Victimhood, from camaouflage to moral overlordship

Evolution has many interesting aspects, but none of them greater than Survival of fittest, at once astonishingly intuitive and frustratingly recondite, a defining test for organisms.

This marvelous phenomenon has given birth to many amazing spectacles in living world.
One such is camouflage, the capability of being to deceive its opponents, as a mechanism of defense and sometimes also as an aggressive strategy.

I think organisms manifests increasing complexity in the deception. At the simplest level is ability to merge itself in the background, this is also the most popular conception of camouflage.
But I would like to think that there are levels to this.
One of the significant adaption is to "play the dead", this is used to throw the predator off balance and it is successful to a limited extent.

The next level to this deception is witnessed in higher animals. Life under constant violence is difficult, with the winner at as much risk to lose in long term as the loser in short term.
Hence there is a trade-off between short term payoffs and long term consequences.
The resolution results in a wide range of final configuration.

The upshot of this is, it is a common ritual in animals to be spared the bleak future that violence beholds by surrendering to stronger. The weak, the defeated are spared the life, though with a decreased probability of long term survival. It is in this simple mechanism that victim hood has roots.

Going even higher and to consider society in mammals and birds, not only weak is spared, but also they happen to have a place howsoever low in society, entrusted with care of offspring of alpha couple. This holds as long as the hierarchy is maintained . In a subtle way this behaviour of submission to stronger is a survival strategy where probability of survival is directly proportional to utility to group in its survival and propagation.

The most complex is human society. There is a additional factor, for while other animals are totally defined by their instincts, humans posses the ability to reason, to delve into abstract.
It is primarily for this reason that only humans happen to have "culture".

As a rule of thumb evolved cultures are marked by compassion to unfortunate. There is variation on this, I doubt that Greeks and Romans were remarkably compassionate, again as a matter of speculation I believe that their culture was marked by heroism and immortality.
Indian culture had various strains which covered the whole range from high altruism to strict (and some will say dogmatic) adherence to duty. The extreme is of course Christianity with assertion that "meek shall inherit the earth".

The important point to note is that usually compassion in degree is balanced by other religious dictates. This is crucial because for society unbalanced altruism is an invitation for free riding and therefore disaster.

This has been the usual course throughout the history, yet 19th century marked a departure.
In Europe the battle between reason and Christian dogma was won by reason.
Principle of equality and justice were established. Freedom to pursue happiness was proclaimed a right. Having vanquished dogma of Christianity, the 19th century liberals went on to make God of weak.

By degrees, under the constant push from progressivism a role reversal occurred, now it is not a matter of shame to be weak, on the contrary in our emasculated age it is a badge of honour.
Today socialists do not beseech for charity, they demand it as a right.

Then also the cult of victim hood, how people are too eager to label themselves as victims, the wronged, the oppressed. Because not only because it is a sign of weakness which evokes compassion, but also it is a testimony that justice has been denied to them, which is of course an indictment of society and sword of guilt over us. The self-proclaimed victim is moral authority then, the raison-dieter of modern society and the strong, "da man", so to speak is the archetypal villain, he is branded evil due to his strength and it is he,who must be confronted

If progressives has to be stopped, we have to seek destruction of this morbid cult, to vehemently refuse its cynical priests. The civilization suffers from malaise of guilt, to reinvigorate it this guilt needed to be removed.