The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
Lack of Innovative Flair Doesn't Matter Under Technological Stagnation
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

reiner tor comments:

Anyway, regardless of Nobel laureates, it’s pretty likely that East Asians are somewhat deficient in the nonconformism department, and so while they’re likely to excel (and overtake whites) in the “add together existing technologies and make them stronger” type of activities, not that many truly original inventions are likely to come from them.

However, I would argue that currently this is less of a disadvantage than would have been 100 or 50 years ago. There currently seem to be very few true original scientific or technological breakthroughs, and what there are, are relatively easy to copy, as long as the original content is merely an idea. For example smartphones, or even nuclear bombs: once you know it’s possible, and have an idea how to start, East Asians will get there and perfect it beyond what most Europeans (except perhaps the Swiss and Germans and a few other similar) are capable of. So, Japanese cars will always be more reliable than American cars, but they won’t invent the automobile. This is a big advantage for whites while things like the automobile are constantly being invented. It’s an advantage for East Asians after technological progress slows down and merely consists of perfecting existing inventions.

Also, achievement is usually 1% idea, 99% implementation. So being better at implementation (“add together existing technologies and make them stronger” is something like that) is actually not very bad. Anyway, whites are also very good at implementation, the East Asian advantage is not that big.

The big issue is the insanity of the Globohomo Empire, which is actively working on destroying whites anywhere. I wouldn’t bet on an empire intent on destroying its own core population. Immigration means lower fertility for whites, interbreeding with Chinese and upper caste Indian etc. immigrants (I’ve seen upper class whites with half-black children, though it’s not very widespread), so the white advantage might get lost even in terms of creativity.

Tl;dr

I’d bet on whites if it was a whites against Chinese struggle. As it is, I think the Chinese have a very good chance to at least become a peer of the Globohomo Empire, and longer term even defeat it.

***

This is a point I agree with, and have made myself here and there. After all, the very concept of a “high level equilibrium trap” was made up to describe China’s curious historical position as a rather economically efficient state coupled with general economic and technological stasis.

Consequently, to the extent that states as such will survive in the Age of Malthusian Industrialism scenario, we may confidently predict that China will be head and shoulders above everyone else.

 
Hide 141 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Please keep off topic posts to the current Open Thread.

    If you are new to my work, start here.

  2. Svevlad says:

    Seems like they’re breaking out of the conformism thing. After all, it’s a long time since that was required to survive, and their breeding patterns have changed. With genetic modification to boot? Yep, they’re gonna overtake everyone, and then rip them off to get gene modded as well

  3. Another point is that it was way easier for the creative races (NW-Europeans) to pull ahead while they were isolated. They invented the steam engine, but China or Japan had no idea of it. Then they invented railways and steam locomotives, but the Chinese and Japanese still didn’t know much. They invented steamships, but they still had very little ideas about it… until those steamships (equipped with multiple cannons etc.) suddenly arrived at their shores. Even then, it was difficult. Most Chinese and Japanese had zero idea how they were produced, what kind of societies it took to create the factories and industrial culture necessary to produce them, etc. etc.

    However, with modern technology, inventions are noticed by others almost immediately, especially if they invest a lot of effort into finding out. So, if the Chinese invest a lot of effort into finding out what the Americans are up to (Emperor Xi: “Wow, they seem to be working on railguns… I want railguns, too! I want it mass produced before the Americans are ready with the first working prototype!”), they might be able to implement those inventions basically at the same time the original inventors implement them. At worst, the original inventors (who have a slightly lesser talent for implementation, and who are also hindered by their own crazy globohomo ideology and affirmative action etc.) might abandon the idea, or get delayed, while the Chinese will implement it. It seems to be happening with railguns.

    So even a White Nationalist Empire might not have such a clear-cut advantage against the Chinese, because the inventions themselves could be quickly copied. Remember, it’s 1% idea, 99% implementation, and the idea itself is easy to copy… at least, in the absence of huge geographical barriers. Thanks to modern transportation and communications technology, those barriers are next to non-existent now.

  4. Dmitry says:

    Apologies to go a bit offtopic.

    Anatoly as your Twitter is projected along the side of this article:

    This article from Tsargrad TV, based on Telegraph, does not represent very well what the source says. It seems like they are reading the least interesting parts of the column in the sources.

    In 2015, Russian (which will be excluding Russians with Cyprus citizenship, et al) students are 3,611 in Independent council schools of the UK (2015 was the historic peak in numbers). In 2018, the number is 2,806.

    Overall number has reduced by around 22% between 2015-2018. At the same time the proportion with parents living in UK increased from around 23% to around 40%.

    So aside from an effect of the currency crisis (-22% total), it also seems to indicate an increase in absolute numbers (+33%) of Russian parents of those children with residency in UK, in 2018 compared to 2015.

    According to new student arrivals.

    In 2015, 1,168 new Russian students whose parents live outside UK, while 226 whose parents live in UK.

    In 2018, 535 new Russian students whose parents live outside UK, 269 new Russian students whose parents live in UK.

    Conclusions.

    1. Currency devaluation and overall weak economy, has significantly reduced number of Russian students whose parents are paying in rubles. (But number from parents paying in other currencies, is unchanged), contributing to overall reduction of 22% by 2018.

    2. Evidence of increased immigration from this demographic to the UK. In 2015, there are 816 Russian parents of children in these schools living in the UK, while in 2018 there are 1107.

    In absolute numbers, 33% more Russian parents of students in independent council schools are living in the UK in 2018, than in 2015.

    https://www.isc.co.uk/media/2661/isc_census_2015_final.pdf
    https://www.isc.co.uk/media/4890/isc_census_2018_report.pdf

  5. Dmitry says:
    @reiner Tor

    There’s not a very good reason to combine Japanese and Chinese together, and it’s somewhat offensive to the high achieving Japanese nationality, who have almost similar 19th/ 20th century achievements as Northern European country.

    Their per person achievement in the modern world is highly divergent, and until recently the gap is makes inferring about Chinese from Japanese, like inferring about Brazilians from Canadians (or perhaps wider). .

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    , @Epigon
  6. The world is stuffed full of people who can implement and/or execute directives (e.g., programmers.) It is NOT full of people who can navigate to better modes of production, i.e., determine what is to be executed.

    While innovations do not have the same splash right now as did the harnessing of steam, or electricity, or the invention of semi-conductors, I suspect that the cumulative effect of smaller, less-noticeable innovations still matters.

    East Asians may well produce ever-better execution of, say, manufacturing automobiles. I do not think, however, that (absent industrial espionage on today’s mammoth scale) they’ll keep up by reverse-engineering the cumulative innovations of People of Mostly NW European Ancestry.

    Cumulative innovation now seems to be the province of “right-brain,” creative people who also have the rare ability to accumulate the “left-brain” foundation necessary to navigate technological processes.

    My guess is that only 1-in-5,000 or even 1-in-20,000 people have this rare combination, and essentially none of them are of Chinese or Japanese (or Indian) ancestry. At least, this is the view informed by people I know who are among the tiny few navigating in this arena.

  7. @Dmitry

    Okay. How is that relevant to my comment?

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  8. Epigon says:
    @Dmitry

    Japan was propped up by the British to present a deterrent to the Russians. China was at the same time mercilessly ground down by a European coalition externally, and by the largest narcocartel that ever existed internally (Chapo and Escobar have nothing on the British opium trade).

    Without enormous British investments, assistance and technology transfers, Japanese victories against the Chinese and Russians would not have been possible at all.

    Armstrong, Vickers and Elswick Ordnance Company literally built the Japanese Navy and Army, along with a brief (counterproductive) input by the French and some crucial early Krupp purchases.

    Do you honestly believe the Japanese came up with steam turbines, boilers, BL and QF weaponry, HE, optical rangefinders, calculators, cemented steel and alloy tech on their own, right from the feudal society? As late as 1915 the Japanese hadn’t built a capital ship on their own. As late as WW2, they were firing large caliber shells made by the British.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  9. Dmitry says:
    @reiner Tor

    I was just responding to the conglomeration of Japanese and Chinese together in the beginning of your comment.

    At the beginning of the 19th century, this could be adequate. But then there is a historical divergence, as Japan rapidly modernized (including technology importation from Europe), and became almost more like a European great power by the beginning of the 20th century.

    Some of this is also only relevant for a limited historical era, and nationalities are almost more attached to historical stages, than to geography.

    So, Japanese cars will always be more reliable than American cars, but they won’t invent the automobile.

    But this is because Japan was still not in the modern world, when the automobile was invented. It’s not because Japanese are less inventive. (Especially in engineering, they are one of the most inventive countries).

    Automobile shows this as much as any industry for them. The most inventive automobile research, is often in Japan. For example, even with a small company – Mazda’s SkyActiv.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyActiv

    The observation is also relevant for China. China is only really joining the modern world since 1990s (largely through technology importation), so their future potential is quite unknown for us now.

    We can’t really infer that Chinese are uninventive, as they’ve only recently been a third-world country. How inventive they will be when they have a developed economy – who knows?

  10. Was non-conformism the advantage of the West?

    Couldn’t one argue that the advantage was that certain parts of the West conformed to the scientific ideal? Also, conformity to monotheistic Christianity did away with much of occult and superstitious thinking.

    West had a stronger sense of individualism, but it was within conformity to the core values and manners.

    • Replies: @AaronB
  11. Dmitry says:
    @Epigon

    Sure, after Japan was shocked by Admiral Perry – Japan modernized by importing everything they could understand from the West.

    Japan rapidly diverged from China, and became analogous to Russia’s historical stage at the end of the 19th century. And by Battle of Tsushima, was interpreted by Western observers, as indication Japan’s organized modernization process had already surpassed a more chaotic managed one in Russia.

    (Compared to Russia, Japan had another advantage of greater cultural and linguistic isolation from the West: they could import Western products, without so much Western political ideology.)

    Modernization by importing technology, China has been doing for the last few decades, while Japan is now one of the countries on the leading edge.

    But my point is, Japan and China have been divergent for more than a century. I don’t think it is very useful to combine them together, and infer about one nationality, from the other nationality.

    It’s possible China in second half of the 21st century will be as innovative (even per person) as Japan was in second half of the 20th century. But there is no guarantee (their behaviour in the 19th century was already very different).

    • Replies: @Mitleser
  12. AaronB says:

    The real Asian advantage is implementation. A more disciplined workforce willing to hugely sacrifice personal time and pleasure for the good of the country (worker bees).

    This is primarily cultural.

    1) This Asian cultural advantage may well significantly erode – it is at least partly a product of the traumas of the 19th century, and an acute sense of inferiority with regard to the West. These effects will dissipate, leaving a population less willing to work the infamous Japanese long hours.

    2) Jews experienced a similar boost in motivation early last century for similar reasons, and are now losing their momentum as that dissipates.

    3) The West may recover a sense of collective purpose and willingness to sacrifice for the….nahhh, just kidding, that’s not gonna happen.

    4) As Asian sense of humiliation and traumas from the 19th century dissipates, so will drive and ambition, and we will see a lowering of Asian IQ scores finally harmonizing with their real world competence level.

    One thing we know – current trends don’t last.

    • Replies: @AaronB
  13. @reiner Tor

    Even historically, I think it’s underappreciated. There is an English poem (by Hilaire Belloc) from the 19th century that went “Whatever happens, we have got the Maxim gun, and they have not.”

    European firearms were introduced all over the world, and in some cases given to natives in large numbers, but they were never able to reproduce them or supply their own ammunition (or be very effective in using them).

    But when Portuguese matchlocks were introduced to Japan in the 16th century, the Japanese began copying them instantaneously and it only took 2 years for them start producing their own guns and ammo for themselves from a couple of Portuguese copies, and they completely reformed their internal warfare around implementing them.

    Then they went into the isolation period which was also a period of peace, so no development was done and they went back to romanticizing swords and writing haiku.

    Isolationism ended in 1853, during the civil war afterward every faction was all buying more modern guns from Europeans to use against each other, including rifles and state of the art gatling guns in the late 1860’s. The gatling gun was invented in 1861.

    By 1880 they had produced their own domestic bolt-action rifle and abandoned all their older muskets.

    The 1880’s was when the above mentioned Maxim invented the first recoil operated machine gun.

    40 years later by the 1920s the Japanese started building their own domestically produced aircraft carriers and planes and machine guns.

