In the final segment on this subject, I want to address how consistently stimulating Liberal amygdalae is a viable long term political strategy, how it can condition within the Liberal a more group centric psychology (or at least condition an aversion to supporting out-group favoring psychologies), how this may have all been a part of a more primitive programming scheme, designed to produce maturity in individuals when it was needed, and how this strategy could develop the populace’s brains so as to motivate them towards the pursuit of greatness and the love of America, and away from the treasonous disloyalty of Liberalism.
I am now of the opinion that amygdala development, and the associated development of Conservatism, function to adapt an organism to it’s environment as completely as possible. As Mangan has pointed out, this probably has to do with dopamine function as well, but no matter. Both mechanisms work the same, in pursuit of the same purpose.
If times are easy, resources are free, and there is little threat to stimulate the amygdala, there is little to develop it. As a result, one’s psychology will trend towards the r side of the spectrum, and from a practical perspective, individuals will make hay converting environmental substrate into offspring as quickly as possible, with little regard for offspring fitness.
If however, resources grow scarce, death will enter the arena, and begin to instill fear, through amygdala stimulation. As Jost has shown, such stimuli will trigger wide ranging conversions in individuals towards Conservatism. What is occurring, is amygdalae are developing, and individuals will, without conscious awareness, begin to shift their psychology and their behavior towards a K-strategy, designed to produce offspring which will survive this period.
Obviously, this plays out upon genetic predisposition, and there will always be some who will not develop properly, and are culled as a result. But the overall effect will stand as an example of a perfect molding of psychology (and reproductive strategy) to environment, designed to maximize the probability of passing one’s gene’s forward.
Today, were government to fail, resources to grow scarce, and the specter of violent competition to enter our national environment, Americans would rise to meet the challenges, and as a result, Conservatism would rapidly rise. Soon Liberal foolishness, especially relating to giving what little we have to the government so it might be redistributed to the welfarites, would not be tolerated. Have no doubt, an accurate description of the modern Liberal would rapidly become a raucously funny story we would tell our disbelieving grandchildren. Indeed, absent an aggressive change of economic course, I suspect this is the direction we are heading today.
Of course, it would be nice to avert such an unpleasant outcome. If only we knew of a way to stimulate Liberal amygdalae, without requiring the horrors of a societal collapse, and a radical reduction in resource availability.
That is, of course the utility of this work, and the debate techniques which arise from it. r-strategists are programmed with extraordinarily sensitive amygdalae, easily overwhelmed by the most basic of stimuli. This both, produces a conflict averse (and aversive-stimuli-averse) reproductive strategy, and it maintains the adaptable r-strategist’s brain in a state of extreme readiness to respond to the amygdala stimulating environmental cues of a K-selective environment. Not all r-strategists will be adaptable, but many will, and those which are, will rapidly turn K when environmental stimuli indicate the time is right. Those which are not adaptable will remain sensitive to the cues discussed here, and will probably find themselves conditioned to withdraw from the public debate.
So if we present these cues to the populace regularly, it will be possible to mimic the K-selective environment, and similarly condition the populace to avoid all of the Liberal foolishness we presently are confronted with. As with the Mike Wallace roundtable, the hardened Liberals would become conditioned to avoid open pronouncements of their Liberalism, while the Lemmings would be conditioned to support Conservative values.
If we do not make an effort to present these clues, our populace’s amygdalae will remain undeveloped, our nation’s greatness will steadily decline, and eventually, nature will apply these cues herself, in a much less pleasant and controllable fashion.
Use of these debating techniques is neither a mark of inferior intellectual ability, nor a mark of a poor grasp of the intellectual side of a debate. Rather it is a mark of the pinnacle of intellect and understanding. Such individuals will not only demonstrate a certainty of their own position’s superiority – they will also demonstrate the most intimate knowledge of their enemy’s innate weaknesses and inferiority.
Those Conservatives who refuse to use these strategies in debate will demonstrate both an uncertainty of their own intellectual ability to understand and perceive correctness, an indecisive cowardice in the battle for Conservative principles and freedom, and a disgusting disloyalty to the freedom loving, Conservative movement.
As Sun Tzu wrote, “Know yourself and know your enemy. A thousand battles, a thousand victories.”
