feet to the left were the toilets for “Ladies” and “Gentlemen” of the master race. Far to the right were the toilets of the “Males” and “Females”, the male and female primates whose ancestors had dwelled on that continent for millennia.

The territories around Hudson Bay were lost to the British after the disastrous war of the Spanish Succession, which brought France nothing but losses of territory, including in Europe. That war and his treaty of Utrecht was the (still) much admired homicidal tyrant Louis XIV’s ultimate disaster, the root of which was his genocidal policy against Protestants. Don’t expect to read this in French history textbook, which are still forgetting to cut Louis XIV’s head, more than three centuries after his Hitler-like atrocities…

To be allowed to go live in Canada, French citizens had to demonstrate superior moral standards to the French administration: females condemned for loitering or prostitution didn’t qualify, nor did vagabonds. The English, by contrast, sent their worst, their convicts, often sparing them hanging from a rope. There were plenty of these lowlives in England: whereas French peasants owned their land, however small and miserable, the English did not, but were working for lords. When they didn’t, they joined the cities, and if they didn’t find employment there either, they would be homeless, and that was illegal. So they were deported to America. The same game was played, two centuries later, with Australia. Meanwhile, France, which used to have more than three times the population of England, saw its population advantage disappear: French peasants were keen to leave inheritance to their children, and that meant fewer heirs, so they practiced contraception.

Friend Stephen Jones objected to having such a thing as too civilized a behavior:

“Huh? Let’s have less civilization?

Is your premise that civilization itself is responsible for genocides and wars?”

I answered as follows: Dear Stephen Jones: That to “have too much civilization” can lose wars is not my premise, but my conclusion. The premise that “civilization itself is responsible for genocides and wars” is an idea so ridiculous that it took Rousseau, that crafty prostitute, to launch it successfully. This tenacious philosophy has been popular with mental retards of academic persuasion, as it enabled them to triumph

Ancient Republican Romans knew how ridiculous the idea was, thus Plebeians, more often than not, voted for better educated “Patricians” to lead them: the Plebeians viewed the Patricians as more civilized. The nefarious mood that civilization was nefarious was picked up by Marx, who advocated “dictatorship of the Proletariat”, and then by various advocates of blood red flags, including Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler (who devised the Swastika, this spider gorged with blood, deliberately so).

And then the mood from Rousseau that civilization was nefarious was amplified further by what US plutocratic universities call “French Theory”. That’s basically the nihilistic theory that there is no such thing as civilization. Only idiots who have never nearly stepped on a snake as I did while running yesterday (I knew it was snake weather, but when I had a momentary lapse of reason, a snake dashed; somehow, while squealing my leg stayed up in the air while the other provided supplementary lift… Snake survived, barely…)… only idiots believe all cultures are identical. Many times I was brought to hospitals in pretty bad shape, in Africa, Europe, America, and thanked the gods of humanity for medical care, civilization… 

***

The French Mission Civilisatrice Was Destroyed By British Slash and Burn:

The French arrived in North America a century before the British. When they consulted with the Native Americans, the French leaders were told that trading was welcome. However, Native American leaders informed Jacque Cartier that settlers were not welcome. Nearly a century later, arriving at the exact same spot as the Mayflower settlement a few years later, Champlain observed that Native American settlements of the land were so extensive that it left no room for French settlers.  Within a century, most of North America was under French control, as “Louisiana” and “Canada”. But it was military and trading control, and the “mission civilisatrice” was in full swing. However the French had not launched a colonization program.

Along the Atlantic seaboard, the English colonies had implemented a genocide against the Natives, as early as 1609 CE:

As Chief Powhatan said:

“Your coming is not for trade, but to invade my people and possess my country…Having seen the death of all my people thrice… I know the difference between peace and war better than any other Country.”

As early as 1610 CE, the two commanders of Jamestown, Thomas Dale and Thomas Gates viewed Native American presence strictly as a “military problem”. Then they decided they couldn’t solve it militarily. As the colonists were about to head out into the open sea, they were met by the incoming fleet of Thomas West, 3rd Baron De La Warr. Taking command as governor, de la Warr ordered Jamestown reoccupied. He plotted annihilation of the surrounding tribes. In July 1610 he sent Gates against the Kecoughtan Native American nation. “Gates lured the Indians into the open by means of music-and-dance act by his drummer, and then slaughtered them“. This was the First Anglo-Powhatan War. The English, led by Samuel Argall, captured Pocahontas, daughter of Powhatan, and held her hostage until he would agree to their demands.