    It was lightning quick and no other country in the world in the colonial era ever did anything comparable. Lots of arab countries were still using matchlock muskets even after the Japanese were flying planes (they made their own muskets, most of the non-arab non-european countries were lucky to have bought or stole a few old european muskets). The Chinese also tried but their government was too dysfunctional and had to much inertia to pull off much modernization.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    , @prime noticer
  14. AaronB says:
    @Priss Factor

    The “non conformism advantage of the West” is a stopgap invented to patch a glaring hole in IQ theory – namely, that whites outperform Asians in intellectual and economic accomplishment despite having lower IQs.

    Of course its historically illiterate – 1) Germans, the most notoriously conformist people in Europe, were hugely creative 2) Chinese are famously anarchic, assertive, and rambunctious 3) Europeans were most creative during their periods of greatest discipline and conformity 4) the explicitly non conformist culture of today is also non creative

    Obviously the theory is merely designed as an awkward patch on a gaping hole, and shouldn’t be taken very seriously.

    • Agree: Daniel H
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    , @utu
    , @Passer by
  15. AaronB says:
    @AaronB

    Oh, and the Chinese loss of traditional culture and religion will follow the same arc as it did in the West – a huge burst of initial energy directed towards materialistic ends gradually petering out as the sources of motivation dry up, and all the mental diseases of materialism and modernity begin to take hold.

    Japan is in a much better position here, as it has a much more robust traditional culture. Although it too is shaky.

  16. Mitleser says:
    @Dmitry

    Their behaviour was different because they faced very different situations.
    One of them was just intimidated, the other one had to fight several wars against the foreigners.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  17. Dmitry says:
    @Lars Porsena

    From the 19th century, Japanese had always seemed quite exceptional for nationalities outside Europe/North America

    They believed this about themselves, and it probably contributed to their shock in the middle 19th century after Perry’s Expedition, when they realized how technologically retarded they were compared to their self-perception of where they should be, and how dangerous this relative weakness was for them (in world of colonizing and colonized peoples)

    They modernize in a very organized and rapid way – sometimes in comical way, trying to import the best of everything: importing army uniforms from Bavaria, trains from England (today reversed, as the English import Hitachi trains), and even the Japanese Navy copied eating Indian curry from the British Navy.

  18. @reiner Tor

    In the 16th-17th century, the Chinese and Japanese did quite effectively adopt European firearms and allegedly invented things like volley fire

  19. Dmitry says:
    @Mitleser

    It cannot be only circumstances, but even after opium wars and civil war, there seems a divergence of attitudes.

    For example – see the different approach to the train in the late 1860s. British built a demonstration train in Beijing and the Chinese initially rejected it and took it down. While Japan in the same decade, imported hundreds of British engineers to build its train between Yokohama and Tokyo.

    And the way Japan investigated the West as part of its modernization, is surely very different and more active than other countries. For example, these missions they send to investigate England

    http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/6908/1/The_Iwakura_Mission_in_Britain,_1872.pdf

    In page 31 ^ they even send Japanese ship constructors to work in British ship factories according to this reason:

    Those Japanese naval architects and naval engineers, who had not only studied abroad but also worked in British dockyards, were the pioneers, bringing this advanced technology to Japan. By the late 1880s the Yokosuka Dockyard was equipped to handle this work, although the first vessel built, the Hashidate (1888-94) took over six years to complete

    • Replies: @Mitleser
  20. AaronB says:
    @Dmitry

    In general, a country has its greatest energy and potential right after it opens up and embarks on a new path. That’s when momentum is greatest.

    Israel opened up economically in the 90s, and 10 years later, it demonstrated its distinctive capacities in an explosion of small but highly innovative tech companies.

    It did not take 50 or 60 years. It took 10 years to show what kind of thing Israel is good at.

    It’s the same with Japan. A short time after opening up, her distinctive capabilities – her signature abilities – were very evident. It was quite clear what kind of thing Japan was good at it very soon after it opened up.

    So this idea that China will “unveil” new capacities many decades after it has opened up seems to get the sequence exactly backwards.

    • Troll: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @Dmitry
  21. WHAT says:
    @reiner Tor

    Chinese had variants of AL-31 for two and a half decades now, and still can’t produce an indigenous variant of comparable specs. In their civillian engine-building things are even worse. Same with reactors. Same with missiles.
    Turns out implementation in actually technology-dense areas is very hard for asians as well lol.

    • Replies: @last straw
  22. A short time after opening up, her distinctive capabilities – her signature abilities – were very evident.

    The same is true of China. Only retards didn’t see already in the 1990s that they were on their way to becoming a superpower.

    And it took half a century for Japan to produce things like capital ships. Its industry was still vastly inferior to Western industry in 1941. It took them literally one and a half centuries for its potential to be reached. And its aerospace industry still has to produce an indigenous passenger jet.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    , @AaronB
    , @Dmitry
  23. Mitleser says:
    @Dmitry

    It cannot be only circumstances, but even after opium wars and civil war, there seems a divergence of attitudes.

    For example – see the different approach to the train in the late 1860s. British built a demonstration train in Beijing and the Chinese initially rejected it and took it down. While Japan in the same decade, imported hundreds of British engineers to build its train between Yokohama and Tokyo.

    Circumstances like multiple wars against the British are what I was talking about.

    By the late 1880s the Yokosuka Dockyard was equipped to handle this work, although the first vessel built, the Hashidate (1888-94) took over six years to complete

    Sounds like inefficient import substitution?
    Why aren’t you arguing against that?

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  24. AaronB says:
    @reiner Tor

    Yes, I was merely pointing out that expecting China to suddenly produce lots of genius mathematicians or scientists or computer engineers, or come up with the next big thing, or create a really excellent brand, is unlikely.

    The likely scenario is that it will continue being what it is now, just more so – what you see is essentially what we will be getting from China, just more of it.

    Until following the arc of modernity, it develops the diseases of materialism, at which point it will enter a decline.

    But that is decades away.

  25. AaronB says:
    @reiner Tor

    Wow, you trolled my rather innocuous comment above 🙂

    I think China is really a religion for you Tor – you are so sensitive!

    You should be commenting on the Godfree threads.

    Cioran was absolutely prescient when he said in the 1920s Europe yearns to act the female towards China. I scarcely realized! Well, I hope you get dominated the way your soul yearns for Tor 🙂

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  26. Dmitry says:
    @reiner Tor

    industry still has to produce an indigenous passenger jet.

    Why is producing a domestic passenger plane sign of modernization or technological level?

    From aerospace engineering perspective, design of passenger planes has not changed since the 1960s.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  27. @AaronB

    you trolled my rather innocuous comment above

    You literally proposed that I (or any guy commenting here) nail you in the ass. What could I have done?

  28. @Dmitry

    Well, we’re talking about reaching their full potential. It was merely an example that Japan still hasn’t reached it. Despite being significantly more developed than even in the 1980s.

  29. @Dmitry

    The Chinese had the same perception of themselves, and made all the same realizations as the Japanese did, they just didn’t manage to do anything about it.

    But my point about the Japanese is it wasn’t just the 19th century, if you go back before isolation in the 16th century there were brief hints of what they were capable of much earlier, with them copying matchlock muskets and having their swordsmiths produce them themselves. Not just the industrial tech but also working out the tactical maneuvers between themselves on the battlefield during the warring states period.

    But before isolationism they ultimately opted to try and shut the foreign influence out, which is a far more normal a response then the realization they made after isolationism which was really quite astute. They took pretty much a perfect read on their international situation and the state of global affairs and what would be needed to change it.

    • Agree: AaronB
  30. Dmitry says:
    @Mitleser

    Yes but by the 1860s, China knows more than anyone the danger of the West and of its own retarded economic and military level – and it’s still not acting with emergency speed to modernize like Japan

    Sounds like inefficient import substitution?
    Why aren’t you arguing against that?

    If these particular ships were built for economic enrichment, rather than military ones which may include against countries which are producing them – and they were expected to cost more and have no better features than the imported ones. Then it would sound like an inefficient import substitution.

    If the aim is military, then there are a number of strategic reasons for import substitution.

    However, if we look in this era, the British are still supportive of Japan and see them as an export opportunity. From the same text:

    The Japanese were eager to emulate the Royal Navy and use the Imperial Japanese Navy to demonstrate Japanese power in East Asia. The Royal Navy, especially after the Anglo Japanese Alliance of 1902, did not discourage the development of Japanese naval power. In some senses it was useful to have Japanese ships operating in the China Seas. Prior to the Russo Japanese War therefore the Japanese deliberately invested heavily in naval vessels. The British rather encouraged this, and the British shipbuilding industry flourished and profited from this development.

    Obviously, in two generations, a very different situation. (And military build up of Japan, and desire to be an imperial power, even seems to be an unfortunate choice).

    Matsushima both completed in France in 1891. And in 1898 two shipyards of the United States, the Union Iron Works of San Francisco and William Cramp and Co. of Philadelphia completed the Chitose and the Kasagi respectively.

    The USA was even contracting some of this work for Japan’s navy development – which seems ironic in the historical perspective.

  31. Epigon says:

    You are vastly overstating Japanese capabilities.
    In WW2, they suffered badly due to technological inferiority – from pistols which were most dangerous for their users, over underpowered average, common aeroengines and unreliable 1000+ kW aeroengines to 10 round tray-fed machine guns and atrocious 25 mm AAA, right up to archaic artillery and tank equipment. Like all Empire’s enemies, they were presented as a larger threat than they actually were. Zero was a one trick pony – hopelessly outclassed by post-1940 US planes, just like Ki-43.

    Regarding Al-31 and aerospace industry, it’s not the implementation which is the problem. Cutting edge, military jet engines utilize monocrystalline, special blade coatings and complex cooling conduits inside fan blades – how do you think a blade operates in temperatures above the melting point of an alloy it is made of?

    It is not just alloy chemical composition and specific part dimensions that matters, so reverse-engineering is nowhere near as simple as in some other sectors.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    , @Marcus
  32. Epigon says:
    @Dmitry

    Have you ever wondered why China was unable to purchase modern armament, for example QF tech guns from EOC or Krupp, modern AP and HE naval shells the same way Japan did?

    I mean, they obviously had the cash, since they paid Japan 30 000 000 £ indemnity which Japan promptly spent in British shipyards and arsenals, ordering pre-dreadnoughts and armoured cruisers, guns and ammunition. Back then, a capital ship was priced less than a 1 000 000 £.

  33. AaronB says:
    @Epigon

    This is quite correct.

    When America was in crisis and truly motivated, she was capable of creating better technology than the Japanese.

    The military arena is the best test of a nations peak technological capability, because survival is at stake, and one truly mobilizes one’s resources.

    When the pressure is off, not every nation wishes to invest in the discipline and sacrifice needed to create the best engineered products, but war has a way of concentrating the intellect.

    Also in military performance, Japan was outclassed by America. Germany would have been no contest.

    So Japan tends to get exaggerated, for sure – but compared to the rest of Asia, she is supremely impressive – and quite reasonably impressive even compared to the West, if not top tier.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  34. Dmitry says:
    @AaronB

    A difference with China is its size of population, which is immediately forgotten when we discuss it like it is “just another country”.

    China is more than 9 times more than population of Russia. And Russia is already the huge, almost incomprehensible population size (by far the largest European population), where it is difficult for an individual to conceive of such numbers of people.

    China is the same population as 23 UKs.

    Imagine, 23 UKs.

    And yet just 1 UK, can dominate some fields of technology and science, and control much of the world in earlier eras.

    So even if the average Chinese human capital level would be mediocre or lower than that, we should expect China to have enough population to dominate at least many fields of science and culture in the future (after their population are living like people in a developed country).

    • Replies: @AaronB
  35. This appeal to unmeasured things like Asian “lack of creativity” and “conformism” is where you see that for a lot of people HBD is simply a cover for white nationalism and not empiricism. Where’s the evidence? The numbers? In my experience Germans and Scandinavians are the most conformist peoples on earth, certainly more so than Chinese people, yet the German speaking world was the scientific innovation leader of the world just a century ago.

    I think the crucial thing is first mover advantage in credit for achievements. We all remember the first man in space. How about the second man? (I Googled it and wow this guy is forgotten compared to some astronauts with later firsts.) Third man? The 20 next ones? Were they somehow less brave and capable than Yuri Gagarin? No, it’s just that the credit goes to the first so a slight lead in any field turns into a massive lead in credits for inventions. Can you name some people who worked on the Manhattan project? Most nerds can. How about the Soviet bomb? Russian nerds, maybe. The British bomb? The Chinese bomb? Only the first thing counts.

    Modern theoretical advancements tend to come on top of technological progress. Unexplained phenomenon shows up when you’re experimenting with the latest gadgets, theorists get on the job, more tinkering produces more data to guide theorists etc. A slight lead in technological progress means a massive lead in scientists credited for inventions because in inventions ONLY being first matters and even a slight lead means you’re getting there first.

