Darwin Again

The old racial paradigms in Malaysia are obsessed with the idea of domination while there is actually more than one result possible by a clash of civilizations.

By batsman

This is not meant to be a torture session for some of you. However, natural science and philosophy has a great impact on the values and mindset of society. Some climatologists are well on their way to bring disrepute to themselves while some people in Malaysia are distorting and manipulating Darwin for their own motives as I argue here.

I have great respect for Darwin as a great thinker, but his theory is nearly 200 years old and owing to its role in the quarrel between science and religion, it has been fossilized somewhat when it was placed on a pedestal by funny champions of science. There have been no improvements which these funny champions are willing to recognize let alone acknowledge in the fear that any alterations may affect its dominance and influence negatively. The theory that is taught in schools today is the same one taught 100 years ago. Darwin has been fossilized the same way some religions tend to be.

Darwin is a natural scientist. His studies and observations were based on what was current during his time. He did not take into account the past or the future. Granted past and future tend to be conjecture, but the conjecture would have been HIS and as the foremost scientist in this new field, his conjecture deserved some weight.

I am not going to discuss the past as the conjectures will then be MINE, although I assure you these conjectures are extremely interesting, so you will just have to miss out on possible PhD ideas. However, we are in Darwin’s future and our current observations (denied to Darwin) should impact on his theories somewhat if they point to a different conclusion.

For example, Darwin never seriously studied the impact of invasive species on isolated native communities or natural equilibriums or even on species under stress and unable to adapt. These are extreme or special cases of natural selection and should impact on his conclusions. Although today many examples already exist especially in Australia, these exceptions never impacted on traditional Darwinism (I suspect because Darwinism was already placed on a pedestal and fanatically protected by funny champions of science).

These studies should have consequences for human communities as well in the form of a clash of civilizations and I suspect this is the second reason why people are so over-sensitive when such issues are brought up. They feign inability to understand.

So maybe this is a torture session after all for those who have feigned inability to understand while for those who truly did not understand, consider this as an intermediate step between level 1 and level 2 and as an aid and practice session for all level 1 players unable to reach level 2 skills. After all you are the ones who champion competitiveness and it would be a shame if you are unable to get past the basic level 1 game.

It is actually incorrect to say that Darwin was never faced with an example of the impact of an invasive species on an isolated local natural equilibrium since what happened in Australia never seriously bothered anyone until recently.

Even in Darwin’s day, humans may already be considered a dominant species and the impact of humans on natural competitors may be studied as a special case in natural selection although the impact of humans on themselves as well as on competing human communities relate more to social or political studies. Perhaps the complication of religious objections never made this objective study a real possibility. But it was Darwin’s genius that allowed the theory of natural selection to be formulated, while hundreds of thousands of studies on the competitive impact of humans on each other never seemed to progress beyond the age old mindset of “Kill or be killed” which, by the way, still seems to be the dominant policy or trend of thought of the US superpower as well as most of the movies it produces.

In Malaysia, the question of dependency on subsidies versus competitiveness equally bothers us on both sides of the political divide. The whole logic of UMNO and Perkasa is that Malays cannot survive without subsidies while some in the opposition champion the idea of super-competitiveness as reflected by “Compete or die”. I submit that both these ideas are mired in the old racial paradigms and there is no real solution to these quarrels unless a new paradigm is achieved.

Darwin’s natural selection produces a natural equilibrium as the end result. Super-competitiveness produces domination as what happens when an invasive species is let loose in an isolated natural equilibrium or the way human super-competitiveness dominates other natural life forms on earth or the way the US super power dominates the rest of the world.

The old racial paradigms in Malaysia are obsessed with the idea of domination while there is actually more than one result possible by a clash of civilizations. Civilizations can also learn from each other and complement each other creating a new equilibrium as a result. For those who believe, soul music is proof enough. For those who do not believe, no proof is possible (quotation pinched from someone else, alteration is mine)

It is not a question of who should dominate or who is most qualified to lead or who is most qualified to work or who should be given controlling interest in the productive resources of the country so as to produce the most returns.

New style opposition (as opposed to those mired in old racial ideas) must promote a competitiveness that encompasses the WHOLE people and not just a segment of the people. The new paradigm demands that all the people move forward as a single competitive unit and that everybody not just carries his own weight but more.

The idea of subsidies should no longer exist except for very young people, very old people, the sick and the handicapped. This must be the platform of the new style opposition. This is a platform that is not possible with just politics and economics, but must encompass faith, ethics and religion as well.