Touching the Raw Amygdala: An Analysis of Liberal Debate Tactics
Table of Contents
Touching the Raw Amygdala: An Analysis of Liberal Debate Tactics – Preface
Touching the Raw Amygdala – Part I – Foundational Understandings
Touching the Raw Amygdala – Part II – Mike Wallace Debates a Marine
Touching the Raw Amygdala – Part III – Mike Wallace’s Amygdala On Overload
Touching the Raw Amygdala – Part IV – The Presentation
Touching the Raw Amygdala – Part V – Distilling the Stimuli
Touching the Raw Amygdala – Part VI – Additional Stimuli
Touching the Raw Amygdala – Part VII – Amygdala Development and Inducing Maturity
Indeed, this paper is another excenlelt suggestion on dealing with the feeling of fear, as our emotional response to concrete or fictive danger. I can only to augment the fact that the essence of whole emotional performance is our brain, respectively its limb system, as modulating centre of our vulnerable emotional life. Your welcome advises to face successfully with sense of scare and anxiety, with instant undertaking any action, fulfills the statement that our brain have great capacity of adjustment in front of many threaten daily events. It is our choice,if we would implement in efficient way this adaptive capability of our brain as comprehensive organ of global life functioning.
I believe that you’re really on to something BIG…
But you need to flesh out the biochemistry/ bio-logic of the amygdala ’emotional fulcrum.’
It must be made explicit that the amygdala is a logical operant/ decision filter / decision tree flip-flop within the cortex.
It functions like the reflexive impulse of our limbs and eyes: autonomusly and for the explicit purpose of injury deflection.
This time around, the defense is social and pyschic.
———-
Further, you need to spell out that r-populations are functionally ‘cannibal genes.’
===============
On a different tack entirely:
The Solutrean thesis is that haplogroup X — Europeans of Basque heritage — made it to an empty Western Hemisphere 10,000-years before Asiatics.
Haplogroup X Confirmed in Prehistoric North America
(I hope that Google search link made it over.)
20,000-years ago, when faced with no human competition whatsoever, which reproductive bias ought to be favored?
I would contend that resource abundance was entirely negated by the absolute requirement for pack unity — both on the hunt and in camp.
For, while the resources were astounding, it was a world of mega fauna. Even if they were not on the menu, they were always too close to hand. In particular, the short faced bear ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short-faced_bear ) was simply everywhere in North America — and it would eat the same foods that we would — plus US.
So, I posit that the r-gambit works in low-threat environments. Resource abundance is almost immaterial. It’s a winning gambit in all conditions when it’s not targetted — ‘out grouped’ — by its inter-species K-crowd. ( i.e. kicked out of the pack/ den/ burrow )
One may call to mind the mocking bird reproductive strategy. In this case you have the r-gambit taken to the ultimate limit.
It’s VERY worth your while to expound upon both this bird and the famously gang-raping mallard duck.
With the duck you have a perfect model of a dual mode reproductive ethos: saints and harlots. ( If you’ve ever wondered where that Manichean dichotomy arose — ’twas in our genes. )
Carry on the good work.
Thank you for the comment, Blert.
I think the amygdala thing could be big too. I suspect in a K-selective state of nature, we would be shocked at how quickly Liberals retreated from all conflict, even at the earliest stages, when it was just in the form of social irritation between individuals. I think it remains, like a vestigial feature, just waiting for Charleton Heston to raise a musket over his head and yell, “From my cold Dead Hands!!” Suddenly gun control isn’t such a good idea.
It’s my hope that by laying out a credible theory behind this, people may begin to try using controlled confrontational stimuli to mold our public dialog.
You are right, though, I will have to dig into the amygdala mechanism more in the future.
“I posit that the r-gambit works in low-threat environments. Resource abundance is almost immaterial. It’s a winning gambit in all conditions when it’s not targeted — ‘out grouped’ — by its inter-species K-crowd. ( i.e. kicked out of the pack/ den/ burrow )”
Very interesting, and completely correct. I am ashamed to say I didn’t really give a lot of thought to megafauna eating us, or those effects. I realize now I was just viewing us as bugs on a petri dish, but you are definitely right. A predator who picked off single individuals, but couldn’t take a group would have been a potent selective pressure.
“One may call to mind the cowbirds and cuckoo birds reproductive strategy. In this case you have the r-gambit taken to the ultimate limit.”
I had never even thought of the cuckoo. Talk about low rearing investment. Interesting.
“It’s VERY worth your while to expound upon both this bird and the famously gang-raping mallard duck.”
I actually saw that a lot as a kid, and you’re right. It would be interesting to see what those studies say about when those strategies are favored.
Thank you for the help. I appreciate it.
Amending and correcting:
I should’ve referred to brood parasites: cowbirds and cuckoo birds.
Mocking birds, apparently, take pleasure in just jamming the mating calls of other species. This gambit is also in the quiver of Liberals.
I’ve lost track of how many times a dyed-in-the-blood Liberal professes to be a Conservative — done, of course, to maintain in-group status.
“I’ve lost track of how many times a dyed-in-the-blood Liberal professes to be a Conservative — done, of course, to maintain in-group status.”
Funny thing is, I think that describes a majority of Republican politicians.
[…] Part VII […]