    Out of non-white countries only Japan has so far closed the gap on technological progress and even they only got there around two generations ago. And now they’re bringing home science Nobels at a good rate, consistent with the delay that people get Nobel credit late in life.

    • Agree: Twinkie
  36. Bonner Tal says: • Website

    The creativity difference is still pretty confusing to me. I wonder, whether you could see the difference if you were to grade essays by Asian and White kids. Mostly, at least in technological areas, creativity is difficult to disentangle from intelligence. You either understand the structure of a problem deeply and then you can come up with a solution or you don’t.

    The conformism difference is similarly strange to me. In Western societies the range of what is seen as acceptable is so narrow, it seems really weird to claim that Whites are non-conformists. My feeling is that conformism, creativity, individualism probably have different aspects that vary between populations. The vocabulary doesn’t seem quite suited to describe the differences in a way that makes unambiguously sense.

  37. @Jaakko Raipala

    Where’s the evidence? The numbers?

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/noosphere/

    In my experience Germans and Scandinavians are the most conformist peoples on earth, certainly more so than Chinese people…

    They’re more conformist on queueing, for instance. But less so on actually important matters. On the tactical level in both World Wars, less so than the Brits, for instance.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    , @Bonner Tal
  38. Mitleser says:
    @Dmitry

    Yes but by the 1860s, China knows more than anyone the danger of the West and of its own retarded economic and military level – and it’s still not acting with emergency speed to modernize like Japan

    British trains in Beijing could also have been used to invade the Chinese capital. Again.

    What China needed was allies, not relying on enemies.

    https://archive.fo/NwWuQ/71e7ed3dda6c48415b8585a64fdbb51711cbce17

    If these particular ships were built for economic enrichment, rather than military ones which may include against countries which are producing them – and they were expected to cost more and have no better features than the imported ones. Then it would sound like an inefficient import substitution.

    So, aren’t they a case of “inefficient import substitution”?
    After all, the main alternative was buying them from the Japanese ally Britain who would not need that much time to complete the ordered ships.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  39. Dmitry says:
    @AaronB

    In some ways, Japan seems to achieve more in their own country than America. And they achieve it despite the earthquakes and tsunamis (which many countries would never return from).

    I’ve only been in Tokyo and Osaka, but my tourist impression of Japan is more impressive than American cities, certainly more than Californian cities – and apart from Manhattan and some parts of Washington (although personally, I like America a lot for tourism).

    Equally compared to Germany – I was generally impressed by Japan (including impressive civil engineering), while from the few cities of Germany I have visited, I didn’t receive any special impressions.

    in military performance, Japan was outclassed by America. Germany would have been no contest.

    And German army, being completely demolished by USSR by 1945. However, the Germans of today build better cars and washing machines. There exists also comparative advantage between countries.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    , @Anatoly Karlin
  40. AaronB says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    The same can be said of Asians in general – conformist in some areas and extremely nonconformist in others.

    Since this is so, it makes no sense to define Asians as being innately predisposed to conformity.

    And in war, if anything, the Chinese have been too anarchic and undisciplined, not too much.

    The whole conformism schema needs to be abandoned.

  41. @Dmitry

    From the 19th century, Japanese had always seemed quite exceptional for nationalities outside Europe/North America

    Japan had become more developed than China economically by the mid-18th century (proxying by things like interest rates).

    It also had much greater human capital.

    Chinese literacy rate in 1900 – 10%. I don’t have the figures off the top of my head, but Japan was at around 30% or 40% at around the time of the Meiji Restoration.

    This must have been the key factor that allowed them to modernize more effectively.

    There’s not a very good reason to combine Japanese and Chinese together, and it’s somewhat offensive to the high achieving Japanese nationality, who have almost similar 19th/ 20th century achievements as Northern European country.

    Sweden (9M) and Switzerland (8M) have about the same number of Nobel Prizes as Japan (127M).

    • Replies: @DreadIlk
  42. AaronB says:
    @Dmitry

    I think that’s a reflection of priorities, where Japan is far more willing to invest in public infrastructure – for which I applaud them.

    We’ve discussed the horror that is the NYC subway, and this is obviously not the result of lack of ability.

    The last time America was at the forefront of investing in public infrastructure was the early 20th century, when they produced impressive works like the Hoover Dam.

    I also think the West is aesthetically ambivalent about technology – where its prized but seen as ugly, and the old is embraced – whereas Asians in general seem to have embraced the aesthetics of technology more and incorporated them into its cityscape.

    The ideal American city block is Victorian housing next to a beautiful park – the ideal Asian city dwelling is gleaming high rise.

    What I found pleasantly surprising about Japanese cities is that they are not the modems of crisp efficiency I had been led to expect – but rather chaotic and shambolic, with buildings jumbled together chronically.

    On the other hand, I didn’t like the lack of architectural distinction you find in Western cities.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  43. Dmitry says:
    @Mitleser

    So, aren’t they a case of “inefficient import substitution”?
    After all, the main alternative was buying them from the Japanese ally Britain who would not need that much time to complete the ordered ships

    From the military view, there are advantages and disadvantages of import substitution (and these are different from only economic considerations).

    If you are preparing for a large war, there is a strategic advantage to use of domestic military industrial complex, even if this is more costly than importation, as it will allow for producing ships to match for particular needs and for secure supply of the armaments independently of policy instability of supplying countries.

    A benign example is the situation of the Mistral class ships from France (which Russian Navy is about to receive before unpredicted events of 2014). Although in this case, only France has lost economically as a result of its immediate cancellation – the future import substitution will add more than a decade and a lot of additional costs in Russia.

    We know now – in the case of Japan, – it would have been better for them if they hadn’t gone crazy into building military ships and militarizing in the early 20th century. Not because of economic reasons, but because of where this process eventually resulted politically.

    • Replies: @Mitleser
    , @Lars Porsena
  44. AaronB says:
    @Dmitry

    Theoretically, yes. China nay dominate some fields in the sense of producing the largest output in them, but probably won’t produce the best minds in them or the best products in them.

    That’s the kind of thing China can do, volume, mass, and reasonable but unxceptional quality.

    With enough volume, this is formidable, but I don’t think we should get carried away

  45. @Dmitry

    Equally compared to Germany – I was generally impressed by Japan (including impressive civil engineering), while from the few cities of Germany I have visited, I didn’t receive any special impressions.

    Thanks for confirming rT’s thesis.

    Mongoloids are better at maximizing existing potential, including making the nicest looking cities. But European cities will have more varied music scenes, and more futurist discussion clubs.

    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @AaronB
    , @Dmitry
  46. @Jaakko Raipala

    What Anatoly answered.

    But my thinking is that this supposed lack of Asian creativity is not a very serious theory, merely a kind of working hypothesis. For example, some troll proposed that HBD predisposes Europeans to submission to Asians, because it postulates that they are superior. Which is not the case: IQ is just one (easy to measure) component of success. It’s possible within the HBD framework that Asians lack some other component. They certainly didn’t manage to start the industrial revolution. So, there’s something to be explained here: Asians have higher IQs, but somewhat lower achievements.

    Since we know, that IQ is not the be all & end all of innate abilities, a serious possibility is that they lack in some other component, for example creativity or curiosity or non-conformism. It’s not necessarily non-conformism, it’s not a very serious theory. But there could be something. (Another explanation is historical accident, like culture and then suddenly meeting Europeans with superior technology, who defeated them in multiple wars.)

    So, don’t take the non-conformism part that seriously.

    However, when talking about whether China could become a fully fledged superpower, and I’m arguing that yes, it could, then I’m basically being prudent here: I argue that, even if they are less creative, they will be able to master all important technologies, and since major new, game-changer technologies are now unlikely to come, they might actually be leading the pack. Like they do with 5G. It would actually strengthen my case if it turned out that the Chinese don’t have any issues, that they are really superior all-around. (Though, I’m not really sure I’d buy it at this point.) But as I wrote, it’s actually not that important even now.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
  47. AaronB says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    I would advice you to visit Tokyo – it is very far from the “nicest looking city”.

    It has great infrastructure, but its rather ugly and chaotic – which surprised me, although it’s charming.

    It’s nothing like the futuristic tech dream you’re imagining – nor is any Asian city I’ve been to.

    It just has clean and efficient infrastructure.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  48. Bonner Tal says: • Website
    @Anatoly Karlin

    I think conformity has to be further subdivided to have any explanatory power. For example Germans and Scandis have more of a egalitarian conformism, everybody has to be “on board”, i.e. lot’s of ideological pressure, etc.

    NE-Asians have more of a hierarchical conformism, i.e. the boss is always right. Obviously, the former is much more conducive for collective problem solving, because everybody can give input and errors are called out.

    • Replies: @Epigon
  49. Mitleser says:
    @Dmitry

    Considering that Japan was running out of money during the war against Russia, there is also an economic reason against “inefficient import substitution”.

    If you are preparing for a large war, there is a strategic advantage to use of domestic military industrial complex, even if this is more costly than importation, as it will allow for producing ships to match for particular needs and for secure supply of the armaments independently of policy instability of supplying countries.

    The thing is that Japan’s best wars were short wars.
    Based on that argument, (naval) import substitution was not needed.

  50. Epigon says:
    @Bonner Tal

    It would be nice if our Scandinavian members shed some light on Law of Jante.

  51. @AaronB

    In the end, it’s less a matter of conformism vs non-conformism than what one conforms to.

    The West developed the scientific method, and thinkers conformed to its ways.

    One of the problems of the East, China and Hindu India, was that spiritually bound folks were unwilling to drop their superstitions and conform to the New Way of science.

    Granted, the West valued youthful spirit more, but even youthful innovators had to conform to the narrow laws of science and math.

  52. Dmitry says:
    @AaronB

    My impression of Japan – it is also reflection of higher cultural level of the overall population, more civil engineering, and quite a lot of intelligence in many things they do (even if their politicians – at the top level – are idiots).

    In relation to the earthquake situation – many countries would not recover from this, but somehow they can adapt their cities and still flourish in these condition.

    Similarly, with lack of natural resources, and distance from their historical export markets – and yet they still manage to dominate many industries.

    What I found pleasantly surprising about Japanese cities is that they are not the modems of crisp efficiency I had been led to expect – but rather chaotic and shambolic, with buildings jumbled together chronically.

    On the other hand, I didn’t like the lack of architectural distinction

    Japanese cities have a very median position.

    Modernist dystopian construction (from a distance), but everything quite clean, cozy and “designed for humans” when you enter inside the city.

    The ideal American city block is Victorian housing next to a beautiful park

    But actually existing American cities, are often completely dysfunctional in design.

  53. Dmitry says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Tokyo and Osaka are kind of ugly from distance, from the train.

    Any old buildings are constantly destroyed and replaced with blocks (partly because of the fear of earthquakes, and need to try to update the safety level of building before the next earthquake).

    But they are very “hipster” cities, where are all kinds of cool little shops, cafes and restaurants everywhere. Probably they have futurist discussions and intelligentsia, if they have time from work.

    Even they have a lot bookshops in English in Tokyo, selling 50 year old philosophy books (and you can see Japanese people buying these books, maybe more for decoration than because they will read them).

    I think a lot of Japanese are very “pretentious” (have high cultural aspirations), and even for ordinary Japanese, there is also often obsession with clothes and fashion.

    If you go to the business district in Tokyo in the morning. The businessmen and businessladies, investment bankers there – are very fashionable, wearing some kind of expensive Italian suits. They care a lot more about clothes even for the office.

    On the other hand, in evening, businessmen often drunk and shameless on public transportation, and sleeping unconscious (where nobody stole their wallet).

    • Agree: AaronB
  54. @Dmitry

    Well hindsight is 20/20. But the Japanese saw themselves as global leaders and masters. They did not want to be subservient to anyone. They correctly realized what they were doing was the only chance they had to stay sovereign and independent.

    The alternative is that would just relegate themselves to being a lapdog of some European power. They could have remained allies of the British but they recognized they would have been at the mercy of the British who didn’t have much mercy for foreign peoples. They could even end up colonized whenever the European powers felt like it, or have parts of their country traded away in European power deals. And they would be a satellite at best. And they would be contained.

    That’s what broke their alliance with the British, unwillingness to be contained and constrained to something manageable. The British where never going to let them build up to the point of being their own threat or peer equal.

    The Japanese played ball with european powers to get the tech they needed to ultimately stand up to them, getting what they needed to not be subservient to or at the mercy of colonial powers was the whole point of reaching out to those powers.

