In a homogeneous, high-trust society, breaking the rules is cheating, and it...

In a homogeneous, high-trust society, breaking the rules is cheating, and it deserves swift, severe punishment.

In a heterogeneous, low-trust society, breaking the rules is strategy, and it often wins you power and resources.

The problem? Many of us are still trying to live as if we’re in the first kind of society. But we have not lived in one since at least the late 1960s.

Act accordingly. Or get devoured by those who already are.

This does not mean there are no rules. It does not mean morality is subjective.

It means this: The rules you live by must be the ones you consciously choose. You are under no obligation to follow the rules of your enemies, your competitors, or those who do not care whether you survive, especially if they do not follow those rules themselves.

You must define for yourself: – How far you are willing to go – What rules you will uphold – Who is in your in-group – Who is not

And then act accordingly.

This is what sovereign moral clarity looks like in an age of collapsing norms.

It is important to note: There are homogeneous low-trust societies. But there are no heterogeneous high-trust societies.

Why?

Because in a heterogeneous society, defection becomes rational. Loyalty defaults to your in-group, not the society at large. What looks like betrayal in a high-trust society is simply a competitive strategy in a fractured one.

This is why diversity destroys cohesion: It incentivizes loyalty fragmentation. And without shared loyalty, there can be no lasting trust.

Now, if you are wondering why some homogeneous societies still do not function like high-trust Western European ones, the answer is simple:

Homogeneity is necessary, but not sufficient.

It is one prerequisite among many, shared moral framework, long time preference, high agency norms, and intergenerational vision all matter too.

Homogeneity is the soil. But soil alone does not grow a civilization.