Summary: Sunday’s post discussed the past themes of the FM website project. Today we discuss what we’re doing here, and the new and disturbing themes now underway. Subscribe and join us for these glimpses at the future of America (and the world). First of two posts today.
Our alternative motto.
The FM website is special, of a type rare among the countless sources of information and insight on the internet. It is not special because of its authors (although much of the material posted or reposted here is by exceptional people). Nor because of its content (although some of it is far off the mainstream). It is its audience that is unusual — people interested in articles that challenge the tribal truths of both Left and Right.
The FM website has gained and lost several audiences during the past nine years, as its individual themes rotated from unimaginable to non-consensus to we all knew that. There were posts about our mad wars and mindless military tactics, about climate alarmists’ misrepresentation of the IPCC’s work and concealing scientists’ papers about the pause in global warming, about inequality (before it was fashionable), about the coming mass unemployment from automation (when economists were still assuring us it was impossible), and thousands of posts about delusional beliefs of both Right and Left.
All are harsh truths. Most controversial and harshest of all are the scores of posts about the decline of the American republic and ways to reform it (spoiler: we are the weak link, our acceptance of responsibility for it is the first step to reform).
Audiences came to see the current themes, stayed to see new themes which often appalled them, and left. In this cycle the Pacific time zone traffic has dropped by three-quarters, although total traffic is near record highs. Those that stayed became the core supporters of the FM website project, generating about 500 pageviews per day (roughly one-sixth of total traffic).
For years I considered the gain and loss of audiences as a failure. Now I realize it is an inevitable result of the project. The large successful website have stable tribal audiences. Coloring across the lines — with content both non-consensus and violating beliefs of both Left and Right tribes — limits its size.
Future themes, even more disturbing than those of the past
Another practice of mine that is bad for business is abandoning stories when they become mainstream. By then they are covered by media with greater resources than mine. And there are always new stories to explore. This year the subjects covered here are in transition. Previous posts were incendiary, as seen in the 50,000 comments — mostly negative (often hysterically so). The new topics being explored here might prove even more controversial than those of the past. Here are three of them, different perspectives on the strange futures that await America in the 21st century.
(1) Hundreds of posts discuss weaknesses in our military, part of the larger military reform movement. Future posts discuss why that movement has failed utterly, and how it might succeed in the future.
(2) One of the great project of elites on both Left and Right (bipartisan!) is flooding the West with immigrants from radically different cultures. Future posts explain why they do this, what they hope to accomplish, and the likely effects on western nations.
(3) Perhaps the most profound evolution in all of western history is that of gender roles. After a 150 years it has moved beyond the wildest dreams of the original revolutionaries who began it. How will this is it already changing our societies? What might be the eventual outcome? The answers will shock both the gentle souls of most Americans — and the hard revolutionaries seeking to break American society and recast it according to their dreams.
Post your comments about the past of the FM website, on the themes of its future, and what you would like to see here.
For More Information
Look at the right sidebar to see the range of subjects covered on the FM website. At the top is the “subscribe” box. Especially note the search box, the categories dropdown menu, and the tag cloud. News about themes followed here is posted on Facebook and on Twitter.
If you like anything you see here, please pass it on to friends or in comment threads elsewhere. Also, see the tip jar on the top of the right sidebar!
Some of the FN posts among the most popular and of enduring value.
- Does Donald Trump have a perverted attraction to Ivanka? Details of a smear.
- Mother Jones sounds the alarm about global warming! This time about the north pole.
- Women dominate the ranks of college graduates. What’s the effect on America?
- Iran will have the bomb in 5 years (again).
- The little-known dark side of Ender’s Game.
- “Some people just want to see the world burn”.
- Peak Oil Doomsters debunked, end of civilization called off.
- The 1% won a counter-revolution while we played. We forgot that we are America’s crew, not its passengers.
- The future calls the Marine Corps, but they refuse to answer.
- The “sucker punch” at the Berkeley riot reveals the rot in our politics.
- The GOP might impeach Trump, changing our politics forever – for the better.
- Katy Perry shows us America. We should listen to her.
- Men are “going Galt”. Marriage is dying. Will society survive?
5 thoughts on “Join the Fabius Maximus website to see into our strange futures”
There is a great deal of value to what you do, FM, and I am glad that you have decided to continue. It is understandable that you have considered stopping but your fact-based creative thinking is greatly appreciated. Even your failures are interesting :)
My personal fear is that the people of the US are beginning to split into separate camps that will eventually become separate nations. The plutocrats are utilizing this split in their drive to power but it could overtake them and become multiple true separatist movements.