    Ultimately I think they played the hand they dealt as good as anyone could play it, besides folding it and giving up on Japanese sovereignty. And to look at their ideology and culture from that period, they probably would have done what they did even if they knew how it would turn out. They would rather die fighting than give up and kneel to foreigners. It would have been a betrayal of their japaneseness to just give up and take second fiddle.

    If they hadn’t built up militarily and just tried to toady around diplomatically, it still would have been the death of their former identity, of what they saw the meaning of being Japanese as anyway. So what they did was the only thing they could have done to try to preserve that.

  55. Dmitry says:
    @AaronB

    There is also the most impressive engineering things I’ve seen in my life, in Tokyo as well. For example, did you go in the train into its bay? And see all the roads and buildings there.

    I was on this train as a teenager. I was shocked when it starts to travel over the sea. This train has no driver, so you can sit in the front seat (I’ve also been on the viewing wheel in the bay – and we went to the shopping mall which looks like Venice, and a car museum in an artificial island somewhere there).

    • Replies: @AaronB
  56. DreadIlk says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    About Japanese. I read somewhere that they were well primed to industrialize. They had well developed proto industry (silk). They had really well developed road and canal network that was also being maintained. Plus when Japan was “opened” by that expedition they already had a college specialized in learning west’s technology and with one order that college spread to the entire country.

    Side note.
    I am starting to suspect that Asian’s lag in innovation may also be different preferences. A preference for the traditional is not necessarily bad. Japanese have well developed wood construction that needs to nails and can be maintained over long period of time. Something you would expect out of an island nation. West burns bright but also deal with consequences such as communisms, SJWs and etc.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  57. @Epigon

    Search commenter Thorfinnsson + Jante/Sweden/authoritarian/”New Totalitarians”.

    • Agree: Epigon
  58. @DreadIlk

    different preferences

    Lack of curiosity would be a case of this.

    At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter, what causes it, as long as it’s impossible or near impossible to change.

  59. Passer by says:

    “The big issue is the insanity of the Globohomo Empire, which is actively working on destroying whites anywhere. I wouldn’t bet on an empire intent on destroying its own core population. Immigration means lower fertility for whites, interbreeding with Chinese and upper caste Indian etc. immigrants (I’ve seen upper class whites with half-black children, though it’s not very widespread), so the white advantage might get lost even in terms of creativity.

    Tl;dr

    I’d bet on whites if it was a whites against Chinese struggle. As it is, I think the Chinese have a very good chance to at least become a peer of the Globohomo Empire, and longer term even defeat it. ”

    ========================================================================

    In my estimates, with current immigration policies, IQ in the US in 2100 will be 93, IQ in Western Europe will be 94. IQ in China will be around 103.

    I do not see how the US will be able to compete with China with 10 IQ points gap (and further dropping).

    How the fuck will the US be able to compete with China under such massive debt levels and with IQ of its population dropping? It is simply not possible.

    The US is projected (by its own CBO) to have massive, crippling debt levels in 2050.

    Debt to GDP 160 % and growing.
    *Budget deficit 10 % per anum and growing* (do you have any idea what this means? It is a disaster! Imminent implosion. Hyperinflation). Budget deficit reaching 20 % by 2093. ???

    6,2 percent of GDP going for debt servicing, debt interest spending crowding out the rest of spending, which in turn hits GDP further.

    And this rising debt is already under the condition that the US will have to cut military spending by from 3,1 to 2,5 % of GDP, non-discetionary spending again from 3,1 to 2,5 % of GDP, and allow the current Trump tax cuts to expire during the 2020s. Which will of course hit the economy and the military standing of the country.

    So the US will have to cut far more than this Including a pension cut by 20 % in 2030, that is already baken in. I can tell you one thing. Americans won’t be able to collect their promised pensions. Not possible *at all*.

    https://www.crfb.org/papers/75-year-budget-outlook

    Then there is the issue of city and state debt. The biggest US cities (New York, LA, Chicago) are broke.

    In my estimates, in order to simply stop the debt from increasing , and keep it at dangerous 160 % (a financial crisis at 160 percent will be horrible and could even cripple the country if it is a large crisis), by 2050 the US will have to cut 27 % of its spending. This means a 27 % Pentagon cut at 2050 will be needed. Plus Pentagon spending will have to be further decreased due to the massive debt service spending on interest. Those cuts will have to start from already all time low military spending of 2,5 % of GDP. So you will have a military spending of probably 1,5 % of GDP. At such numbers, say good buy to US military hegemony.

    So the US will have to massively cut spending and will still be in very bad position. Because those cuts will be needed to simply stabilise the debt at 160 percent. And what happens if a big economic crisis hits at those long term debt levels? Very bad things will happen.

    Thus the numbers show that under current projections China will dominate the US by the 2050s and will be indisputably bigger military power by that time. The US will be in very bad position.

    Moreover, my demographic estimates show that the IQ of the US population will drop by 2 IQ points by 2050, thus the US population will be dumber. And since it is mostly young people in the military, it means that the US military will be a majority minority by 2050. Do you think that 90 IQ hispanics (the predominant young population by 2050) would make good soldiers? No.

    Have you seen the military test scores for hispanic soldiers? The difference between white and hispanic soldiers on the Air Force AFOQT qualification test, as well as on the military ASVAB test is 0,8 SD (12 IQ points). This is massive difference.

    How the fuck will the US military be able to operate with such soldiers?

    All of these numbers simply show a *significant* decline coming for the US military.

    Moreover: about hispanic population: whites are declining in Latin America too. This means that Latin American migrants after 2050 will be overwhelmingly non-white. Good luck with that.

    Dollar world reserve currency status? It looks like it will be gone by 2050.
    PWC estimates are currently for China having 1,5 bigger economy (and 1,7 times bigger in PPP) and India having an economy bigger in PPP but a bit smaller in nominal compared to the US. Combined with continuously dropping US share as part of the world economy. Now combine this with the huge US debt levels by 2050.

    As far as the EU is concerned, there will be large numbers of muslims there. Very bad for stability. IQ of euro immigrants is prettty low, lower than in anglo countries. By 2100, western europeans will be minorities in their own countries. Some countries, such as France, the UK, Belgium, Italy, Greece, Portugal, Spain etc. already have large debt levels. So you will have countries with lots of young non-whites and muslims (probably at least 30 % muslims by 2100) and lots of very old whites, many of them with high debt levels. Also PWC estimates even bigger decline as share of world GDP for Europe than for the US. I do not see how this will work for Europe. It is going down.

  60. So, we’re looking at a stagnant world that is led (but not necessarily dominated in the traditional sense) by China. That’s pretty much how I see it as well.

  61. Mr. XYZ says:

    Anatoly, does the idea that East Asians are better at implementation than at innovation also apply to Russians/Eastern Slavs? I mean, obviously Russians/Eastern Slavs appear to have a lower genetic ceiling for their average IQ in comparison to East Asians (plus Vietnamese), but the Russian/East Slavic average IQ is still pretty high.

  62. Technology is driven by reaching the new requirements first. This means already being the wealthiest and in combination the most advanced society in the first place. Buenos Aries is not going to be the world technology leader soon. The requirements differ by society so there are multiple centres, perhaps not centres but zones. Europe’s Blue Banana being the main one. It lost ground to the US Mid West after WW1 but has caught up since WW2.

    Were the Confucian cultures ever close enough in terms of concentrating wealth? The capital cities kept wandering around. China and Korea were disturbed by alien invasion. Europe had plenty of wars but not alien invasions. The Muslims blended the Persian and Greek cultures. They had a spectacular flourishing of trade, wealth and science which led to nothing. If anything there was regression, even in India.

    I vote for institutions. My own relatives made a fortune trading with India which was reinvested in canal building just in time (but the events were connected) to transport South Wales iron from the mountains to the sea. Their Indian trading partners had no protection for their private property (this is still true in China and Russia) and no financial structures (Banks, Joint Stock Companies) to reinvest it. Japan is limited to perfecting technology trends defined elsewhere by the relics of the Zaibatsu system of large conglomerates. This is excellent for producing high speed trains but the real running is now in other places like medical devices (Olympus has been completely eclipsed by EU, North American and Israeli companies for example). South Korea is now the East Asian front runner but the Chaebol do the same job of overshadowing small and middle sized firms that the zaibatsu did in their day. Both Japan and Korea have excellent large firms in established industries and flourishing (or at least state supported) artisan traditions but the €100m engineering firm is not typical in the way it is in the US or Europe.

    Meanwhile, the big new problems are amongst other places in medical devices and pharmaceuticals to support ageing populations. Japan is there with the science, leading edge with stem cells indeed but this is not being turned into international trade. The EU and the US make the rules for new technologies China is not there yet. Japan and Korea and Taiwan and Malaysia etc need their own EU if they are ever to compete in the regulatory space. Regulatory institutions frame the space for technical advance. This is true for aerospace, healthcare, telecoms, green energy, transport, waste management and other industries. The also rans speak English, French, Spanish or Russian not a variant of Chinese. The EU and the US will still be setting enough rules to keep their advantage for a long time.

    A current example of this is Trump’s effort to stop the UK adopting 5G technology from Huawei. If the UK App development industry gets 5G first, the next Facebook could be British not American. (The last Facebook understands this and is now recruiting 500 people for its new London development team).IT is also the case that Huawei devices are stuffed full of British technology not just old favourites such as ARM chips and transputers but recent developments in say, base station technology, designed for Huawei by the large design consultancy firms around Cambridge. Huawei has had close technical ties with the UK since 2002 when it won a major contract with BT. Using UK technology for future products was part of the deal. Huawei products meet the regulatory requirements set by EU (mostly British and Finnish) regulators. Not by accident, Nokia is #2 in 5G just now. Well defined EU regulations producing results.

    Muh. Brexit!

  63. @Passer by

    Who needs soldiers when you have AI assisted drones?

  64. Daniel H says:

    >>At worst, the original inventors (who have a slightly lesser talent for implementation, and who are also hindered by their own crazy globohomo

    I notice that the globohomo rhetorical meme is popping up everywhere on the right these days, and I am gladdened and encouraged by this. Globohomo is a meme that will drive our enemies to distraction. Of course they will yell “homophobe”, but that will only demonstrate that they don’t get the point. So, happy GloboHomo month.

  65. @Epigon

    There is actually eleven commandments in the Jantelov.

    11. You may believe that i do not know anything about you?

  66. utu says:
    @AaronB

    The “non conformism advantage of the West” is a stopgap invented to patch a glaring hole in IQ theory – namely, that whites outperform Asians in intellectual and economic accomplishment despite having lower IQs.

    The night time stories HBDers and IQists tell their children as vanguards of approaching yellow peril can be heard. An exercise in consolation Onanism. Typical for reiner Tor.

  67. Jason Liu says:

    A lot of this is just because there’s a fear of criticism and challenging authority in China. A ton of new ideas never get expressed by young people because they’re afraid the boss would be offended, since proposing something news implies that the old thing is bad, and that’s criticism.

    This probably sets the difference between China and Japan’s modernization. Some Chinese must have realized the utility of western technology, but few if any were brave enough to tell the emperor that his stuff was not as good as the foreigner’s. This bullshit has gone on since forever.

    What China needs now is leadership that can distinguish between constructive criticism and treasonous dissent. Encourage the former and crack down on the latter. The CCP’s fear of losing power is causing it to grip society too tightly, which ironically just makes it more likely to lose legitimacy in the eyes of average people.

    • Replies: @yakushimaru
  68. @Lars Porsena

    “European firearms were introduced all over the world, and in some cases given to natives in large numbers, but they were never able to reproduce them or supply their own ammunition”

    i’ve made the same observation on isteve a few times over the last 20 years. but on a more recent historical timeline.

    almost everybody uses US, soviet era, or EU manufacture small arms. whenever you see a conflict around the world on television, that’s what they’re using. i would say anything made outside of those places accounts for like 10% of the small arms around the world at most. and that’s mainly equipment made by europeans in other places. taurus stuff made in brazil. denel stuff made in south africa. IMI stuff made in israel.

    that 90% of the humans around the world can’t even make their own small arms, in volume, with reliable designs, after 100 years of time in which to copy existing stuff, really shows the huge intelligence and ingenuity deficit we’re working with here. that’s rubber to the road, push comes to shove type of stuff that the jared diamonds of the world can’t explain.

    the chinese have a lot of copied small arms, but they do manufacture in china. so that’s your minimum standard of intelligence. they can copy most of what somebody else comes out with. that shows they have some brainpower. the rest of the humans can’t even do that. after a century. so there’s NO chance of them ever having first world nations with electricity, running clean water, functioning republics, and so forth.

    a good basic, jared diamond level test: can they copy existing tech? if they can’t even copy the 100 year old tech, they’re hopeless. initial technological deficits are irrelevant in 2020. just copy what the europeans came up with in 1920. can’t do that? then jared diamond explanations are wrong.

