Viral vs. Organic Propagation

A Framework for Understanding the Diffusion of Culture

Much of the work done in this Substack is introducing concepts.¹ This is of course not enough—theory must give way to praxis, but theory still matters. One of the most orthopraxic schools of thought, Confucianism, nevertheless understood the importance of getting your concepts in order. They called this process the rectification of names, and the master himself said it was the “beginning of wisdom”. The idea is that your conceptual frameworks must carve reality at the joints, because otherwise you will be systematically deceived.

One such conceptual framework is viral vs. organic propagation. As it sounds, this framework concerns the way that ideas, practices, identities, even something as concrete as sexualities, spread. And as usual, the idea is quite simple but has implications not at all obvious on the surface.

The core difference between these two modes of diffusion is in the relationship of the object to its carrier, specifically concerning the alignment of reproductive interests. When the reproductive interests of the object and carrier are aligned, we have organic propagation; when they are not, we have viral propagation.

Let us give some concrete examples. The carrier of the object sexuality is the person; we all, as particular people, have a sexuality. In the case of heterosexuality, the reproductive interests of the person (carrier) are aligned with the reproductive interests of the sexuality (object). If heterosexuality is to reproduce itself, it can only do so by ensuring the reproductive success of the person who is heterosexual—heterosexuality propagates organically. Homosexuality, on the other hand, is not aligned to the reproductive success of the homosexual. In fact, it is misaligned—the homosexual’s reproductive fitness is actually harmed by his homosexuality. Homosexuality must reproduce itself another way, such as by inducing its carriers to create a cultural environment where homosexuality is accepted, even encouraged—homosexuality propagates virally.²

This framework applies to ideologies too. Nationalism is an example of an ideology that propagates organically, because nationalism (object) promotes the reproductive interest of the ideologue (carrier). Globalism, on the other hand, propagates virally, because it does not. In this case we can see something else interesting: an object may have more than one carrier. We can consider the carrier of the ideology the ideologue himself, or we can consider it the nation. This can in some cases get quite complex. Meritocracy, as an idea, does not necessarily help the individual person, who may be competent or not. But meritocracy does, at least purportedly, help the group.³ So apparently, at the individual level meritocracy spreads virally, but at the group level, organically. Even a population subgroup can propagate virally within a wider population group, although you’re not allowed to talk specifics unless you want to go to jail.

This is all fine and good, but what does it matter? As it turns out, it matters a lot. In fact, it has deep implications for our world.