Agustin Otxotorena, a Basque executive living in Caracas, grew tired of constant calls from friends and relatives in Spain telling him that there was no food in Venezuela, so on May 20 he began publishing photos on Facebook of supermarkets in upscale sectors of Caracas filled with goods.
In addition to showing evidence of an abundance of food stuffs, Otxotorena also analyzed the situation. He concluded that there are two countries in Venezuela—one where “there are many people having a hard time, who don’t have the money to live,” and another where there is “an upper class that has a living standard higher than Europe.”
The exclusive Fresh Fish Gourmet Market in the upscale Altamira neighborhood in Caracas has plenty of food.
“If you have money there is champagne … vodka, Belgian chocolates … lobster, brand-name clothes, exclusive restaurants … nightclubs, beaches … yachts, golf clubs—a whole country within a country where there are no poor, women and children are blond, go to exclusive schools, exclusive universities, and vacation, where Blacks or poor are the waiters… ,” he posted on his Facebook page.
So now those with the ability to provide value enjoy an increased relative return on their efforts, while the rest of the country is fired up with anger and frustration, building its collective amygdala as each individual is driven to try and compete for meager scraps. Doubtless in the stress, frustration, and anger sex drive will be diminished, and fathers will be much less likely to condone the defiling of their daughters by transient suitors. You couldn’t foster K more effectively than Chavez did.
If you want to stall the ascension of K, there is no better way than to install a responsible leader, and have him create economic success. The only reason Trump may oversee a further rise of K during his term is because of his aggressive, confrontational nature and his tendency to deride his enemies. The only reason Reagan didn’t see a dramatic rise in r was because of his aggressive derision of liberals. Trump will have the same effect. However the success he creates may haunt the movement after he leaves office.
I still think if you wanted to foster a dramatic rise in K, and maybe precipitate a world war, there would be no better strategy than to elect Bernie. By the time he got done with the nation, we would be hanging liberals, illegals, and anyone else who even vaguely irritated us from lampposts, and assault rifle sales would be through the roof.
It is the most confusing paradox, but to get one ideology thriving, you need only try to foster the growth of the other, and succeed.
[…] Try To Create r, You End Up With K […]
“It is the most confusing paradox, but to get one ideology thriving, you need only try to foster the growth of the other, and succeed.” Why? This is the cyclical vision of history, one that assumes that there’s a sweet spot — the Golden Mean — between the extremes of r and K. I’ve been reading your blog incorrectly, then, as I assumed that a K-shift was sustainable, although It appears, now, that a K-shift inevitably falters, producing weak r-selected individuals, who in turn falter, re-creating a K-shifted society.
It’s the rise and fall of the American empire, no? What changes in this vision, is that the rise and fall is repeated by another rise and fall, ad infinitum, but in the history books I’ve read, once a country/culture goes “r”, the decline is more or less permanent. No more Rome, for instance.
No more Rome, but Italy isn’t too bad, and the culture can spontaneously re-emerge with the right rabbit-culling stimuli, such as Y. pestis creating the Renaissance.
The Upper class is Venezuela would most likely be the equivalent of the Democrat rich liberal elites in America. Would one consider them K?