Profitable Disruption

Like creative transduction, Profitable Disruption is ubiquitous. An earlier, limited definition was given on the ‘Supplemental – Race’ page (2006), as an extension to Creative Transduction: ‘Generating or inventing a problem for the purpose of selling you a solution.’ In 2013 Profitable Disruption was defined as ‘creating a problem for advantage.’

“Ah,” a critic of mine once said, “you’re just pointing out something that is obvious, and everyone already knows about.” But if that be the case, how come there is no accepted terminology, and hundreds of papers exploring it, as there is for, say, cognitive dissonance and the bystander effect? These two are at least an order of magnitude less significant to the well-being of a society than transduction and Profitable Disruption. Yet it seems to have fallen to me to formally define them.

I now have a putative archetype for Profitable Disruption – the last time I wrote on this topic I was still seeking one. Suppose a romance is in progress. It might be a scene, not going far back in history, of a maid in service and a young man in the employ of a neighbouring, well-to-do family. Perhaps she is a chambermaid or milkmaid being courted by the butler’s son.

Many examples given in this system are in relationship/sexual terms, because this of course is where it all begins. No strategy can persist unless it can be passed to the next generation. Hence our ‘Garden of Eden’ for evolutionary archetypes is sex.

The affair between the young man and the maid is going swimmingly – too well in fact, for isn’t it said that “The path of true love never runs smooth”?

Evolutionarily, the female seeks a single male who will stay with her and support her during gestation, childbirth and child-rearing. Crucial to the understanding of female behaviour is an awareness that for as long as females have had undergarments, males have been trying to get into them. And if she permitted that she courted disaster. Until very recently a deserted female could find herself in the workhouse and her children starving, and that is hardly going back a couple of centuries. Many committed suicide to avoid the social stigma of being with child out of wedlock. In pre-history (certainly according to Marvin Harris) the major cause of female mortality was childbirth and attempts to induce abortions.

So a putative origin of Profitable Disruption is testing the male, ensuring that he is not easily swayed and will remain with her during the critical future period when she needs him most of all.

This is also the proposed origin of neurotic transfer, particularly when a female mentions her bad habits or failings during a ‘first date.’ When she does, she transfers power to her opponent and makes her rejection more likely. It is a test in another form.

Since I say that Profitable Disruption is ubiquitous, there should be little difficulty in providing examples. The challenge is in seeing them objectively, for it is human analysing human, not an easy task – never mind the political implications. Below is an attempt to list some likely examples of Profitable Disruption, gathering them together with a few mentioned previously:

• The putative archetype: The female disrupting a relationship and thus testing the male before she allows him to make her pregnant.
• The more complex a system of rules (e.g. tax, welfare benefits), the more people are required to administer the system. With increasingly complexity comes greater chance of error. Every mistake (disruption) generates more work, and the need for more workers. The new workers also elevate the status of those already in post (cf. Cyril Northcote Parkinson).
• Computer software being constantly changed to maximize revenue. Particularly, “naffware” (discussed previously) which refuses to read the data files of its earlier versions. This obliges the user to keep upgrading. It is also an example of a lock-in being exploited.
• A dealer buys a rare and sought-after item, perhaps a vintage valve (vacuum tube) amplifier. He can realise a greater profit by removing the valves and selling them separately, so he does. The valves are sold at high price. He sells the amplifier (minus the valves) to an enthusiast but he has created a problem for the new owner, who must now expend great effort obtaining replacements. He may also have devalued the item, because it is no longer in its original condition, with its original parts.
• Removing the death penalty for outstanding crimes. This is an interesting one, and I shall give a personal perspective on this.
  
  I used to be against capital punishment, having had friends who in various circumstances have been convicted of offences they did not commit. Then I started to notice press reports of appeals, parole hearings, funerals and so on, decades after the crime, of individuals who would formerly have been hung. This allows the media to recycle the original crimes, to no-one’s benefit except their own.
  
  If capital punishment were reinstated, perhaps a small proportion of innocent men would suffer, but what’s new about that? Males take practically all the “rough stuff” life has to offer. ‘String ‘em up and let there be an end to it’ is now what I say, if the matter is beyond doubt and/or there is a guilty plea. Keeping someone on death row for years is of no benefit to anyone either.
  
  Another aspect is that the dramatic nature of capital punishment is striking and impressive. One can envisage someone being close to committing murder, perhaps in the heat of rage, being swayed from killing, during that time of great anger or excitement, by the vivid nature of the punishment.
  
  I could add that this is an example of how applying a feminine approach to problems almost invariably makes them worse. Removing the finality of a death sentence, speedily executed, is a feminine expression (in the past I have referred to this as the feminine Inability to Egress, the female reluctance to permit resolution). Instead that masculine finality has been replaced by the slow torture of years on death row or imprisonment with no prospect of release. Arguably, murder has become more likely to occur.
• A specifically political instance of Profitable Disruption was the election in 2009 of John Bercow as Speaker of the House of Commons. The previous Speaker, known colloquially as ‘Gorbals Mick,’ was so bad that he became the first Commons Speaker to be ousted in 300 years. He authorised MP’s to shred their records; several were convicted of fraudulent expense claims even so. Protocol demanded that he be replaced by a Conservative (who were then in Opposition). One candidate was Sir George Young, a Tory of the old school, who was ideal for the job, especially after the damage done by ‘Gorbals Mick.’ His rival was the left-leaning Bercow: diminutive, Jewish and with an out-of-control wife to boot. Labour MP’s overwhelmingly voted for Bercow to spite the Tories. Although nominally a Conservative, Bercow is accused of favouring Labour during debates and now commands even less respect than his predecessor.
• Mass immigration, causing all manner of problems and giving governments the excuse to introduce laws suppressing free speech, engaging in state-snooping and various other intrusive and totalitarian-type measures. This may not necessarily have been the intention, but instincts can be expressed unconscious of their implementation or outcome. An entire sector of translators, advocacy groups etc. is created, who all profit from the policy.
• “Human Rights” laws generating a bloated legal sector which thrives on alleged incursions upon those entirely abstract “rights.”
• Selling faulty goods, or allowing them to be imported. The seller, or the seller’s population, profits by selling replacements or spare parts; a government can profit by the tax income from repeated purchases (‘Buy cheap, buy twice.’)
• The media clearly thrive on reporting the problems it creates. They enjoy high salaries, public recognition, expenses-paid trips to remote locations, etc. An extreme example is spree killers: Offending male instincts and denigrating white males continually, they enter into a veritable orgy of righteous indignation should one crack and go on a killing spree. (If the spree killer turns out to be black however, a curtain of silence will suddenly fall on the coverage.)
• Similarly, the media establishes taboos then feasts on utterances which break the taboos they have themselves created.
• Israeli companies winning security contracts, e.g. on the London Underground, citing as qualification their experience of the ‘terrorism’ they have largely inspired. Reportedly, Israeli companies are also engaged in safeguarding American and Japanese nuclear facilities.
• Feminism. By empowering women to impose a more feminine environment Jews have modified society for greater amenity for themselves. The societal problems are obvious, not least of which are mass immigration and overpopulation.
• The most significant example of creating a problem for advantage, I would say, is the sheer number of babies being born. Numerous advantages exist for the female of a high population. Condoms have been in use since 10,000BC (sheep gut) and certainly now, women would not have babies if they did not want them. In the Philippines the birthrate is so high that women share maternity beds and the primary schools are operating three shifts a day. Britain is massively overpopulated, but here the population increase is overwhelmingly due to immigrant populations. Practically every modern problem ultimately derives from overpopulation.