Organized Or Disorganized Legacies

Recently, Bruce Charlton posted about marriage, and how young people have trouble marrying and settling down these days because until very recently marriages were mostly arranged by parents, and people aren’t evolved for self-arranged marriage.

I think this is only partly true. I think that for older children, parents took some trouble to arrange marriage, after making it financially possible by arranging some kind of work for the boys and a dowry for the girls.

I think that for younger children, particularly in larger families, much less trouble was taken. A stock beginning to a fairy tale is a young boy who leaves “to seek his fortune”.

In less optimistic terms, this was the boy getting kicked out of the house. The oldest son can get the farm, or the tenant plot, or the family business. Possibly something can be arranged for a second son, but likely not, and a third son is out of luck.

The same is true for daughters, with some variation. The oldest daughters will have more access to family assets such as a dowry and help from the mother and other female relatives. If all daughters have a similar level of attractiveness, they will do better. If a younger daughter is better looking, she will attract more interest from marriageable men and may get the assets to complete the marriage. Daughters could probably hang around the house longer, as there was always a demand there for female labor.

In general, though, for younger sons and daughters, it was pretty tough. You could hang around town and maybe somebody would take you on as an apprentice, or a laborer, or a servant. A boy could join the army, or you could go and take your chances in the city. If you couldn’t find anything in the city, you would probably wind up a petty criminal or a prostitute, and even if you did it would probably a miserable servant position. Infectious disease killed lots of city dwellers, so there was always room for more hopefuls.

This young man in Spain has no future, and no one is too interested in finding him one. Is he lazy? Probably, but he’s a kid, and all kids need some ass-kicking.

The old system was pretty harsh. A lot of people disappeared into a black hole of extreme poverty and early death. But older children did get taken care of. I suppose this accounts for the adoption of limited reproduction starting in the late 18th century. As people got more sensitive, the idea of having kids who would be miserable and die young without families seemed much worse.

When modern prosperity arrived, the problem largely went away. There was a job for every boy, and a boy with a job for every girl. Parents didn’t need to worry too much about their children’s future, and even if you had a lot of kids they all had a good chance of being OK. This was assisted by the fact that traditional morality prevented people from doing stupid things, like getting knocked up by a bad boy with no job.

Both modern prosperity and traditional morality are long gone, so now many, many young people are in the position of a third son or a third daughter in the old days- no resources, little prospect of decent employment, and no one real interested in helping out.

We are all descendants of survivors. More of us are descendants of the oldest son who got the farm, and of the oldest daughter who got the dowry. But many are descendants of plucky younger siblings who survived in the city.

The most important thing to remember is nobody cares. We are the surplus population, and we are not only not of any use to TPTB, we are potentially dangerous. TPTB have created mouse utopia for black and brown welfare recipients, but most white people find this kind of life abhorrent.

The only help we will get is self-help. Help yourself, help your family, and help whatever deserving white folks you can.



About thrasymachus33308

I like fast cars, fast women and southern-fried rock. I have an ongoing beef with George Orwell. I take my name from a character in Plato's "Republic" who was exasperated with the kind of turgid BS that passed for deep thought and political discourse in that time and place, just as I am today. The character, whose name means "fierce fighter" was based on a real person but nobody knows for sure what his actual political beliefs were. I take my pseudonym from a character in an Adam Sandler song who was a obnoxious jerk who pissed off everybody.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Organized Or Disorganized Legacies

  1. Pingback: Organized Or Disorganized Legacies | Neoreactive

  2. Ryu says:

    We surely aren’t like the jews during WW2. No one is coming to save us. They would have been exterminated from Europe completely if not for the US.

    Were you familiar with the mouse utopia experiment, Thrashy? The ending was not pretty. It ends with violence and alienation.

  3. Pingback: This Week in Reaction (2015/12/13) | The Reactivity Place

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s