In defence of Chesterton's fence, it was never meant to instil blind respect for all traditions. Rather, it was a reminder to only change or abolish a tradition once you thoroughly understand what purpose it serves. The fence may be keeping out a dangerous bull you weren't aware of, for example.
A thorough investigation of a tradition of widow-burning might reveal it serves to keep women as the status of chattels. Or that it allows poor societies to get rid of less productive members no longer defended by a patriarch, much as European and American witch hunts targeted "strange" old women. Proper consideration may lead you to conclude it is malign in intent and effect, and then do away with it.
The reason Chesterton's fence caught on is that many (supposedly sophisticated) people assume that all traditions are barbarous relics that are at best useless and at worst malign. People for whom the words 'tradition' and 'traditional' are risible markers of primitive ancestor worship. Of course, holding such a view is actually much less sophisticated than taking the time to understand the value and purpose of each tradition and judging each on its true merits, as Chesterton suggested.
I got the American version of the 1066 book Ed mentions at the beginning and it's a fun read. Made me LOL several times which is quite a feat (I'm pretty dour IRL) and I recommend it for people who want a light 'n fun intro to the historical period it covers.
Speaking of Amazon reviews, I saw one reader review of the book on I think Amazon that said, amusingly, "the author is far too flippant for the subject matter." :| .
Well, you can always remove a small part of the fence and watch what happens. If a bull rushes through, then at least it's in a place that you're already half-watching, just in case. Sure, damage done, but easy to contain, and repairing that part of the fence shouldn't be all that hard (much easier than erecting a whole new fence). And if nothing bad happens (and ideally some good things happen), then you can tear down the whole thing.
At its best, that's how liberalism works. Let different people try different things, and see how it works out for them. If it works out well, then imitate them. Otherwise, they become a cautionary tale, before everyone else got around to imitating them.
For some reason I thought "has a good beat" came from Margaret Thatcher on a Saturday morning kids TV show, but I can't find it. However, I did find her reviewing Pepsi and Shirlie alongside Gordon Kaye, so that's something https://youtu.be/YdTkNz2KgcI?si=DL8e3mnOtmM_sFo0
In the U.S. "it has a good beat and you can dance to it" was a catchphrase associated with the music show American Bandstand, which probably predates any British usage.
Re: Proper consideration may lead you to conclude it is malign in intent and effect, and then do away with it.
There's a point where something is malign and barbarous to a magnitude that requires we get rid of it, whatsoever the original intent. Slavery had several justifications in antiquity. but in the modern world these ceased to be meaningful and all we had left was a moral horror that made some few masters very rich.
About TSMC, the fertility rate of TSMC's employees is not 6x that of Taiwan's general population as it might appear by comparing that 1.8% of babies to 0.3% of population.
Around 95% of TSMC's workforce is comprised of employees aged between 18 and 50, so TSMC employees are 0.6% of the population of fertile age. More importantly, assuming a small number of marriages between employees, for every new TSMC parent there's a spouse or partner who is - most likely - not a TSMC employee. So, these are the children of close to 138k Taiwanese people, not of approximately 69k TSMC employees.
Taking this into account, I estimated the crude birth rate of TSMC employees between the ages of 18 and 50 as 18 per 1,000, compared to a CBR of 12.6 for the general population in that same age range. That's a fertility rate 40% higher for TSMC employees, which seems pretty good but not spectacular (it's still bellow replacement level).
Re Karen's - There was a manager of an imaging department of a London- Whom objected to MRI's cat scans and such being serviced. Checked visually etc- Would complain loudly about some of the most gifted professionals in the country walking on to her ward- to fix the machines that spot cancer.
Indeed. The thing about "Karens" is that they nag and nitpick all out of proportion to the cause, including about harmless things. They're the ones who make HOA regs banning outdoor clothesline drying of the wash; they're the ones who lodge a complaint if someone uses drapes in their windows of a disapproved shade. If they see a family's children playing in the family's own back yard but without an adult present they call CPS as if some dire abuse were in process. If church bells ring out on Christmas or Easter Eve they lodge a noise complaint. As managers they time their employees' restroom visits.
In defence of Chesterton's fence, it was never meant to instil blind respect for all traditions. Rather, it was a reminder to only change or abolish a tradition once you thoroughly understand what purpose it serves. The fence may be keeping out a dangerous bull you weren't aware of, for example.
A thorough investigation of a tradition of widow-burning might reveal it serves to keep women as the status of chattels. Or that it allows poor societies to get rid of less productive members no longer defended by a patriarch, much as European and American witch hunts targeted "strange" old women. Proper consideration may lead you to conclude it is malign in intent and effect, and then do away with it.