Shortly after, the colonists in Massachusetts introduced slavery in North America (alerted to this by yours truly the New York Times then started their “1619 Project”, to draw attention to what really happened during the foundation of the English colonies.

***

Alternate History: Could history have been different?

To redraw history is complex: the French would have needed to change towards a colonization mindset, and send their degenerates, thugs and derelicts to America… Or their Huguenots… And that was actually attempted in the Sixteenth Century. This happened in the Carolinas (named this way by French settlers). But then the fascist war criminal Philippe II of Spain annihilated those colonies, down to the last baby.  Bad luck intervened: the relief French fleet was destroyed by a hurricane. Or why the USA speaks poorly pronounced French…

Should history be redrawn?

As it is the USA is a giant United Europe. It was founded in blood and gore… But arguably, not much more blood and gore than what was needed to make the “mission civilisatrice” proceed. similarly to what the new city of Rome achieved until it massacred the population of the neighboring Veii, largest and wealthiest Etruscan city (396 BCE). the genocide at Veii was followed, within six years, with very bad behavior “contrary to the laws of nations” say Livy, of its envoy, the Fabii brothers. Outraged, the offended Gauls attacked, routed the Romans, and conquered Rome (390 BCE).  

Were history to be redrawn, it would have to be redone in such a way that the French would have been able to build a strong enough civilization in North America. That would have required tougher ways, those one calls “less civilized”. 

“Less civilized” ways have to be well targeted. If the idiot known as the “Sun King” had directed his energy towards the conquest of North America, instead of destroying the French elite (not just the Huguenots), and making little plots in Europe (war of the Spanish Succession), France could have civilized America… instead of letting English plutocrats (and their tobacco slave plantations) do it. But then Louis XIV was following well established French ways: the French elite had known about America and its “Indians” for more than 150 years, in great detail: a massive “Indian” fair had been held in the early Sixteenth Century, and even the king came. But the consensus in France was that trading with the Indians was fair, and so was the “mission civilisatrice” but not much beyond that was. And the mission civilisatrice backfired as the French-civilized Indians were killed by people of the fiercer sorts (including English land speculators a la George Washington)…

When the Anglo colonial imperialist genociders pushed west, some of their fiercest opponents were descendants of French “coureurs des bois” and “trappeurs”. Resistance to US imperialism in Colorado was led to such French (five resisting brothers were all killed by the US). The same sort of thing happened in Canada. As it happened the French mood and French methods of trading, civilizing, and interbreeding won in the end (but too late for comfort). They were used in parts of the USA. Collaborator Don Kemerling points out: 

“I grew up in Missouri. There are no reservations. The deal was that individuals could own land and attend schools. I grew up next door to an Indian family who owned land, and were our best family friends. My father mentioned their origin a couple of times, associating the skills of the father at hunting and fishing with his ancestry. It didn’t mean much to me then, but I went to see his widow with my mother and grandmother once, and was suddenly struck at the family portrait, which clearly showed their darker skin and associated features.

They fully assimilated, marrying white people. One son was my supervisor at a company where I worked, for a while. There was no mention of it. It was not an issue. I like to think that instead of genocide, there was much more such assimilation than is recognized. Of course, many died of disease too, but I expect that intermarriage strengthened their ability to survive disease.”

Interbreeding indeed increases resistance to disease. American Natives were mostly isolated from the Eurasiatic-African land mass, a biological supercontinent if there ever was one, for at least fifteen thousand years: only a few hardy, healthy, thus non-contagious, mariners came across the Pacific and the Bering Strait. Thus their immune system got selected to be leaner and weaker. European diseases devastated them. Both in North and South America, the arrival of the Conquistadores was preceded by the death of much, when not most, of the population. The same happened after Champlain’s expedition: the area where the Mayflower would make land was mostly empty when it arrived. However there were still lots of Natives alive, and they learned fast. The English colonies had to conduct a systemic policy of invasion, translocation, and extermination. Several US presidents (Washington, Jefferson, Jackson) became great practitioners of the art of cancellation of the Natives.

