The radical forces of change in our society aren’t really fighting people or opposition groups, they are fighting nature.
Whether you believe in God and that He created the universe or not, humans do live in a world dictated by natural reason and logic and have millions of years of history – most long before our first ancestors became bipedal and learned to make tools – to prove the reality of…well, reality.
There has always been a sect of Utopian humanists who, at some point, decided they are smart and powerful enough to change natural laws simply by ignoring them and implementing their views of the ways things should be as new laws, thereby perfecting the human race.
But stretching that rubber band can only go so far before it breaks, or it snaps back to a point of equilibrium.
Change only works when the changes fit within established parameters of natural law.
You can’t break the law of gravity just because you want to fly. You can invent airplanes that can fly using the laws of physics, but even that flight is temporary and still subject to the law of gravity – planes fall out of the air when the engines stop (the engines also behaving according to the natural laws of physics, thermodynamics, etc.).
In economic terms, replacing something that works with something new and better is a characteristic called “creative destruction.”
Coined by the Austrian-born American economist Joseph Schumpeter in 1942, he considered it ‘the essential fact about capitalism’. Creative destruction refers to the incessant product and process innovation mechanism by which new production units replace outdated ones.
In other words, the capitalist system improves itself and its output through simultaneous creation and destruction as the old makes way for the new. This is how a capitalist economy responds to changes in demand and create more and more system efficiencies. It also, by nature, incremental. Being so guarantees that the creation/destruction process is experienced across the system in small amounts, preventing a massive paradigm shift as the system seeks equilibrium.
Buggy whip manufacturers give way to automotive parts suppliers, makers of typewriters give way to computer manufacturers, or they morph from one to the other, and so on. One failure common to many theories of governance is that an economy can be “managed”, that committees of planners can react more efficiently than the market itself. This is a belief that has been proven false and yet it persists. This belief creates policies that protect those “too big to fail” and guarantees inefficiency will not be destroyed and replaced until the system becomes too top heavy and topple over, creating situations far worse than allowing the incremental changes necessary in a smoothly functioning economy.
But all these economic changes must follow the established natural laws of economics – like the law of gravity, these laws can also be bent, but not broken without dire consequences.
When you consider our society, culture, and civilization – they all appear as great rubber bands that get stretched in all directions by all sorts of forces.
With no restraints, over time, society and culture always return to a center point of equilibrium. It is when the band is held by some force at one point and is constantly stretched to maintain some “desired” position that it eventually snaps back violently – like the mortgage bubble. The center point is an equilibrium determined by the natural function of the system itself and when not influenced by outside forces, is the most efficient, effective, fair, and equitable allocator of resources on the planet. It operates from the moral point where a seller wants to sell, and a buyer wants to buy. Two individuals determine what is “fair” and “equitable” and act accordingly.
The folks who want to force change, the social engineers, don’t believe in natural law.
The free market of ideas is also subject to creative destruction and distortions like those in the economic arena with one exception, distortions can be sustained for a very long time through government intervention, but the sociopolitical system can be distorted in such a manner to prevent the oscillation of normal function and when a paradigm shift occurs, it is painful – and the more radical the stretch, the more painful the correction.
The powerful can sustain bad ideas longer than would be allowed in a natural environment of trial and error. The best solution is to allow creative destruction in the marketplace of ideas – the people should decide what works and what does not. They should be free to decide what best through trying something but being free to explore other alternatives – or to not change at all.
But that isn’t what the social engineers want.
Social engineering is a dangerous pastime, roughly equivalent to alchemy. If creative destruction exists in economics, then destructive creation, replacing good ideas with bad ones, exists within social engineering.
They want to implement their “smarter than you” ideas via fiat and coercion to prevent any alternative from being considered. Their ideas are so perfect and good, they must be made mandatory.
Larry Fink, the CEO of Blackwater, an investment/private equity firm that has become the enforcement arm of those seeking change through global governance, said it out loud in a 2017 interview:
“Behaviors are going to have to change, and this is one thing we are asking companies, you have to force behaviors and at BlackRock, we are forcing behaviors.”
But even when the change could be positive and good, sometimes society isn’t ready to accept it. Coercion often causes good ideas to fail because their time has not come.
An amazing and unique aspect of Western civilization, and specifically that of the American variant, is that they possess a remarkable elasticity for change and to self-correct.
Change should be organic, a part of a natural cultural ecosystem.
It may be painful for a while and take a lot of effort to force the ruling elite to let go of the rubber band but sooner or later, as always occurs in nature, an equilibrium will be achieved.