  69. Passer by says:
    @AaronB

    The “non conformism advantage of the West” is a stopgap invented to patch a glaring hole in IQ theory – namely, that whites outperform Asians in intellectual and economic accomplishment despite having lower IQs.

    I will just throw the bomb here by mentioning that i found that japanese and south koreans do have smaller SDs than europeans/westerners, according to the PIAAC.

    PIAAC has good sampling methodology plus good, highly representative samples. It is the PISA study for adults. The data is modern – from 2013.

    PIAAC data has been used in the past in various studies to estimate IQ and G.

    The japanese/south korean SD is smaller in reading comprehension, numeracy, and problem solving in technology rich environments. One exception is PSTRE, where japanese, but not south koreans, have similar SD to OECD countries.

    I do not know about the quality of studies that found that japanese do not have smaller SD than whites, but this is recent high quality international study. I don’t know why nobody up to now managed to find this interesting east asian SD data.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    , @utu
    , @Anon
    , @AaronB
  70. @Passer by

    all accurate. been posting on here for 20 years about all these exact same topics with about the same mathematical take on the situation.

    the future is china and the muslims battling for control of the planet.

    in 2100 school children won’t believe their ebooks that europeans utterly dominated the earth 100 years ago. and dominated it for 500 years. it would be like a 14 year old mumble rap listener on youtube seeing these videos of van halen, ACDC, guns n roses, led zeppelin, metallica dominating the entire planet and filling stadiums for decades. “No way anybody ever listened to that. I never even heard of this stuff.”

    all just a passing biological time period, like an outbreak of beetles or cicadas 12 years ago that the earth barely noticed. oh yeah, right. forgot about that one summer where there were all these moths flying around. they came, peaked, and left. a blink of an eye in geological time scales.

    i’ve posted before about how john calhoun’s experiments with rats explains current human behavior a lot better than most stuff. the europeans had their time. now it’s coming to an end. they’re going to voluntarily disappear, with a little help from their (friends).

  71. Twinkie says:
    @Passer by

    Thanks. Do you have links?

    • Replies: @Passer by
  72. @Jason Liu

    The creativity thing is like an IQ-subgenre. When we talk about IQ, we have the tests at least and by and by there’re genetic stuff emerging. When we talk about creativity and conformity, what people have are circular arguments. So, what exactly are we talking about?

    A lot of this is just because there’s a fear of criticism and challenging authority in China. A ton of new ideas never get expressed by young people because they’re afraid the boss would be offended, since proposing something news implies that the old thing is bad, and that’s criticism.

    As if it’s not the same everywhere? At least people can come up with some metric/measurement if one’s so interested?

    This probably sets the difference between China and Japan’s modernization. Some Chinese must have realized the utility of western technology, but few if any were brave enough to tell the emperor that his stuff was not as good as the foreigner’s. This bullshit has gone on since forever.

    This is the old traditional view of the past ~200 years. People just carelessly ignore the size differences between Japan & China. The difference in distances from British India (for example, Opium was banned in Japan and the ban was agreed by Britain). And the fact that, for example, Chinese were making naval ships in Fujian and having their factory destroyed by the French around 1870.

    Frankly if Japan didn’t disrupt the Qing modernisation by mid 1890s, China would’ve being very different. Or, if the Japanese didn’t disrupt the KMT/Chiang modernisation by their ever more brutal war 1937~1945, China would’ve being very different. Or, if some crazy German didn’t invent some crazy ideology by the aid of some British gentleman, China might still fall to the hands of Mao, but he might as well be just another emperor instead of the crazy shit he actually was.

    What I mean is that, on one hand you have an undefined IQ-subgenre, while on the other you have historical contingencies.

  73. Passer by says:
    @Twinkie

    Thanks. Do you have links?

    Yup. Use the data explorer to get the data and compare the different countries. Btw i just checked out and US whites also generally have larger SDs than japanese and south koreans in most tests.

    https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/piaac/ideuspiaac/

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  74. Twinkie says:
    @Passer by

    Many thanks. I’m curious how the comparison looks look over time.

    • Replies: @Passer by
  75. Passer by says:
    @Twinkie

    Well, unfortunately Japan and South Korea did not participate in the 1994 and 2003 studies.

  76. utu says:
    @Passer by

    2006 PISA per https://infoproc.blogspot.com/2008/06/asian-white-iq-variance-from-pisa.html

    OECD AVG=500 SD=90
    Finland AVG=548 SD=80
    NE Asia (HK, Korea, Taiwan) AVG=548 SD=95

    So, this guy does to agree with you and unlike you he produced some numbers.

    • Replies: @Passer by
  77. Passer by says:
    @utu

    It is not that he “does not agree” with me, he simply checked a different study. From what i heard though, it is not a good idea to compare children’s IQ between races and sexes. The best way is to compare adults. There are lots of changes happening during growing up and they certainly affect cognition. For example i heard that racial and sex differences are higher among adults.

    As far as numbers are concerned, i already produced them, in the form of link. It is not my problem that you are unable to deal with a data explorer. But ok, i will give you numbers if you are too lazy or unable to check them yourself.

    PIAAC 2013 reading comprehension

    All jurisdiction AVG=267 SD=47
    Finland AVG=288 SD=51
    Japan AVG=296 SD=40

    Now, does this mean that east asians have lower variance? Maybe yes, maybe not. I just said that i never saw anyone else mention this data, that’s it. I will be more than happy to see more high quality data on this issue, because i’m interested in this myself.

    • Replies: @Jaakko Raipala
    , @utu
  78. @Passer by

    Races have different schedules for puberty with blacks hitting it earliest, whites in the middle, East Asians latest. That’s going to influence results for teenagers.

    This tends to lead to a lot of bafflement for white do-gooders who start up multiculti projects, black kids will be doing fine in early grades so they think they’ve found the magic recipe to close the gap and then the black students just fall far behind as teenagers.

  79. Anonymous[320] • Disclaimer says:

    Привет Анатолий,

    I sincerely believe any discussion of Japan should start with its host stating categorically for the record that at no point, at no point, in Japan’s [modern] history, was more than 25% of the country’s workforce comprised of the [in]famous salarymen. Not much different from any high-achieving western economy – and that is at the all-time peak. It’s also worth mentioning that things like overtime or contractual hours do not exist in legal form in many countries to this day. Look at the labor conditions in Chile for a perfect example, where the expectations of employees, in the white collar sectors, make America’s look like northern Europe’s. I believe Japan has the best PR of any country in human history, everything “you” [generic] think you know about it is likely not wholly correct – the situation is rather similar to the reality of Slavic nations in comparison to the Western, specifically handshake-worthy-Western, perception. Beware of all armchair Japan historians who speak suspiciously natural English! It is the soft power superpower, and as Steve has said, so much of the Japanese doom-saying is really more like a clever real estate ploy – if it’s really so awful, why is precisely no one dying to leave? In exchange for working “long” hours at demanding jobs, they get to live a solidly middle class life in a solidly homogeneous society which is among the most functional, with among the most-high-standard-of-living, in existence. If there is a possible less-than-entirely-dystopian iteration of postmodernity, we can surely agree Japan is it.

    Пока

    • Replies: @anonymous coward
  80. utu says:
    @Passer by

    I went to https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/idepisa/report.aspx and got report on means and SDs for 2015 PISA.

    The following countries have lower SD than Japan:

    Chile, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Ireland, Latvia, Mexico, Norway, Spain,

    The following countries have the same SD as Japan:

    Canada, Poland, USA

    The top 5 countries with the largest SD:

    Israel, Korea, Belgium, Portugal, Switzerland
    ____________

    Are you one of those whose theories are ahead of data? Quite common among the IQists.

    • Replies: @Passer by
  81. Passer by says:
    @utu

    Start from the link, then add adults 16-65, then move to step 2 – select variables – PIAAC literacy, numeracy and problem solving, and so on. I don’t think it is so hard, another guy before you made it, so you should be able too. I don’t see why you have so much trouble.

    https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/piaac/ideuspiaac

    • Replies: @utu
  82. utu says:
    @Passer by

    I did it for PISA using the link you listed. And PISA data contradict your theory about low SD for Japan.

    • Replies: @Passer by
    , @Dmitry
  83. Passer by says:
    @utu

    Many in this scene are aware of the PISA children data on asian variance, first this was mentioned by Steve Hsu even back in 2008 and you already linked to him.

    https://infoproc.blogspot.com/2008/06/asian-white-iq-variance-from-pisa.html

    His post on this issue is pretty popular and i saw it once, before years, too. I even thought that the issue on asian variance was settled.

    But recently, after studying PIAAC data about adults, something that i was doing for another purpose by the way, i found new adult population data that contradicts the PISA children data on east-asian variance. And as far as i know no one is aware about this data on this particular issue.

    So i decided to mention about this here, so that people know about it.

    As far as this (lower japanese and south korean variance) being my “theory”, no it isn’t – it is simply what the PIAAC data for adult populations shows. Adult South Korean and Japanese populations have lower variance than almost all other studied countries. Are you able to access the data it or you still have trouble?

    • Replies: @utu
  84. utu says:
    @Passer by

    I do not have trouble getting data but you have trouble with methodology, cherry picking and jumping to conclusions.

    PIAAC 2012/2014 Literacy
    SD range: 40-53

    Japan 40, Czechia 41, Korea 42, Austria 44, Estonia 44, Turkey 44, Italy 45, Germany 47, Greece 47, Ireland 47,…, USA 50, Canada 50, Chile 53

    PIAAC 2012/2014 Numeracy
    SD range: 44-64

    Czechia 44, Japan 44, Estonia 46, Korea 46, Slovakia 48, Austria 49,…, Chile 59, Israel 64

    PIAAC 2012/2014 Problem Solving TRE
    SD range: 37-52

    Slovakia 37, Austria 38, Korea 38, Ireland 40, Norway 40, Finland 42, Denmark 42, Japan 44,USA 44,…, Poland 48, Chile 49, Israel 52
    ___________________
    You cherry picking, right? IN PISA Japan is doe snot sends out in terms of SD. And here in PIAA there are European countries that in Literacy and Numeracy are very similar to Japan in terms of SD. And in Problem Solving Japan is in the middle in terms of SD.

    Keep mind that estimates of SD are prone to be very sensitive to outliers even when samples are large. There are non-parametric method that are insensitive to outliers but I do not know if they were applied in this case.

    Note that confidence level of SD value is rather low. So if two countries differ in SD by, say 20%, of the SD range it means really nothing.

    Anyway your thinking that you have discovered something by focusing on Japan’s SD in literacy while overlooking other data like PISA might be a sign of impaired judgments fueled by delusions of grandeur that usually lead to serious methodological difficulties.

    • Replies: @Passer by
  85. you have to hand it to utu. he tries.

    • Replies: @Marcus
  86. Passer by says:
    @utu

    I do not see what i’m cherry picking – i already said that PISA children data shows higher SD for east asian countries, and that this is already well known. The new thing here is that among adult populations, studied by PIAAC, (the PISA for adults), variance is lower in South Korea and Japan.

    Overall, as i said, Japan and South Korea have lower variance of their adult populations compared to the big majority of countries as well as the average of all jurisdictions. This is the case, as mentioned above, in Literacy and Numeracy for both countries, as well as in Problem Solving for South Korea.

    Keep mind that estimates of SD are prone to be very sensitive to outliers even when samples are large.

    Well, maybe PISA data then is bs too and it can not be taken seriously as well. Therefore no one knows whether east asians have larger variance or not.

    I will say that PIAAC and PISA are one of the highest quality available studies, these are large international studies that beat almost everything else.

    So if you think that PIAAC, in the case of adult populations, offers low quality data, then good luck to you.

  87. dux.ie says:

    Seems like the article is regurgitating from the echo chamber with plenty of hand waving and no concrete data.