If he read those lines, the Chinese dictator Xi could say: ‘I told you so, I need to be tough enough to gather enough power!’ Indeed Qin united China by force, 22 centuries ago. However, Qin succeeded because, like Rome, Qin claimed and practiced more than most, the rule of law. The one and only law, human and humane law. 

Xi is forgetting that crucial characteristic. Communist Party forever dictatorship is not sustainable. Ultimately, China failed as a state in the preceding millennium, because it was too dictatorial (the very dispersion of authority in the European Feudal System made it less dictatorial, and less intellectually fascistic: free thinkers could generally find a sympathetic potentate… at least outside of places where the Catholic Inquisition exerted its terror, as a crutch to despicable dictatorship as found in the Iberian peninsula, or the Vatican). 

***

Intelligence Does What Is Necessary Best, Including Violence As Needed:

And last, but not least; ultimately power rests on mental power. Dictatorships are less good at creating mental power than democracies. They make do with theft (see the USSR, Putin Russia, Xi China). But stealing goes only so far: it makes one nastier, not more intelligent. Both the Roman state and various Chinese dynasties found themselves in situations when their mental expertise was not enough to solve the problems which crushed them…

 

Individuals who have been indoctrinated by nihilists and jealous inferior thinkers to hate civilization object to the very notion of “civilization”. However, civilization means to live in cities. Cities have high human density, so they require high human dispute resolution. They require intensive agriculture. This is exactly what the French promoted among the Native Canadians. It worked. The Hurons and fellow nations, adopting French agriculture, learned to live in farms. That enabled the Iroquois confederacy, then allied and armed by the British, to swoop down and massacre them all. French Jesuits didn’t thank the Lord. 

The French leaders never saw the conquest of America as the military problem it was. Their mission civilisatrice failed  for a number of reasons, including the fact France’s longest ruling monarch, Louis XIV was a barbarian and criminal against humanity. But, overall, France was too… Zen. Letting British plutocrats run amok happened, in part because the French aristocracy despised merchants and thieves… instead of putting them in the lead (as Queen Elizabeth already did with Drake and company, who made the kernel of what became the Ireland conquerors, the West Country Men…)

So the verdict? 

It’s all a question of balance. Civilization needs to strike the right balance. Talking to the Nazis or the Japanese imperial military-industrial complex with flowers didn’t work. What worked were bombs. Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we know know, were highly successful… considering the alternatives prepared by the Jap High Command, and, inevitably the Allied (mostly US) High Command, which had anticipated them… without the Japanese surrender following Hiroshima and Nagasaki, atomic bombings next to the beach heads (as planned), gas (as planned) were not needed… Hiroshima and Nagasaki were also warnings to the future: see and consider what happens after atomic bombings. The two atom bombings were just the right amount of craftly designed savagery to hasten Japanese surrender (the third planned Plutonium bombing, against Sapporo, was delayed by US generals… Marshall (Joint Chief) and Groves (head of Manhattan Project: they were obviously not too keen to destroy civilians as if they were cockroaches…).

Where I am presently, in North California, we are experiencing what can only be described as nuclear winter, as the vegetation of California is turned into smoke, under climate change, as I predicted would happen, long ago…

Another thing that nobody believes, erroneously, is that the gigantic nuclear arsenals (mostly in the US and Russia) are of no consequence… When it is known, by anybody having read on the subject enough, that a short circuit can terminate civilization as we enjoy it now.

Some, baffled, may wonder: What is the connection with violence? A Norwegian Parliamentarian today nominated  Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize (for a peace treaty between the UAE and Israel). What is urgently needed is a bit more mental violence… to reduce the number of nuclear warheads below a total number of one thousand thermonuclear warheads… Enough warheads to be ready to detour a rogue comet, or smash an uppity dictator sneaking around with WMDs… But not so many warheads as to be able to destroy civilization… So quite a bit more violence here, now, is needed against the ideas and moods which lead us… to forecasted disaster.

Patrice Ayme   

Tags: Civilization, Excess of Civilization, Native Americans, Nihilism