The reason Chesterton's fence caught on is that many (supposedly sophisticated) people assume that all traditions are barbarous relics that are at best useless and at worst malign. People for whom the words 'tradition' and 'traditional' are risible markers of primitive ancestor worship. Of course, holding such a view is actually much less sophisticated than taking the time to understand the value and purpose of each tradition and judging each on its true merits, as Chesterton suggested.
True. I would always vote to keep the Fence.
modern centrists like some traditions, namely ancient customs that go back to 2005 or whatever and so can't be repealed by a Tory government.
We still trustingly miss that the whole point of removing the fence is to set the dangerous bull at large.
Great comment.
I got the American version of the 1066 book Ed mentions at the beginning and it's a fun read. Made me LOL several times which is quite a feat (I'm pretty dour IRL) and I recommend it for people who want a light 'n fun intro to the historical period it covers.
Speaking of Amazon reviews, I saw one reader review of the book on I think Amazon that said, amusingly, "the author is far too flippant for the subject matter." :| .
Thank you!
Flippant - fair enough! Is the reviewer still hurting from 1066?
haha I don't remember the details as to why they felt it was such a delicate matter, just that one line that stood out to me as strange
Re: Chesterton's fence
Well, you can always remove a small part of the fence and watch what happens. If a bull rushes through, then at least it's in a place that you're already half-watching, just in case. Sure, damage done, but easy to contain, and repairing that part of the fence shouldn't be all that hard (much easier than erecting a whole new fence). And if nothing bad happens (and ideally some good things happen), then you can tear down the whole thing.
At its best, that's how liberalism works. Let different people try different things, and see how it works out for them. If it works out well, then imitate them. Otherwise, they become a cautionary tale, before everyone else got around to imitating them.
Related: https://www.magyar.blog/p/let-us-be-the-second
For some reason I thought "has a good beat" came from Margaret Thatcher on a Saturday morning kids TV show, but I can't find it. However, I did find her reviewing Pepsi and Shirlie alongside Gordon Kaye, so that's something https://youtu.be/YdTkNz2KgcI?si=DL8e3mnOtmM_sFo0
iconic
In the U.S. "it has a good beat and you can dance to it" was a catchphrase associated with the music show American Bandstand, which probably predates any British usage.
"Liberalism is a product of Christianity, and the decline of one is leading to the decline of the other."
A culture—any culture—that is not transmitted from one generation to the next will quickly disappear.
Re- raising children is a second youth. Linguists seek out rural bachelor's when trying to hear how Lancashire English sounded in1960
Re: Proper consideration may lead you to conclude it is malign in intent and effect, and then do away with it.
There's a point where something is malign and barbarous to a magnitude that requires we get rid of it, whatsoever the original intent. Slavery had several justifications in antiquity. but in the modern world these ceased to be meaningful and all we had left was a moral horror that made some few masters very rich.
About TSMC, the fertility rate of TSMC's employees is not 6x that of Taiwan's general population as it might appear by comparing that 1.8% of babies to 0.3% of population.
Around 95% of TSMC's workforce is comprised of employees aged between 18 and 50, so TSMC employees are 0.6% of the population of fertile age. More importantly, assuming a small number of marriages between employees, for every new TSMC parent there's a spouse or partner who is - most likely - not a TSMC employee. So, these are the children of close to 138k Taiwanese people, not of approximately 69k TSMC employees.
Taking this into account, I estimated the crude birth rate of TSMC employees between the ages of 18 and 50 as 18 per 1,000, compared to a CBR of 12.6 for the general population in that same age range. That's a fertility rate 40% higher for TSMC employees, which seems pretty good but not spectacular (it's still bellow replacement level).
Sources:
- TSMC ESG 2022 report: https://esg.tsmc.com/file/public/e-all_2023.pdf
- Taiwan's population structure, Ministry of Interior: https://ws.moi.gov.tw/001/Upload/OldFile/site_stuff/321/1/month/month_en.html
Re Karen's - There was a manager of an imaging department of a London- Whom objected to MRI's cat scans and such being serviced. Checked visually etc- Would complain loudly about some of the most gifted professionals in the country walking on to her ward- to fix the machines that spot cancer.
Karen's exist
Indeed. The thing about "Karens" is that they nag and nitpick all out of proportion to the cause, including about harmless things. They're the ones who make HOA regs banning outdoor clothesline drying of the wash; they're the ones who lodge a complaint if someone uses drapes in their windows of a disapproved shade. If they see a family's children playing in the family's own back yard but without an adult present they call CPS as if some dire abuse were in process. If church bells ring out on Christmas or Easter Eve they lodge a noise complaint. As managers they time their employees' restroom visits.
1066 (and all that)
No Kindle edition?
I think there will be kindle, a bit later