    The OECD PISA survey has a special study different from the standard more academic survey on “CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING” with large sample size supervised by OECD conducted by another European research institution different from the standard PISA survey (thus if there is any bias it is not systematic) using problems that are vaguely defined with no complete data provided for solving where the students needs to know what are needed and how to find those data, i.e. ROTE LEARNING WILL NOT HELP. The creative problem solving ability can be characterized by the ability to utilize (existing) knowledge and the ability for new knowledge acquisition.

    http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/pisa-2012-results-skills-for-life-volume-v_9789264208070-en

    In modern societies, all of life is problem solving. With constant changes in society, the environment, and in technology, what we should know in order for us to live a full life is evolving rapidly too. Adapting, learning, daring to try out new things and always being ready to learn from mistakes are essential for being resilient and successful in an unpredictable world.

    Are today’s 15-year-olds acquiring the problem-solving skills needed in the 21st century? New results from the PISA 2012 assessment of problem solving, which was conducted on computer and involved about 85,000 students in 44 countries and economies, help answer this question.

    Results show that students in Singapore and Korea, followed by students in Japan, score higher in problem solving than students in all other participating countries and economies.

    The assessment uses simulated real-life problem situations – such as an unfamiliar vending machine, or a malfunctioning electronic device – to measure students’ reasoning skills, their ability to regulate problem-solving processes, and their willingness to do so. These problem-solving skills are key to success in all pursuits, and can be developed in school through curricular subjects.

    • To do well on PISA’s first assessment of creative problem-solving skills, students need to be open to novelty, tolerate doubt and uncertainty, and dare to use intuition to initiate a solution.
    • Just because a student performs well in core school subjects doesn’t mean he or she is proficient in problem solving.
    • Many of the best performers in problem solving are Asian countries and economies, where students demonstrate high levels of reasoning skills and self-directed learning.

    The test is based on objective interaction with computers (to take out the human element) which present the fuzzy and ill defined novel problems with inadequate (not all required) knowledge supplied, and additional info will be given only when the candidate intuitively know what additonal knowledge are required and ask/search for them. Significant number of students just stared blankly at the screen. Rote learning does not help.

    However they frame the requirements, creative problem solving score is still strongly correlated to the standard PISA score. A plot of the PISA CPS vs the standard PISA scores to find the general relationship between the standard PISA and the CPS scores,

    Singapore, Korea, Japan, HongKong, Macau, Taiwan and China did score very well. Though China is about the same level as HongKong, Taiwan and Macau on CPS scores, it scored higher on the standard PISA test which might be there were some element of rote learning, but China’s CPS score is still higher than those from western countries. From the CPS results, rote learning or not China still seems to be more creative than those from the western countries. It is worth reminding that the CPS test was designed and conducted by a western country. The results show that there is a gap where the EastAsians are better than the Western countries in new knowledge acquisition. Contrary of the usual echo chamber narratives, the AUS and CAN are actually better than the Chinese in existing knowledge utilization which might be from rote learning.

    The plot to see the interplay of knowledge utilization and acquisition skills. Singapore and Korea are highly skilled for new knowledge acquisition whereas Japan is better at knowledge utilization which might be related to rote learning to have a larger knowledge base. The Han Chinese regions are quite good new knowledge acquisition and not as good as knowledge utilization and thus they are prone to re-invent the wheel which is the reverse of common biased narratives. Still there is a gap between the new knowledge acquisition skills for the East Asians and the Westerners.

    • Replies: @Passer by
  88. Passer by says:
    @dux.ie

    You failed to mention that Japan and South Korea had lower variance on both problem solving PISA tests, though. As far as China is concerned, only several (biggest and most affluent) cities were tested, so the results are not representative of the country. The whole of China will participate only in PISA 2018. I suspect that averages will be considerably lower, no idea what will happen to variance.

    • Replies: @dux.ie
  89. @Jaakko Raipala

    I did a twitter thread about how, despite the Soviet Union sending up the first satellite and first man into space, that the USA was always ahead of them in the technical skills needed for space flight. The Soviets got glory for being first, but the American spacecraft sent up shortly after each of the Soviet accomplishments were much better. The first Soviet cosmonauts had to eject from their spacecrafts (was the plan) because the Soviets had yet to figure out how to slow them down to safely land. The Soviets never landed a man on the moon, not because they didn’t want to, but because their project kept failing.

    My thread:

  90. Anon[311] • Disclaimer says:
    @Passer by

    That’s no “bombshell”. I expected to find an IQ study when you mentioned you were about to “drop a bombshell”

  91. @Dmitry

    Yes but by the 1860s, China knows more than anyone the danger of the West and of its own retarded economic and military level – and it’s still not acting with emergency speed to modernize like Japan

    In 1860 there was no “China”, only the Qing Empire. That is, a shameful “empire” of horse-riding stone-age Manchu barbarians. I doubt they were the people to really care one way or the other about “China”. (Whatever that is.)

    • Replies: @yakushimaru
  92. @Anonymous

    If there is a possible less-than-entirely-dystopian iteration of postmodernity, we can surely agree Japan is it.

    Japan is literally dying out, on the road to hell in a literal country-wide suicide pact.

    So, no.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @DreadIlk
  93. @Pale_Primate

    a) This is a bald-faced lie. USA space tech was always behind. Still is today.

    b) The USA never landed men on the Moon. Robots and probes – sure. But not men.

    P.S. Robotics was always the crown jewel and only real achievement of the USA space program.

  94. Chinese men cannot play football. Great mystery. Seriously.

    As economy develops, Chinese sports competence improves generally. But not Men’s football. I mean soccer. Chinese men’s team’s current international standing is worse than in the 1980s.

    But, as the topic of this article says, it probably doesn’t matter. 😀

    I mean, this really is confusing. I’m not suggesting comparing to Brazil or anything but to Thailand for example. The national U18 team of China lost big to Thailand’s recently.

    Not that I care about football, I mean, soccer. But then how much do I care about Chemistry Nobels?

    • Replies: @dux.ie
  95. @anonymous coward

    The manchu rulers did say something like, they rather lose parts of the country to western powers than gave it to Han Chinese.

    But Japan also got her share of internal turmoil before they settle down on econ development.

    But then, the size difference of the two “countries” does matter now in this regard, does it not?

  96. AaronB says:
    @Passer by

    I don’t think IQ can explain this.

    Have you ever read descriptions by creative people of how their ideas come to them?

    Some famous mathematicians, scientists, and others have given us detailed descriptions.

    Basically, it is entirely outside their control – they work and work on their problem and nothing happens, they can’t solve it. Then one day, often after a period of relaxation, it “comes to them” from the outside. The experience is one of the ideas coming from the outside without their control.

    In other words, they do not set out to be “nonconformost” and break taboos or whatever – they work on a problen trying to find a solution.

    In fact, what does nonconformist even mean with math and science? You are not breaking any social conventions by coming up with the right mathematical solution or inventing something new – you are not destroying the family or disrespecting parents or whatever. The social dimension doesn’t even exist in these abstract problems (although unanticipated social effects may appear later).

    Can anyone explain in detail how conformity might operate here?

    The only thing I can think of is that a scientist may not wish to outshine the boss – OK, but there are plenty of ways to publish anonymously or even attribute ideas to your boss. But such a rigid social structure would not even allow effective engineering among groups – can an underling offer an engineering solution his boss didn’t think of first? And we know japanese companies encourage contributions from their lowest level employees, and that’s part of their success.

    Clearly, this is not operative here.

    So, appealing to a social mechanism – conformity – to explain an intellectual limitation is not convincing.

  97. AaronB says:
    @Dmitry

    That sounds really cool – no, I did not take that train.

    Maybe next time.

    The Japanese do have cool engineering and infrastructure, that’s for sure.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  98. TG says:

    “China’s curious historical position as a rather economically efficient state coupled with general economic and technological stasis.”

    Not curious at all. You see, Malthus was right. When people breed like rodents, they and their children will live and die like rodents.

    It is indeed true that, for long historical periods of time, China’s economy was very efficient. Using only primitive technology, they supported populations of many hundreds of millions of people. In bare subsistence poverty. So yes, efficient, but also pointless, as almost all of the economic output was used to sustain a vast malnourished peasantry. In such conditions, there is very little surplus to reinvest. There is also crushing corruption and nepotism, as people on the edge of starvation are by nature selfish and cautious.

    After Mao’s initial policy of ‘strength through numbers’ was shown to be a fiasco, and China’s rate of population growth slowed down, then China started to acquire real wealth. Note how India, with continued high fertility rates, has not. If China continues on its present path, it has a chance to really become a true power – and as the United States continues to force population growth ever higher, while starving the real economy of investment, it will likely start to go the other way.

  99. I have opposed some hostile ideas about China before (such as Xinjiang, muh democracy, the non-existent colonisation of Siberia) but I am beginning to find the value judgement-embedded China-boosting on Unz a wee bit vexatious.

    • Replies: @Anonymoose
  100. Marcus says:
    @Epigon

    I wouldn’t compare postwar Japan to the 1920s-30s version that was completely lacking in industrial capacity (I think most munitions were produced by households). And a large part of the US’ success was due to breaking their codes, we would have won anyway, but that greatly shortened the war

  101. @Pale_Primate

    The Soviet R7 rocket was an objectively far superior space launch vehicle than the US redstone rocket that put Alan Shepard in space a few months later .The US could only manage a sub orbital flight in the immediate aftermath of Yuri Gagarin.

    The US beat the USSR to the moon because of much greater money and the complete authority given to Werner Von Braun.

    After Sergei Korolev (who was basically a one man NASA) died there were atleast 3 rival teams Chaemoli,Yangel and Mishin competing for very scarce funds and two rocket engine designers Glaushko and Kuznetsov all with sky high egos,their own design bureaus and very different ideas of going to the moon.

    After the dust settled after about 15 years after Apollo the Soviets could land on the moon using the Energia rocket which was technically superior to the Saturn V and had a superior space program overall except in the field of long range space probes as the US is still the only country to have sent probes beyond Mars.

  102. anonymous[534] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous coward

    “Dying out” with the highest life expectancy in the world…that makes a lot of sense….

  103. @Marcus

    Yes the Soviet probes to Venus were very impressive but their probes to Mars decidedly less so and they never attempted sending anything beyond Mars like the Voyager probes hence my assertion that the US had overall superior space probes.

  104. @Pale_Primate

    i reckon it was much like Christiaan Barnard and the first heart transplant, or Legendre and the first publication of least squares.

    the competitor was far ahead, and more developed, but was waiting until they were finished with a complete work before appearing in public, while the other guy had a less developed version and just wanted to rush to be first.

    the soviets were doing a minor version of what the chinese do all the time. the soviets were way less bad or annoying about this stuff, the space race mattered a lot so they’d take any ‘first’ they could get regardless of it meaning less technically or being unsafe. russians don’t do that kind of stuff often. the chinese are by far the leaders in such things and will push to the next unsafe, unproven step in any tech as soon as possible.

    the soviets also ‘got’ to the moon first by just launching some dumb probe straight into the surface. the US also could have done that, but didn’t, since there was not much point. after the US got humans to the moon, the soviets didn’t want to spend the money on that project anymore, so they did do useful projects like landing on venus. and some dangerous projects like launching nuclear reactors into orbit. some of which crashed into canada later.

    less clear is stuff like frank whittle and hans von ohaine.

  105. DreadIlk says:
    @anonymous coward

    As long as they have people who are willing to make children they will be fine. There are more Japanese now then in the past. They seem to be doing fine by that metric.

  106. @Hyperborean

    What do you find vexatious. I think most commenters here who are experts on technology do acknowledge that china does not really have that big of an innovative flair.

    • Replies: @Hyperborean
  107. Dmitry says:
    @Pale_Primate

    Another irony of life – how people writing about who is smart, always seem the most stupid ones.

    • Agree: Vishnugupta
    • Replies: @dux.ie
  108. @Vishnugupta

    ESA has gone beyond Mars.

    • Replies: @Vishnugupta
  109. @Vishnugupta

    Oh bullshit. The Soviets never got their moon rocket to work. Kept blowing up.

    • Replies: @Vishnugupta
  110. Dmitry says:
    @utu

    Problem about PISA is that it mainly does not test correlates of intelligence or academic ability in children, but rather cultural conformity to the expectations of the test designers (who are educational consultant companies, working for a contract for the OECD).

    The exam not only has little academic content, but questions are often technically incorrect, or with more than one correct answer. In many cases, more intelligent children will be score false, while stupider but more conformist children score correct.

    PISA is all without harm, until you learn that countries (especially third-world countries) are investing to try to improve their PISA score. As PISA test is without much academic content, they will simply waste the children’s time, when they should be learning real knowledge and skills.

    OECD are experts about economic policy, but teaching children real knowledge – is clearly not their area.

    If you are interested in the e.g. maths level, of children in different countries – there is a real way to know this.