Hey FM, haven’t commented in a while, but I’ve still been reading. Keep up the good work!
As for your future themes, on #1 (military affairs) I look forward to your analysis specifically as it pertains to China’s steady (or perhaps not so steady?) military and economic rise. (I write this just after MSCI added A-shares to the EM index…) On #2 (migration), I’m curious for your thoughts about what Steve Sailer calls “the world’s most important graph” (http://www.unz.com/isteve/the-worlds-most-important-graph/) — demographic trends in sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East versus everywhere else.
Thank you for the feedback. I’ve written about both the issues you raise (they’re big ones).
See posts about China’s military and economic growth here. In brief, predicting any nation’s economic growth is difficult to do accurately (remember the widespread forecasts in the late 1980s that Japan would dominate the world in the 21st C?). It is especially difficult for China, with their complex population and debt dynamics. As for its military, it is like Russia — a subject of war mongering hysteria to support America’s insane level of military spending.
As for “The World’s Most Important Graph”, it is like most of Steve Sailer’s work — superficial, ignoring the key details (i.e., he often gives little or no evidence that he has read the material he excitedly cites). The demographers who prepared that said it was purely a probabilistic exercise — not considering the real-world factors that drive demographics. In other words, it’s nuts to use it like Sailer does. To see how actual experts look at it see The facts behind the scary new UN population forecast & those doomster headlines.
it’s quite daft to seriously expect that Africa – which can barely feed itself now — can have its population grow from 1 billion to 4.5 billion. As is Sailer’s belief that Africa’s emmigration rate has a significant effect on its overall population. But he manufactures great clickbait! An intellectual entrepreneur for our time.
His follow-up post is equally daft in its nutty confidence that Africans will neither reduce their fertility as has everyone else — especially as their population density skyrockets.
FM, not sure you’re correct about sub-Saharan African demography. Erlich was wrong about commodity prices. All the neo-Malthusians were wrong about population growth in the late 20th century. There is, as far as I know, no sound reason to believe the recent trends in sub-Saharan birthrates are in any meaningful sense “unsustainable”. It is difficult to come up with an “ecological” or “carrying capacity” based theory of population which would hold up to scrutiny relative to the many times such theories have been disproven by mankind’s adaptiveness. But the fact of the matter remains, to the best of our knowledge, above-replacement-rate fertility is expected to be concentrated in sub-Saharan Africa and MENA for the foreseeable future. There is no way that cannot be a big deal, and it seems likely to lead inexorably to future migration-based stressors. That’s why the graph is important, and I think you’re too quick to dismiss it.
“There is, as far as I know, no sound reason to believe the recent trends in sub-Saharan birthrates are in any meaningful sense ‘unsustainable’.”
Why do you put “unsustainable” quotes? I didn’t use the word. Nor is that remotely what I said, and your claim explicitly contradicts what I wrote in my post.
The UN probability study assumes that much of sub-Sahanan Africa will grow to the population densities seen in modern China. That is clearly sustainable — but that assumes that they will advance in technology yet not experience the collapse in fertility that every other society has experienced as it moves along that curve.
On the other hand, if they don’t advance in technology (and social organization) than those high population densities are unlikely — they can’t feed themselves.
“All the neo-Malthusians were wrong about population growth in the late 20th century.”
“Erlich was wrong about commodity prices.”
That is pretty much an urban legend as usually stated. The truth is, as usual, more complex than ideologues say. See Looking at natural resources as limits to growth.
“It is difficult to come up with an “ecological” or “carrying capacity” based theory of population which would hold up to scrutiny relative to the many times”
Totally false. Carrying capacity is a valid concept if stated in terms of a given level of technology and social organization. It is false only if stated as an absolute, ignoring other relevant factors. That’s a mistake made by ideologues and pop gurus, not professional demographers.
“the best of our knowledge, above-replacement-rate fertility is expected to be concentrated in sub-Saharan Africa and MENA for the foreseeable future.”
First, what is “our knowledge”? Can you provide an expert citation for that claim? Second, real demographers are cautious about predictions of constant fertility rates because such claims have been repeatedly proven wrong. For example, it was long assumed that Iran’s high fertility would not collapse — due to religion and cultural factors. Nope. It was almost 7 in 1960 and still 6.5 in 1982. But eventually collapsed: it was 1.7 in 2014 — below replacement level.
“That’s why the graph is important, and I think you’re too quick to dismiss it.”
I think you read too much Steve Sailer, and suggest you upgrade to more reliable (if less exciting) sources.