    You simply look at the maths exam, what kind of topics are introduced in the exam, and the proportion of children who pass the exam. (And if you really want, the scheme for scoring maths exams). This allows quite easy comparisons between countries and across time.

    In Russia, children have the highest, or one of the highest, levels of maths, as the proportion answering difficult questions (around 60%). For example, in UK – only around 15% of children are answering questions in equivalent topics, in their final exam before they go to university.

    However, after educational reforms in 2015 to the exam in Russia – which introduced the separate higher option exam (which includes topics which used to be the part C of the exam), proportion of children answering the difficult questions is already falling.

    • Replies: @utu
  111. @Philip Owen

    Yes in collaboration with NASA Cassini Huygens probe…NASA provided the nuclear thermo electric generators(solar doesn’t work beyond Mars) and the deep space network for guidance and control and iirc footed most of the cost of the project..

  112. @Pale_Primate

    The Energia rocket which was flown successfully twice in the 1980s had the payload capability for a moon mission…

    What you are referring to is the N1 rocket which failed 4 times and was then cancelled…

  113. Dmitry says:
    @AaronB

    And the most eccentric.

    At 2:00 in video below how track is switching on Osaka monorail

  114. @Anonymoose

    What do you find vexatious. I think most commenters here who are experts on technology do acknowledge that china does not really have that big of an innovative flair.

    It is not so much this specific post, but based on Karlin’s general comments – I think Karlin is beginning to fall in love with an idealised version of China.

    It is not nearly as bad as Fred Reed or Godfree Roberts, but none the less it seems to be going further than merely saying that China as a country should not be underestimated.

  115. dux.ie says:
    @Passer by

    You seem to think that you are smarter than OECD in sampling theory, are you? And who are you? Go read up on statistical sampling theory on how to create representative samples. OECD has the data on the cognitive demographics of all the countries involved. They dictate which schools and which students are to be tested so as the samples are representative. Though the country involved can have some leeway to decline some of the specific selections, all those data are transparently reported. For example it was reported that Canada declined the selection of all Native Indians in the sample, UK had higher decline rate than China, etc. OECD has the targeted sample demographics and the data on the percentage of those targets that had been achieved. You dont know what you are talking about.

    There are many other OECD facts that contradict the echo chamber narratives, for example some claimed that their low scores were because their students were not “motivated” to take the PISA tests. That were totally wrong on both counts, e.g. the 2015 PISA tests were accompanied with the student well being studies of which motivation was studied. The OECD results showed that the East Asians were moderately “motivated” where as the Americans were highly motivated.

    “Motivation” is also correlated with many other factors and cannot be studied in isolation. There is the myth that higher “motivation” will give higher performance but that have to be tested with numbers. There was also study on “anxiety”. In the “real world” rather than the fictitious bubbles in their minds, the OECD data showed that in the real world in general high “motivation” induces high “anxiety” which reduces the cognitive performance under competitions, especially for those snowflakes. It seems that only 25% of those countries with Viking, AngloSaxon/Celtic or EastAsian ancestries can thrive under competitions. Thus in general both assumptions for the echo chamber narrative were wrong. If I have time I can dig out the data to show that.

    Another false echo chamber narratives is about prep classes or after school tuitions which UNESCO and OECD also have data on. The OECD data showed that East Asians except Koreans were only moderately involved with that and the levels were only slightly above that for USA. Those whinging lusers abut EastAsians in prep classes seem to be only projecting “their laziness” on the rest of the Americans.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Passer by
  116. @Passer by

    Completely agreed except for this:

    whites are declining in Latin America too.

    Have not heard of this before. Any stats to back it up?

    • Replies: @Passer by
  117. @Hyperborean

    I agree with you that romanticising China too much might be a bit silly even if what Karlin writes is generally accurate. A multi polar world is better than one superpower imposing its norms and governing style across the rest of the world. We wouldn’t want China telling the rest of the world what cultural values they must have anymore than the USA. However as of now China is the only economic superpower right now which has the strength and ability to stand up to the insanity of the American globohomo empire and its attempts to turn the whole world into one giant deracinated mass.

  118. utu says:
    @Dmitry

    You simply look at the… – Writng your thoughts is simple. In reality nothing is simple.

    In Russia, children have the highest, or one of the highest, levels of maths…. – on paper only. IMO 80% of kids can be taught various tricks and mnemonic devices by learning to identify to which category a given problem belongs and then apply learned template they were taught and trained to solve it. Only 20% of kids can think outside of the box and when given a problem that is formulated in a new unknown to them way will be table to translate it into a know to them problem and then solved it.

    These 80% of kids will never encounter problems they trained to deal with in school after they graduate.

    IMO pumping up kids with math they do not need is waste of time. It does not teach them creativity or independent thinking.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  119. utu says:
    @dux.ie

    They dictate which schools and which students are to be tested so as the samples are representative.

    Exactly. That’s why variance estimates are suspect and most likely not representative. And this Passer by character tries to blow out of proportion the fact that in LITERACY Japan has the lowest SD though similar to that of Czech Republic and in NUMERACY it has SD as low as Czech Republic while he conveniently forgets that in PROBLEM SOLVING its SD is in the middle and furthermore conveniently forgets that in PISA Japan’s SD is also in the middle. What was his point? What was this discovery everybody missed? That Japanese score high but they are just noncreative automatons all thinking alike? Another after reiner Tor character practitioner of consolation Onanism? AaronB wrote something about it up the thread.

    Concentrate on Czechia. Why Czech Republic has low SD? Should Czech Academy of Science call for a special task force to study this great national ‘problem’ of low SD? Perhaps there is something in Czech beer? Perhaps Czech Academy of Science could consult Passer by who has a special knack for making sweeping theories based on one data point.

    • Troll: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @dux.ie
    , @Passer by
  120. dux.ie says:
    @yakushimaru

    It is really a mystery. The Chinese played football during the the Han dynasty from about 200 BCE and FIFA recognized that, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuju

    They are now hopeless in football, even with encouragement from the central government, i.e. Xi is a football fan and the Central Politburo has a sub-committee on football chaired by a Vice Premier and they have signed MOUs with various countries for the promotion football competitions. May be that is their self-deprecation soft power activity.

    https://www.bundesliga.com/en/news/Bundesliga/agmd12-germany-and-china-sign-comprehensive-soccer-agreement.jsp

    “Germany and China sign comprehensive soccer agreement”

    https://www.scmp.com/sport/soccer/article/2101554/germanys-football-diplomacy-delights-beaming-xi-jinping-chinese

    “Germany’s football diplomacy delights beaming Xi Jinping as Chinese president and Angela Merkel watch kids’ match in Berlin”

  121. dux.ie says:
    @Dmitry

    The important difference was how the Russian German rocket experts compared to the American German rocket expert.

  122. dux.ie says:
    @utu

    It is pointless just focusing solely on the SD data for Japan and Korea as there are local pecularities. Both countries have significantly more aging populations which will be excluded, PIAAC only samples ages 16-65. The aged tends to have decreasing cognitive abilities thus the left hand side of the bell curve will be significantly thinned, reducing the SD. For Korea those 65+ are about 14.1% of the population.

    PIAAC also specifically excludes military personel of which Korea has the world longest mandatory military service of about 24 months plus 6 more years of short duration annual retrainings, totalling may be 30 months of the male adult lives. The fraction of Korean male 15-24 (rather than the 16-25) is 13.3%, thus the upper limit of active male conscript periods could be about 4% of male lives. Those under IQ 85 might be reassigned to other non-military tasks and might be in the PIAAC sample. Those in active conscript periods most probably are on the right hand side of the bell curve and thinning it, reducing the SD further.

    I am not familiar with military conscriptions but I will assume that most of the time they will be more physical than mental activities. Thus the cognitive development might be stagnate during those period. Those already out of schools for 2 years might not want to return to university thus thinning out the right hand side further, reducing the SD.

    Military training is not walking in the park but really put them out of the comfort zones. Though there might be positive effects on the physical side, various studies have shown than on mental side there might be various negatives for 5% to 25% of those involved, such as PTSD, head/brain/mental damages, which last their whole lives, i.e. 5% to 25%. of 58.8% of the remaining male adult lives (say 25~64). Low IQ also tends to have PTSD. IQ test below 85 are less sensitive, more will hit the low floor cutoff rather than moving further to the left. Thus the left hand side is yet thinning down, reducing the SD. All these tend to thin out the right and left tails and relatively boost the central regions, thus reducing the SD.

    On top of all these it is harder to recruit Japanese or Korean adults for testing as they usually have to work. It is different for USA where a large population are under-employed (graduates working in job that do not require any university degrees) or unemployed and might readily turn up for the psych tests. For PIAAC the min country sample size is only 5000. For PISA it is 6300 and can be readily obtained from participating schools.

    • Replies: @utu
  123. utu says:
    @dux.ie

    I agree that “It is pointless just focusing solely on the SD data for Japan and Korea”. My point was that a singular data point like this from PIAAC for literacy and numeracy which is not replicated in Problem Solving part of PIAAC and is not replicated in PISA should not be used as a starting point to push cumbersome theories about East Asians conformism and lack of creativity.

    NB: Since Japan and Korea have high scores there is more people hitting the upper cut-off which will reduce SD as well.

  124. utu says:

    2015 PISA Graphical Summary

    Note:

    (1) Japan and Korea in terms of standard deviation are close to the mean and median
    (2) PISA-Math and PISA-Reading correlate well
    (3) SD does not correlate with PISA score for either Math or Reading parts
    (4) SD-Math and SD-Reading correlate well
    (5) IQ country scores correlate well with PISA-Math and less well with PISA-Reading. About 64% and 40% of variance in PISA scores respectively can be explained by IQ scores.

  125. Passer by says:
    @dux.ie

    You seem to think that you are smarter than OECD in sampling theory, are you?

    It is not the OECD who told China what to test, dear dux.ie. It is China that decided that only few, richer cities/areas will be tested. It is not that hard to research the issue of PISA and China.

    China’s participation in the 2012 test was limited to Shanghai, Hong Kong, and Macau as separate entities. In 2012, Shanghai participated for the second time, again topping the rankings in all three subjects, as well as improving scores in the subjects compared to the 2009 tests. Shanghai’s score of 613 in mathematics was 113 points above the average score, putting the performance of Shanghai pupils about 3 school years ahead of pupils in average countries. Educational experts debated to what degree this result reflected the quality of the general educational system in China, pointing out that Shanghai has greater wealth and better-paid teachers than the rest of China.[31] Hong Kong placed second in reading and science and third in maths.

    In 2018 the following four Chinese provinces participated: Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang. In 2015, the participating provinces were Jiangsu, Guangdong, Beijing, and Shanghai.[32][33][34] The 2015 Beijing-Shanghai-Jiangsu-Guangdong cohort scored a median 518 in science in 2015, while the 2012 Shanghai cohort scored a median 580.

    Critics of PISA counter that in Shanghai and other Chinese cities, most children of migrant workers can only attend city schools up to the ninth grade, and must return to their parents’ hometowns for high school due to hukou restrictions, thus skewing the composition of the city’s high school students in favor of wealthier local families. A population chart of Shanghai reproduced in The New York Times shows a steep drop off in the number of 15-year-olds residing there.[35] According to Schleicher, 27% of Shanghai’s 15-year-olds are excluded from its school system (and hence from testing). As a result, the percentage of Shanghai’s 15-year-olds tested by PISA was 73%, lower than the 89% tested in the US.[36] Following the 2015 testing, OECD published in depth studies on the education systems of a selected few countries including China.[37]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_International_Student_Assessment#China

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2017/01/04/are-the-pisa-education-results-rigged/#19df4f791561

    So what i said is pretty clear – performance for China is overrated.

  126. Passer by says:
    @utu

    That’s why variance estimates are suspect and most likely not representative.

    If variance estimates are suspect then the PISA estimates of of east asian children having higher SDs are suspect too. Then you should have told Steve Hsu that he is wrong and nothing conclusive can come from PISA data anyway.

    If data is bad anyway and they can not properly estimate their SDs, then all results are suspect, including results where east asian countries have higher SDs.

    Therefore no conclusion is possible on the issue of east asian variance.

    But this is not what i’m hearing from you. You say that east asians have higher SDs based on PISA data, and thats Ok, and it shows that they don’t have low variance.

    Then you turn and say that that in the cases when they have generally lower SDs based on PIAAC data, then the data is shit because they can’t estimate their SDs.

    Well darling, this is not how it works. If PISA and PIAAC can not properly estimate their SDs, then all of their data is useless and no one really knows if east asians have lower variance or not.

    And this Passer by character tries to blow out of proportion the fact that in LITERACY Japan has the lowest SD though similar to that of Czech Republic and in NUMERACY it has SD as low as Czech Republic while he conveniently forgets that in PROBLEM SOLVING its SD is in the middle and furthermore conveniently forgets that in PISA Japan’s SD is also in the middle. What was his point? What was this discovery everybody missed? That Japanese score high but they are just noncreative automatons all thinking alike? Another after reiner Tor character practitioner of consolation Onanism? AaronB wrote something about it up the thread.

    Concentrate on Czechia. Why Czech Republic has low SD? Should Czech Academy of Science call for a special task force to study this great national ‘problem’ of low SD? Perhaps there is something in Czech beer? Perhaps Czech Academy of Science could consult Passer by who has a special knack for making sweeping theories based on one data point.

    I’m not blowing anything out of proportion. This is what i said and this is what the data shows.

    1. On PISA children tests, such and reading, math and chience, Japan and South Korea have higher variance.

    2. On PISA problem solving tests for children, Japan and South Korea have lower variance than the vast majority of countries and the average of all countries.

    3. On PIAAC tests for adults, Japan and South Korea have lower variance than the vast majority of countries and the average of all countries in 5 out of 6 cases.

    Adults:
    Japan Reading Lower variance.
    Japan Numeracy Lower variance.
    Japan Problem Solving – medium variance, similar to average.

    South Korea Reading Lower variance.
    South Korea Numeracy Lower variance.
    South Korea Problem Solving – Lower variance

    @dux.ie

    PIAAC also specifically excludes military personel of which Korea has the world longest mandatory military service of about 24 months plus 6 more years of short duration annual retrainings, totalling may be 30 months of the male adult lives. The fraction of Korean male 15-24 (rather than the 16-25) is 13.3%, thus the upper limit of active male conscript periods could be about 4% of male lives. Those under IQ 85 might be reassigned to other non-military tasks and might be in the PIAAC sample. Those in active conscript periods most probably are on the right hand side of the bell curve and thinning it, reducing the SD further.

    Not an argument, South Korean adult population has low variance in all age groups.

    • Replies: @utu
  127. utu says:
    @Passer by

    You still do not get it. Concentrate on your argument and your motive. Why do you argue about it? Why did you bring up that SD for Japanese is lower in one particular survey of test and ignored the fact that Japanese SD is average or even higher in other surveys of different tests

    All I wanted to point out that your are conclusion driven and not data driven. Your pet theory is that Japanese or East Asian in general are less creative, more rigid, and so on. Pretty much what this reiner Tor character wrote here. And you wanted to add your two cents. The question is why you had this urge to chip in your piece of misguided wisdom. Is it the issue of consolation Onanism that AaronB identified as a motive behind the never ending yapping by alt-righters about the lack of creativity in East Asia?

    There can be many reasons why variances are as they are. Most important is sampling issue. Is sampling representative? Or is there some bias that affect variance? Perhaps schools selected are not representative. Possibly in some jurisdictions only “good” schools with “good” students were selected. Then there is a possibility of tweaking the results by filtering “outliers” which may involve different procedure in different jurisdictions. Then there might be beefing up of data by removing low end outliers which would be cheating.

    But for you these issues do not enter your mind. You are a typical IQists who has infinite faith in numbers. You have a number fetish and do not question what did it take to create this number. You see a number and you think it must be real and must mean something particularly when it confirms you a priori bias.

    Just let it go. Perhaps you have some talents. Have you tried pottery or gardening? Numbers are not your thing. You seem to be skewed towards autism and numbers will aggravate you OCD that usually comes with autism. Read some soothing novel that shows the richness of human actions and character. Try Tolstoy or Balzac.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  128. Dmitry says:
    @utu

    You simply look at the… – Writng your thoughts is simple. In reality nothing is simple.

    It’s simple to compare exams of different countries, how they are scored and proportion who enter the exam.

    If you want to know what the level the children are attaining between countries in a particular topic, and what proportion of children this is – there is the answer (and it’s easiest to compare between countries for mathematics, than for other topics).

    Whether this information is useful or not, is another question.

    More usefully, you can look between countries at number of university graduates in these topics, and whether the university curriculum was adequate.

    However, if you want to know realized skill level of an adult population in different areas, then you compare proportion of the population who are working in job which requires those particular skills. And there is the answer for inter-country comparison of the adult population.

    Usefully, here, you could see lack of matching between educational level and occupational level, in the same areas.

    For example, in Republic of Ireland, there is higher proportion of occupations requiring certain skills and education, than education level of native population, and therefore a lot of importation of skilled gastarbeiters. In Russia, the situation is comparatively reversed.

    Only 20% of kids can think outside of the box and when given a problem that is formulated in a new unknown to them way will be table to translate it into a know to them problem and then solved it.

    A well designed exam for children should primarily testing basic knowledge and skill. In the end of the exam, there can be designed some more difficult questions to challenge the proportion of more knowledgable or talented children.

    IMO pumping up kids with math they do not need is waste of time. It does not teach them creativity or independent thinking.

    Creativity and independent thinking is expressed after a person has basic knowledge and skills in the topic, and it often a result of learning more knowledge, having more practice, and developing more understanding.

    School can teach basic knowledge and skills. People may or may not express creativity in areas where they have more knowledge, and school cannot be a sufficient condition of this, but the school should provide the necessary condition.

    • Replies: @utu
  129. Dmitry says:
    @Hyperborean

    This behaviour is more an expression of character types.

    For some people, it is naturally far more exciting to project about future possibilities, than to think about current, already realized ones. In Jungian psychology, this would correspond to “intuitive personality types”.

    For people with this tendency, developing countries like China, Brazil and India, will often seem far more interesting than developed countries. Although the interesting thing for them, is not current situation of the countries, but rather potentialities they perceive for their future – here there is a lot of space for fantasy, and also certain faculties of clairvoyance.

    I sympathize with this view, – although I am more curious about India – and feel a little sad we might be old men before India starts “take off”.

  130. @Hyperborean

    If you have any specific issues with things in this or any other posts, name them. If you think the general description of the situation is significantly different, give us an outline of how things would look in your opinion.

    BTW I don’t really get what do you mean by “falling in love” with China here – one major point made here was that despite the higher IQ, Chinese are lagging when compared to whites. The second major point was that this might matter less currently than it did a century ago. The third major point was that Globohomo ideology is a major weakness, which even raises the prospect of China dominating the US. (Without Globohomo, I’d expect some kind of Cold War II type situation, where neither would be strong enough to outright dominate the other. But it’s not hard science anyway.) Do you disagree with any of these? If yes, which? Do you think there are other major points which are overlooked by us? What would those be?

    There are many points one can make, for example a Chinese world dominance might be worse than a US world dominance, or at least not much better. (We don’t know.)

    I don’t really get what use it is whining about the supposed China-favoritism or certain authors or commenters.

    • Replies: @AaronB
  131. @utu

    Concentrate on your argument and your motive. Why do you argue about it?

    I now realized you must be a Jewish woman. (Or at least a British word for cigarette, though your being Jewish is still very likely.) This kind of debating style (switching to ad hominem arguments about the supposed motives of the interlocutor) is typical of women, homos and Jews, for example AaronB.

    Try to make substantive arguments about the issue at hand instead of thinking about the possible motives of the people with opposing points of view. Once you’ve defeated the substance of the argument, you can fantasize about what you think the reasons for the errors might be, but don’t switch outright to ad hominem “arguments” right in your second sentence, because it just destroys the purpose of the comment board.

    The rest is for the benefit of the others, not this British word for cigarette.

    Your pet theory is that Japanese or East Asian in general are less creative, more rigid, and so on.

    Well, all the data points to them being less creative in recent history (i.e. last 500 years), so you need an explanation for that. The explanation might be historical contingency (i.e. they will converge or even overtake whites, just give them enough time), cultural (i.e. it might be more persistent, but the reasons are not genetic), genetic, or a combination of these.

    I’m not even sure the commenter “Passer by” was strongly arguing for East Asians having a lower SD than whites. He simply raised the possibility. Sure, he only has one data point (or maybe six data points given the three different tests for both Japanese and South Koreans), so maybe later tests will have different results and then we’ll abandon the hypothesis, but it is nevertheless a possibility. Why do you think it’s impossible? He has already answered your argument based on PISA several times. (It’s based on children, so their SD might be somewhat different. But yes, those are contradicting data points, so maybe his hypothesis is not very strong.)

    • Replies: @AaronB
    , @utu
  132. AaronB says:
    @reiner Tor

    Tor has a Chinese boyfriend 🙂

    And I think we know who the sub is lol….

    • Troll: reiner Tor
  133. AaronB says:
    @reiner Tor

    Didn’t you say you are moving to Hong Kong, Tor, on another thread?

    Don’t worry, you will be assigned a large Chinese dom that you will be required to service every day 🙂

    Your fantasies will come true!

    And you make a good point about debating styles – the passionless and “objective” manner that is the natural style of the cuck has indeed come to characterize the deracinated European as of late, while self respecting groups argue with passion.

    And no, Tor, don’t ask me to be your dom – I don’t swing that way 🙂

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  134. @AaronB

    Didn’t you say you are moving to Hong Kong, Tor, on another thread?

    In the same thread you begged Karlin and German_reader to nail you in the ass.

    argue with passion.

    You mistake being a faggot for being passionate.

  135. utu says:
    @Dmitry

    school should provide the necessary condition

    Yes. But one has to define what are the necessary conditions. Does teaching Zermelo Fraenkel axioms or Peano axioms in the third grade of high school to everybody is necessary? And what about variational calculus or functional analysis? Or group theory as the foundation of geometry?

    I have been taught these things in high school and it was a waste of time for 90% of students.

    There is no universal education. Yes to schools for everybody but different schools. German system that still operates in Switzerland where at age of 14 your career is decided students are put on different tracks: vocational school, technical school or high school. After vocational school you will never go to college. After technical school with lots of effort you may qualify to get to polytechnic university but not to university. Only high schools open door for you to higher educations. This system works though yes it breeds some resentment. But you can’t lie to people that there are equal chances to everybody all the time. This chances should stop at reasonable time like at age 14.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  136. @WHAT

    Chinese had variants of AL-31 for two and a half decades now, and still can’t produce an indigenous variant of comparable specs. In their civillian engine-building things are even worse. Same with reactors. Same with missiles.
    Turns out implementation in actually technology-dense areas is very hard for asians as well lol.

    Chinese fighter jets are already flying with their own WS-10 engines. More powerful WS-15 engine for 5th gen. fighter J-20 and WS-20 high-bypass ratio engine for heavy transport Y-20 are in the pipeline and will be available in 3-5 years.

    Only a few companies in the world can produce engines for civilian airliners that are commercially competitive on the international market. Even Russia has not been able to offer such an engine yet. China is developing CJ-1000A for its C919 airliner and CJ-2000, in cooperation with Russia, for their CR-929.

    China’s Hualong One nuclear reactor is world-class, and is currently under evaluation by the British nuclear regulator for possible exportation to UK.

    As for China’s missile technology, besides their strategic ICBM and SLBM, and all kinds of tactical ballistic missiles, including their exclusive anti-ship ballistic missiles, they are also at the final stage of the development of hypersonic missiles. China is also one of 4 countries and regime that deployed satellite navigational systems. Currently, China is 1 of only 3 countries that have their own manned space program. By 2024, China will be the only country that has a functioning space station. China may land a man on the moon by the 2030s.

  137. Dmitry says:
    @utu

    I have been taught these things in high school and it was a waste of time for 90% of students.

    Sure, classes can be separated by ability, and there can be modification of what you teach for each ability level. Moreover, especially talented student can be provided with additional tutoring in other areas (university level) – this is a good idea.

    But there should be equal potential access for students to all important topics, and ability of children to move between lower and higher classes, if they change their attitude or improve their ability.

    where at age of 14 your career is decided students are put on different tracks: vocational school, technical school or high school.

    This is not a good idea. Talents of children often don’t emerge until at later ages than 14.

    Moreover, intelligent children can sometimes (often?) develop later than stupider children.

  138. utu says:
    @reiner Tor

    What about reading some serious Western 19 century and early 20 century literature? Like H. Balzac, C. Dickens, F. Dostoyevsky, A. Tolstoy, T. Mann, R. Musil, M. Bulgakov, H. Broch, J. Roth, A. Döblin. I would add even J. Hašek.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - If you are new to my work, *start here*. If you liked this post, and want me to produce more such content, consider *donating*.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS