The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
Open Thread 39: Lurlsitania
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

lisbon-night

Just back from Portugal. Will share impressions in a later post (most are positive).

I’ll be doing quite a bit of traveling this summer. I’ll be in London again soon [business], will probably stop by in Denmark this May [because a certain event can no longer take place in London for political reasons], will be in Romania early this June [friend's wedding] – at which point I might as well tick off some of the V4 countries and maybe Austria [dependent on whether I can get free accomodation there].

On this note, I am considering getting a laptop. Blogging from a PC as I do is fine when you are stationary, but not so straightforward from a cell phone, and I’ll probably be abroad for most of this summer. And as the great Thorfinnsson correctly pointed out, writing posts from a cell phone is for losers.

So I’ll appreciate some advice on the best value-for-money laptops today [reqs: Needs to have an SSD and a good processor, but don't care about the GPU].

Donations are even more appreciated: http://akarlin.com/donations/

Featured

* Audacious Epigone: Support for free speech among young white college graduates has declined over the last several decades.

free-speech-support-over-time

Seems to confirm our worse fears; declining support for free speech far from entirely ascribable to demographic change.

* New book coming out soon: Edward Dutton and Michael Woodley, “At Our Wit’s End: Why We’re Becoming Less Intelligent and What it Means for the Future.”

Incidentally, if all goes well, I’ll be able to collect Heiner Rindermann’s new book Cognitive Capitalism when I’m in London and review it.

* Spat between Ezra Klein and Sam Harris.

* Gregory Hood: The Racial Politics of ‘Kingdom Come: Deliverance’. Will try to finish a review of this game myself soon.

* Pyrkov, Timothy et al. – Extracting biological age from biomedical data via deep learning: too much of a good thing?. Company behind this is Gero, one of the Russian companies getting into the life extension game.

* Woodley, Michael et al. (2017) – What Caused over a Century of Decline in General Intelligence? Testing Predictions from the Genetic Selection and Neurotoxin Hypotheses.

Summary from James Thompson here.

* Search for advanced civilizations beyond Earth finds nothing obvious in 100,000 galaxies. Kirkegaard: “The great filter is coming for us. But what is it?” Doing an article on this right now.

.

World

* Paul Nehlen doxxes legendary Alt Right Twitter troll Ricky Vaughn.

This did good for Vaughn’s brand, if perhaps not his future career prospects. He was for a change a pretty normal fellow by Alt Right leader standards: Not obese, no Jewish wife, not a walking caricature of a white trashionalist, etc.

This also proves that boomers are incurable. Even if you try to cure them, they OD on the redpills.

* Just follow Audacious Epigone already:

.

Russia

* Russia/China cooperation continues increasing; some links in my post here.

* Patrick Armstrong’s RF Sitrep, April 5 2018. He is also leaving Facebook.

* Alexander Mercouris: Latest US sanctions on Russia: incitement to a coup and a new form of protectionism. But Navalny is pretty happy with them.

.

Science & Culture

* James Somers: The Scientific Paper Is Obsolete

* Diffusion of public mechanical clocks followed the printing press:

Germany, Northern Italy, Benelux still the most advanced parts of Europe – especially in manufacturing. Really deep precedents for that.

* Emil Kirkegaard points out genomics costs going town much more rapidly than expected:

genomics-costs

* CW: EU-funded research: “genes make up 15-45% of the factors that determine the number of children a person ends up having”

* Chapman, Robert et al. (2018) – New literacy challenge for the twenty-first century: genetic knowledge is poor even among well educated

Participants received secondary education in 78 countries, with the largest samples from Russia, the UK and the USA. The results showed significant group differences in genetic knowledge between different countries, professions, education levels and religious affiliations. Overall, genetic knowledge was poor. The questions were designed to assess basic genetic literacy. However, only 1.2% of participants answered all 18 questions correctly, and the average score was 65.5%. Genetic knowledge was related to peoples’ attitudes towards genetics. For example, those with greater genetic knowledge were on average more willing to use genetic knowledge for their personal health management.

* Jose Ricon’s links.

* Scott Alexander reviews Jordan Peterson’s new book.

.

Powerful Takes

* A perfect 180:

.

 
• Category: Miscellaneous • Tags: Freedom of Speech, Open Thread 
Show 200 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Jordan Peterson is such an insufferable pseud (and coward).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. The above clip of George Galloway in full talk radio flow was posted by an anonymous contributor on the C.J.Hopkins thread. It’s a magnificent tour de force that accurately summarises the true position of the UK government, and those who believe it or even take it seriously, in the Skripal affair.

    The contrast between the content of Galloway’s polemic and the UK establishment media’s treatment of this matter is a measure of the degree to which we live in a manipulated society. The sheer barefaced absurdity and enormity of what they expect people to nod seriously at and treat as though it is some kind of rational approach to the issue begs this kind of polemic treatment in response.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Big Red Scary
    Alas, after Galloway, they broke the mold.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. And by contrast here’s what the UK establishment left seriously thinks is a rational response to the patently absurd allegation of a supposed chemical weapons attack by the Syrian government in Syria, from the Diplomatic editor, no less, of the “respectable” left’s flagship newspaper, the Guardian:

    Syria will see US price for chemical attack as worth paying

    All over Britain there are highly educated Labour voters – relatively serious people: doctors, lawyers, teachers, … believe me there are, I know plenty of them – reading this arrant nonsense and gravely nodding their heads and telling their wives that “something will have to be done” about Assad and about Russia.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. Those who blame Africa’s problems on colonialism are brutally debunked by a simple comparison, made of a time well before colonialism began: Europe had fully mechanical clocks before much of Africa had the wheel.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. Would we really want to be contacted by aliens?

    Better not to be, than to live permanently in their shadow, as blacks do of whites, or find all the good real estate is already taken. It’s better to live in the Age of Discovery, than be on the receiving end of some alien SWJs.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. This also proves that boomers are incurable. Even if you try to cure them, they OD on the redpills.

    According to Wikipedia Paul Nehlen was born in 1969. He’s not exactly what is generally understood as a baby boomer.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Matra
    No, but there's something wrong with someone in his 40s, or even 30s, who jumps straight from conventional race-blind politics to full blown WNism. This is especially so if within months of conversion they are calling for purges of those not as pure as they are. I've seen this with WNist converts for well over a decade. When I was younger I saw the same thing with born-again Christians. One month they are degenerate junkies or drunks, next month they are lecturing everyone on Biblical morality. A reflective level-headed adult of Nehlen's age should take about five years - maybe longer - to fully change course politically because that's how long it takes from the beginning of doubting your already existing worldview to researching then observing alternatives in the real world, to eventually discarding beliefs of many years/decades. It's a humbling experience that should take time.

    Gen Xers like Nehlen (and obviously Boomers) who change too quickly are usually mentally unstable or just plain old opportunists. If they don't fit those two categories then they are probably just too unobservant and stupid to be of much use to any movement. Perhaps nationalists should have a general rule saying that unless you can demonstrate being somewhat "woke" for a minimum of five or ten years you don't get to play a prominent public role in the movement as there's a good chance you will either suddenly change your mind again or go full freak show. Obviously for people in their early 20s it's different but much older people who are only now noticing immigration issues, race, and to a lesser extent the JQ, should be seen as suspect.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. On this note, I am considering getting a laptop. Blogging from a PC as I do is fine when you are stationary, but not so straightforward from a cell phone, and I’ll probably be abroad for most of this summer. And as the great Thorfinnsson correctly pointed out, writing posts from a cell phone is for losers.

    So I’ll appreciate some advice on the best value-for-money laptops today [reqs: Needs to have an SSD and a good processor, but don't care about the GPU].

    Lenovo Thinkpad X1 Carbon or the Thinkpad X1 Yoga in the event you would like a tablet capability (for watching films on flights, for instance).

    The 14″ screens are big enough to do real work, and are now on the same level of quality as Apple Retina and Dell Infinity Edge displays.

    The four core ultra low power processors are a big upgrade from their two core predecessors.

    USB Type C charging is very convenient and fast as well.

    Both systems are available with 4G LTE mobile broadband, which I highly recommend. Eliminates dependence on WiFi.

    Build quality and robustness of Thinkpads can’t be matched either, and Lenovo’s service is quite good.

    I own a Thinkpad P51 and a Thinkpad X1 Yoga. The P51 is fantastic but I don’t recommend it for travel as it weighs five pounds.

    If you don’t want a Thinkpad the Dell XPS laptops are also great choices.

    This German website is generally the best source of laptop reviews: https://www.notebookcheck.net

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
    Note: Windows 10 is required on 8th generation Intel Core processors

    You can still run Linux of course, but older versions of Windows won't install.

    I recommend using NTLite to do a clean install so as to remove criminal features (such as Asimov Telemetry) from Windows.

    You can also purchase a legitimate Enterprise license key from a Bonanza criminal, which gives more control over the OS as well as some other neat features like Hyper-V and Windows to Go.

    I don't recommend Enterprise LTSB for the simple reason that it lacks the Microsoft Store. The Microsoft Store is of course gay and criminal, but you need it for some software.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. @Thorfinnsson


    On this note, I am considering getting a laptop. Blogging from a PC as I do is fine when you are stationary, but not so straightforward from a cell phone, and I’ll probably be abroad for most of this summer. And as the great Thorfinnsson correctly pointed out, writing posts from a cell phone is for losers.

    So I’ll appreciate some advice on the best value-for-money laptops today [reqs: Needs to have an SSD and a good processor, but don't care about the GPU].
     
    Lenovo Thinkpad X1 Carbon or the Thinkpad X1 Yoga in the event you would like a tablet capability (for watching films on flights, for instance).

    The 14" screens are big enough to do real work, and are now on the same level of quality as Apple Retina and Dell Infinity Edge displays.

    The four core ultra low power processors are a big upgrade from their two core predecessors.

    USB Type C charging is very convenient and fast as well.

    Both systems are available with 4G LTE mobile broadband, which I highly recommend. Eliminates dependence on WiFi.

    Build quality and robustness of Thinkpads can't be matched either, and Lenovo's service is quite good.

    I own a Thinkpad P51 and a Thinkpad X1 Yoga. The P51 is fantastic but I don't recommend it for travel as it weighs five pounds.

    If you don't want a Thinkpad the Dell XPS laptops are also great choices.

    This German website is generally the best source of laptop reviews: https://www.notebookcheck.net

    Note: Windows 10 is required on 8th generation Intel Core processors

    You can still run Linux of course, but older versions of Windows won’t install.

    I recommend using NTLite to do a clean install so as to remove criminal features (such as Asimov Telemetry) from Windows.

    You can also purchase a legitimate Enterprise license key from a Bonanza criminal, which gives more control over the OS as well as some other neat features like Hyper-V and Windows to Go.

    I don’t recommend Enterprise LTSB for the simple reason that it lacks the Microsoft Store. The Microsoft Store is of course gay and criminal, but you need it for some software.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    Agree with Thorfinnsson on Lenovo laptops.

    It's good for the price. You need to uninstall some junk they preinstall, but otherwise it's recommended.

    And of course with an SSD.

    You need to spend somewhere in $1000-$1500 range, and you'll get a really nice one.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. anon[378] • Disclaimer says:

    * Search for advanced civilizations beyond Earth finds nothing obvious in 100,000 galaxies.

    What are they looking for? How do they know how would advanced civilization look like?

    As far as we know, the universe can be fully developed and densely inhabited in the dark matter and dark energy, and the “normal’ baryonic matter is just handful of trash and refuse cast away.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  10. @Thorfinnsson
    Note: Windows 10 is required on 8th generation Intel Core processors

    You can still run Linux of course, but older versions of Windows won't install.

    I recommend using NTLite to do a clean install so as to remove criminal features (such as Asimov Telemetry) from Windows.

    You can also purchase a legitimate Enterprise license key from a Bonanza criminal, which gives more control over the OS as well as some other neat features like Hyper-V and Windows to Go.

    I don't recommend Enterprise LTSB for the simple reason that it lacks the Microsoft Store. The Microsoft Store is of course gay and criminal, but you need it for some software.

    Agree with Thorfinnsson on Lenovo laptops.

    It’s good for the price. You need to uninstall some junk they preinstall, but otherwise it’s recommended.

    And of course with an SSD.

    You need to spend somewhere in $1000-$1500 range, and you’ll get a really nice one.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Go onto eBay and get a high spec, ex-corporate think pad for between £150 and £200.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
    This isn't a bad idea but a lot of corporate Thinkpads have inferior displays. 1366 x 768 is for instance very common, and the FHD panels are not that bright.

    The latest Thinkpads are available with 500 nit displays you can use on a beach.
    , @Dmitry
    'Ex-corporate' means used?

    I'm not sure it's a good idea to buy used laptops (although maybe you know more than me), because things like the power-socket, the headphone socket or keyboard/mouse are usually the first part to break for me.

    Unlike a desktop, it's not easy to fix when a part wears out in a laptop. I've added a new socket to a laptop before with a soldering iron, and it was really a lot of hassle.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Re the doxxing mentioned above, a worthy quote:

    It takes a whole lot of balls, a whole lot of stupidity or some combination of the two, to get into this scene with your real name and face.

    - Andrew Anglin

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  13. @Randal
    https://youtu.be/32ylnBrADkQ

    The above clip of George Galloway in full talk radio flow was posted by an anonymous contributor on the C.J.Hopkins thread. It's a magnificent tour de force that accurately summarises the true position of the UK government, and those who believe it or even take it seriously, in the Skripal affair.

    The contrast between the content of Galloway's polemic and the UK establishment media's treatment of this matter is a measure of the degree to which we live in a manipulated society. The sheer barefaced absurdity and enormity of what they expect people to nod seriously at and treat as though it is some kind of rational approach to the issue begs this kind of polemic treatment in response.

    Alas, after Galloway, they broke the mold.

    Read More
    • Agree: Randal
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. @g2k
    Go onto eBay and get a high spec, ex-corporate think pad for between £150 and £200.

    This isn’t a bad idea but a lot of corporate Thinkpads have inferior displays. 1366 x 768 is for instance very common, and the FHD panels are not that bright.

    The latest Thinkpads are available with 500 nit displays you can use on a beach.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    I got the new Lenovo Yoga 920 a few months ago. You can turn it into a kind of e-book with a touch screen, which is useful for reading articles in your bed or watching downloaded films on the plane. It's cheap for quite good quality - selling $1600 with the larger SSD.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. @g2k
    Go onto eBay and get a high spec, ex-corporate think pad for between £150 and £200.

    ‘Ex-corporate’ means used?

    I’m not sure it’s a good idea to buy used laptops (although maybe you know more than me), because things like the power-socket, the headphone socket or keyboard/mouse are usually the first part to break for me.

    Unlike a desktop, it’s not easy to fix when a part wears out in a laptop. I’ve added a new socket to a laptop before with a soldering iron, and it was really a lot of hassle.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson


    ‘Ex-corporate’ means used?
     
    Yes, however specifically the laptops were leased by corporate IT departments. They are therefore almost always in good condition and very attractively priced. The cost compared to used Macbooks or gaming laptops is superb.


    I’m not sure it’s a good idea to buy used laptops (although maybe you know more than me), because things like the power-socket, the headphone socket or keyboard/mouse are usually the first part to break for me.
     
    Power socket on Thinkpads is more robust than competing laptops, except perhaps the Fujitsu Siemens Celsius mobile workstations (which are actually assembled in Germany and Japan rather than China). But I haven't used those since they're barely available in America.

    Unlike a desktop, it’s not easy to fix when a part wears out in a laptop. I’ve added a new socket to a laptop before with a soldering iron, and it was really a lot of hassle.
     
    A good compromise for bargain hunters not interested in DIY repairs is to purchase refurbished Thinkpads instead.
    , @songbird
    Durability in electronics has improved greatly in general, but power sockets are really the weakest point remaining, IMO.

    USB in general is a great design, but micro USB for power input is a total crap design. Very easy to break, if your device falls while plugged in. Devices should be built with two, or a more easily replaceable design. Barrel jacks are better, but not really designed to be durable either.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. @Thorfinnsson
    This isn't a bad idea but a lot of corporate Thinkpads have inferior displays. 1366 x 768 is for instance very common, and the FHD panels are not that bright.

    The latest Thinkpads are available with 500 nit displays you can use on a beach.

    I got the new Lenovo Yoga 920 a few months ago. You can turn it into a kind of e-book with a touch screen, which is useful for reading articles in your bed or watching downloaded films on the plane. It’s cheap for quite good quality – selling $1600 with the larger SSD.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. @Dmitry
    'Ex-corporate' means used?

    I'm not sure it's a good idea to buy used laptops (although maybe you know more than me), because things like the power-socket, the headphone socket or keyboard/mouse are usually the first part to break for me.

    Unlike a desktop, it's not easy to fix when a part wears out in a laptop. I've added a new socket to a laptop before with a soldering iron, and it was really a lot of hassle.

    ‘Ex-corporate’ means used?

    Yes, however specifically the laptops were leased by corporate IT departments. They are therefore almost always in good condition and very attractively priced. The cost compared to used Macbooks or gaming laptops is superb.

    I’m not sure it’s a good idea to buy used laptops (although maybe you know more than me), because things like the power-socket, the headphone socket or keyboard/mouse are usually the first part to break for me.

    Power socket on Thinkpads is more robust than competing laptops, except perhaps the Fujitsu Siemens Celsius mobile workstations (which are actually assembled in Germany and Japan rather than China). But I haven’t used those since they’re barely available in America.

    Unlike a desktop, it’s not easy to fix when a part wears out in a laptop. I’ve added a new socket to a laptop before with a soldering iron, and it was really a lot of hassle.

    A good compromise for bargain hunters not interested in DIY repairs is to purchase refurbished Thinkpads instead.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. Since the Russians here have “goycotted” my questions about economic reform, I will offer my own thoughts on the matter. Some of this stuff may be old news to most people here.

    1. China actually began it’s economic liberalization before Russia did. China’s liberalization started in 1978 after the Cultural Revolution. Russia did not begin it’s liberalization until the late 80′s. But even if Russia’s case, liberalization started before the collapse of the USSR.

    2. Boris Yeltsin is one of the most underrated leaders in world history. It was Yeltsin, not Putin, who “made Russia great again”. The country he inherited was in absolute shambles and despite massive internal opposition, severe brain drain and collapsing commodities prices, he managed to push through important economic reforms while beginning the important work of rebuilding state institutions.

    3. I had no idea that Putin had been part of the Yeltsin clique. That explains why after coming to power he initially continued the reform path for his first few years. Land reform in particular had been something Yeltsin had really wanted but just didn’t have the juice to get through. And now because of that reform Russia is even ever bigger agricultural superpower than it was under the Tsars.

    4. Chinese economic liberalization was from 1978 to 2003 whereas Russian liberalization was from 1987 to 2004 (approximately, in both cases). Chinese reform was more modest and over a longer period, so relatively little hardship resulted. Russia’s shock therapy, in contrast, caused a whole host of short and medium term problems.

    5. It’s interesting that the end of liberalization for both countries happened at around the same time. And in Russia’s case, liberalization did not just cease, it was actively reversed. Even so, the current Russian economy is a little bit freer than the current Chinese economy according to international metrics. This is probably because China has never pushed through the massive land reform that Russia did.

    6. The widespread assumption in the West seems to be that Putin and Xi both want economic liberalization in principle, but either aren’t politically strong enough to do so or are worried about it weakening their holds on power. But I’m not really sure that’s the case. I have not really seen anything to indicate that Putin and Xi believe in western style capitalism.

    When Putin and Xi talk about “reform”, they mean getting rid of corruption, removing excessive regulations on private business and running SOE’s more efficiently and profitably.

    But when it comes to outright privatizing SOE’s and allowing more foreign investment/control, I don’t think Putin/Xi are interested in that. They are true believers in state capitalism.

    7. If China isn’t going to economically liberalize, then my prediction about China becoming a democracy in 20 to 30 years is off. That prediction was always contingent upon China selling off the SOE’s and I said as much at the time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Yevardian
    Yes, please tell me more about the great Boris Yeltsin, the man who saved Russia.
    If you're still cheerleading for Trump at this point you're even more of a brainlet than I thought.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. @Dmitry
    'Ex-corporate' means used?

    I'm not sure it's a good idea to buy used laptops (although maybe you know more than me), because things like the power-socket, the headphone socket or keyboard/mouse are usually the first part to break for me.

    Unlike a desktop, it's not easy to fix when a part wears out in a laptop. I've added a new socket to a laptop before with a soldering iron, and it was really a lot of hassle.

    Durability in electronics has improved greatly in general, but power sockets are really the weakest point remaining, IMO.

    USB in general is a great design, but micro USB for power input is a total crap design. Very easy to break, if your device falls while plugged in. Devices should be built with two, or a more easily replaceable design. Barrel jacks are better, but not really designed to be durable either.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. “The great filter is coming for us. But what is it?

    usury -> parasitism -> horizontal transmission with virulence

    horizontal transmission with virulence + globalism = extinction

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  21. Seems to confirm our worse fears; declining support for free speech far from entirely ascribable to demographic change.

    partly an indirect effect of the demographic change imo i.e. “hate speech” wouldn’t be as big an issue if the population was mostly homogenous i.e. someone saying something negative about a faraway group is less of a big deal.

    What Caused over a Century of Decline in General Intelligence?

    I wonder if telling the truth (i.e. genetics > environment) would change women’s mating choices enough to reverse it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosie

    I wonder if telling the truth (i.e. genetics > environment) would change women’s mating choices enough to reverse it.
     
    Are you blaming dysgenics on women's mating choices? If so, you are wrong to do so.


    https://www.scotsman.com/lifestyle/sexy-science-why-music-really-is-the-way-to-a-woman-s-heart-1-1081833

    I suspect a bullying instinct among men evolved to eliminate more creative/intelligent rivals, because they are more attractive to females.

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/2150994-songbird-gets-angry-when-its-rivals-are-brilliant-at-singing/

    , @Jaakko Raipala
    Women are already eugenic in mating choices. That's the whole reason high IQ women have low birth rates - they are unwilling to accept lower status mates. Men are more willing to date lower status women and IQ among men is positively correlated with reproductive success as high IQ men can turn their intelligence into career success which translates to mating success. High IQ women have no such option and their mate pool is reduced by the high status men dating lower status women.

    If you want more eugenic fertility by changing mating choices, you need to change the choices of men, not women. Women already prefer mates who display proxies for IQ such as educational or career success. For more eugenic fertility, you need to change the preferences of men away from the prettiest women and more towards women with STEM degrees, high paying careers and other proxies for IQ. Good luck with changing those preferences...

    Delusional ideas about women have to be one of the biggest problems in the alt-right.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Zinoviev#After_the_%E2%80%9CCatastroika%E2%80%9D

    Do Russians use the term ‘Catastroika’ to characterize the 1990s.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  23. On this note, I am considering getting a laptop.

    Don’t buy HP.
    Their laptops are worse than others.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  24. @German_reader

    This also proves that boomers are incurable. Even if you try to cure them, they OD on the redpills.
     
    According to Wikipedia Paul Nehlen was born in 1969. He's not exactly what is generally understood as a baby boomer.

    No, but there’s something wrong with someone in his 40s, or even 30s, who jumps straight from conventional race-blind politics to full blown WNism. This is especially so if within months of conversion they are calling for purges of those not as pure as they are. I’ve seen this with WNist converts for well over a decade. When I was younger I saw the same thing with born-again Christians. One month they are degenerate junkies or drunks, next month they are lecturing everyone on Biblical morality. A reflective level-headed adult of Nehlen’s age should take about five years – maybe longer – to fully change course politically because that’s how long it takes from the beginning of doubting your already existing worldview to researching then observing alternatives in the real world, to eventually discarding beliefs of many years/decades. It’s a humbling experience that should take time.

    Gen Xers like Nehlen (and obviously Boomers) who change too quickly are usually mentally unstable or just plain old opportunists. If they don’t fit those two categories then they are probably just too unobservant and stupid to be of much use to any movement. Perhaps nationalists should have a general rule saying that unless you can demonstrate being somewhat “woke” for a minimum of five or ten years you don’t get to play a prominent public role in the movement as there’s a good chance you will either suddenly change your mind again or go full freak show. Obviously for people in their early 20s it’s different but much older people who are only now noticing immigration issues, race, and to a lesser extent the JQ, should be seen as suspect.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. @notanon

    Seems to confirm our worse fears; declining support for free speech far from entirely ascribable to demographic change.
     
    partly an indirect effect of the demographic change imo i.e. "hate speech" wouldn't be as big an issue if the population was mostly homogenous i.e. someone saying something negative about a faraway group is less of a big deal.

    What Caused over a Century of Decline in General Intelligence?
     
    I wonder if telling the truth (i.e. genetics > environment) would change women's mating choices enough to reverse it.

    I wonder if telling the truth (i.e. genetics > environment) would change women’s mating choices enough to reverse it.

    Are you blaming dysgenics on women’s mating choices? If so, you are wrong to do so.

    https://www.scotsman.com/lifestyle/sexy-science-why-music-really-is-the-way-to-a-woman-s-heart-1-1081833

    I suspect a bullying instinct among men evolved to eliminate more creative/intelligent rivals, because they are more attractive to females.

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/2150994-songbird-gets-angry-when-its-rivals-are-brilliant-at-singing/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosie
    Women prefer more complex music around the time of ovulation.

    https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/gory-details/could-menstrual-cycle-have-shaped-evolution-music

    Musical ability may signal "divergent thinking" ability.

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0278262608002303

    What evidence is there for this theory that women's sexuality is dysgenic?

    , @notanon

    Are you blaming dysgenics on women’s mating choices?
     
    yes - and climate change
    , @ussr andy
    >I suspect a bullying instinct among men evolved to eliminate more creative/intelligent rivals,

    it's not the intelligent that are bullied but the socially inept.
    "Just be normal, ffs" - TRS

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @Rosie

    I wonder if telling the truth (i.e. genetics > environment) would change women’s mating choices enough to reverse it.
     
    Are you blaming dysgenics on women's mating choices? If so, you are wrong to do so.


    https://www.scotsman.com/lifestyle/sexy-science-why-music-really-is-the-way-to-a-woman-s-heart-1-1081833

    I suspect a bullying instinct among men evolved to eliminate more creative/intelligent rivals, because they are more attractive to females.

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/2150994-songbird-gets-angry-when-its-rivals-are-brilliant-at-singing/

    Women prefer more complex music around the time of ovulation.

    https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/gory-details/could-menstrual-cycle-have-shaped-evolution-music

    Musical ability may signal “divergent thinking” ability.

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0278262608002303

    What evidence is there for this theory that women’s sexuality is dysgenic?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pericles

    What evidence is there for this theory that women’s sexuality is dysgenic?

     

    The dysgenic part is when intelligent women spend their years up to, say, 35 on their high-powered management career, then have a single artisanal child. In the meantime, their less accomplished sisters have had 2 or 3, perhaps more.

    By the way, I think building a family with an intelligent young woman (pre-university if possible) is not a bad idea at all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. @notanon

    Seems to confirm our worse fears; declining support for free speech far from entirely ascribable to demographic change.
     
    partly an indirect effect of the demographic change imo i.e. "hate speech" wouldn't be as big an issue if the population was mostly homogenous i.e. someone saying something negative about a faraway group is less of a big deal.

    What Caused over a Century of Decline in General Intelligence?
     
    I wonder if telling the truth (i.e. genetics > environment) would change women's mating choices enough to reverse it.

    Women are already eugenic in mating choices. That’s the whole reason high IQ women have low birth rates – they are unwilling to accept lower status mates. Men are more willing to date lower status women and IQ among men is positively correlated with reproductive success as high IQ men can turn their intelligence into career success which translates to mating success. High IQ women have no such option and their mate pool is reduced by the high status men dating lower status women.

    If you want more eugenic fertility by changing mating choices, you need to change the choices of men, not women. Women already prefer mates who display proxies for IQ such as educational or career success. For more eugenic fertility, you need to change the preferences of men away from the prettiest women and more towards women with STEM degrees, high paying careers and other proxies for IQ. Good luck with changing those preferences…

    Delusional ideas about women have to be one of the biggest problems in the alt-right.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
    The idea that women make dysgenic mating choices generally comes from high IQ but socially inept men who discover the manosphere, or in worse cases, the sluthate community.

    These men wrongly assume that their own high intelligence means they possess superior genetic fitness. IQ is good, but that's hardly the only consideration. Good looks signal many positive attributes (virility, courage, strength, health, etc.), and social mastery is very obviously fitness-maximizing.

    In the same way men preferring pretty women is not dysgenic. Beauty in women signals many positive things. Beauty is also positively correlated with intelligence to begin with.

    Now there is the matter that men are not attracted to women smarter than they are (annoying), but the reverse is true as well.

    The issue is less people's inherent sexual preferences but rather the manner in which modern industrial civilization alters reproductive strategies. Economic and financial independence for women means that the more talented women (and, to be fair, men) delay reproduction to a considerable extent. At the same time modern abundance and social assistance allow the lower classes to support more children than would otherwise be possible.

    Women, to be clear, are not to blame for this. It's not as if women had any role whatsoever in creating this system.

    In preindustrial times it was quite the opposite--the most successful had the most children.

    , @theMann
    In the immortal words of Don Penciotti:


    I've had smart and I've had pretty.....And I prefer pretty.
    , @notanon

    Delusional ideas about women have to be one of the biggest problems in the alt-right.
     
    whose problem is delusional ideas about the mating choices of women on the left side of the bell curve?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Lazy Glossophiliac was one of my favourite commenters here. I agree with him that I’m sad with Karlin’s turn to the economic right over the past few years.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    But they didn't part ways over economic issues...as I understand it, Glossy went ballistic when AK criticized Stalin for promoting Lysenkoism and having genuine geneticists executed or sent to the Gulag.
    Expecting AK to show reverence towards Stalin is a bit much imo.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. Best response to the Vaughn doxxing came in the Twitter mentions to that ROGPR tweet:

    -28 and balding is good optics?
    -He thinks really hard.
    -Thinks really hard how to pull a far right movement to be just about epic tax cuts

    That about sums up the uselessness of Vaughn. He was increasingly going off the rails trying to push civnat boomerism, even going outright trying to denounce WN. He was even on record claiming that he didn’t want to see negroes out of a future ethnostate. In other words, he didn’t even want a white ethnostate. So why was he even in the AR? If you don’t want WN and you want to support the GOP, then just join the local boomer club. I don’t really see why people defend Vaughn. He was exactly the same kind of poison that America into Le 56% meme territory.

    Vaughn is ultimately a distraction, however, the person who started the more insane attacks on WN is weev, who is likely Jewish. Hunter Wallace over at occidentaldissent.com did great research on weev. Weev has:

    - been invovled in Occupy Wall Street with other Jews and repeatedly identified himself as one as late as 2012.
    - been doxxing WNs in the early 2000s on Encyclopedia Dramatica
    - been doing the “Borat maneuver” wherein he has been trying to make criticism of Jewish socially marginalised by overdoing it and making everyone who does it appear mentally insane. There is a very telling YouTube video of him from 2008 or so when he is doing this.

    Weev has basically been doxxing and/or Borat:ing(new verb?) WNs since the early 2000s. In 2014 he suddenly rebranded to a hardcore WN and started pushing the most insane memes (“we have to kill 4/5ths of humanity”). Once again, take the most extreme positions to try to discredit WN. Weev has pushed Vaughn, who himself has attacked WN. Basically Vaughn was the lapdog of other people. The role of Anglin is mysterious. He has supported both and rumor has it he even knew about weev’s background.

    Basically, there has been a large push to abandon WN in the AR from those three and embrace somekind of Trumptardian framework instead. After the omnibus disaster, that agenda went to hell. Vaughn went down the flames after he got doxxed. I’m certainly pro-Nehlen here as Vaughn was so in-your-face to everyone but hid like a coward. If your jaw is made of glass, don’t put it out.

    Where the AR goes from here is far from certain, but there seem to be two clear dividing lines, is Trump the God Emperor or the ZOG Emperor. The latter are more or less separating from Angling/Weev/Vaughn. TRS has been vacillating between the two camps. Enoch in particular has very good instincts but Sven has terrible ones, and Sven runs TRS and Enoch sort of just folds. For now, Sven has followed Anglin but post-omnibus, Sven is now blackpilled on Trump, too.

    The more Trump fails, the more discredit the neo-boomers like Vaughn will be who still pushes the meme that the GOP can be reformed from within. BTW, Vaugn’s dad is a GOP lobbyist. Once you understand that, you understand why he is the way he is. He is basically an apparatchik and such people will never be capable of doing anything radical in their life. But the bigger problem is weev, and it is only now that people are starting to understand that this character. And again, why was Anglin allowing him onto his platform?

    Ultimately, the key lesson here is that an online movement is doomed. It is easily infiltratable by various trolls and the sperging is way higher than if everyone meets IRL. A problem here could be the huge geographical distance in the US which makes nationalist organising extremely difficult. There’s a strong case to be made to split the AR into various regional factions. I know that there are already people doing this in the pacific north-west and the South. Until IRL becomes the norm and not the exception, this kind of spergy behaviour will continue unabated.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  30. @Hector_St_Clare
    Lazy Glossophiliac was one of my favourite commenters here. I agree with him that I'm sad with Karlin's turn to the economic right over the past few years.

    But they didn’t part ways over economic issues…as I understand it, Glossy went ballistic when AK criticized Stalin for promoting Lysenkoism and having genuine geneticists executed or sent to the Gulag.
    Expecting AK to show reverence towards Stalin is a bit much imo.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Yevardian
    There has been a notable shift in his worldview since he was blogging at sublime oblivion. Shilling for muh 'free markets', his obvious distaste for ordinary Russians and quoting trash sources like the economist to back his posts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Re: Sanctions on Russia.

    It seems that the ruble lost most today since 2016, though if you take a longer-view perspective, the losses are quite marginal:

    There also seems to be somewhat of a rout in certain companies on the Moscow stock exchange. From /r/Europe:

    - Rusal lost ~40% in 2 days.
    - En+ lost ~35% in 2 days.
    - Nornikel lost ~18% in 1 day.
    - The 50 wealthiest citizens of Russia lost ~$12 billion today

    This won’t affect Russia as a country, but it is clearly a hammer blow to some oligarchs. We’ll see if these losses will be persistent or ephemeral.

    Whether or not they are an incitement to a coup, it might even be useful in the long run. Oligarchs will not succeed in ousting Putin even if they wanted to, but this episode will (hopefully) force some to show their disloyalty, at least their economic losses are durable and won’t rebound quickly.

    I think in the final analysis, this move is really an act of desperation. Russia is not folding and Washington is increasingly at its wits’ end. Trump having completely folded and bent over to neo-Cohenists means that confrontation will the US with increase, but what tools do they really have left? Any significant leverage? Putin is far more secure in his position than any Russian leader for many generations.

    The timing is bad for ZOG, too. The oil price is now going up, Russian forex reserves are increasing rapidly and Russia has won the ‘optics’ game in the Syrian conflict so far. How many even believe the latest false-flag “gas attack”? Even normies I talk to are cynical. Both on economics and on politics, Russia is today in a far better position than it has been for years, and its hand keeps getting better. It better not get cocky and overplay it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    How many even believe the latest false-flag “gas attack”? Even normies I talk to are cynical.
     
    Maybe in Poland.

    But Western citizens I think tend to have more faith in their governments and elites, even if its misplaced. Certainly doesn't seem to be any substantial skepticism in, say, /r/worldnews, where expressing doubt about the politically correct version of the gas attacks gets you downvoted and branded as a Russian troll.
    , @Randal

    How many even believe the latest false-flag “gas attack”? Even normies I talk to are cynical.
     
    My impression is that most of my social and family contacts are willing to express cynicism about government up to a point, but still see outright scepticism about the Syrian chemical attacks as a step too far. It requires them stepping too far outside their comfort zone in questioning their fundamental assumptions about the basic goodness of their government and ruling elites, and the basic honesty (in general, allowing for convenient exceptions mostly amongst media supporting those they see as political opponents) of the media they rely upon for information about the world.

    That's bad enough, especially given that most of these people lived through the Iraq debacle and really have no excuse for not knowing better, but what is truly disturbing is that most of them take the same broad position on the Skripal nonsense - and that really is profound idiocy. Again, it seems to be because questioning it threatens a basic patriotic (misguided, but nevertheless) sense in them.

    These stories are threatening to ordinary folk in ways that general cynicism about politicians or "the media", or corporate power, are not.
    , @Mitleser

    - Rusal lost ~40% in 2 days.
     
    https://twitter.com/russian_market/status/983328249022267392
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. And now, for something completely different:

    GTA V is apparently the best-selling game of all time in terms of revenue. More impressively, it even beats the highest-grossing movies by a longshot.

    Here’s the platform breakdown:

    So, not great news for the “PC masterrace”. Console players may be peasants, but they rake in the profits. How the games have stacked up progressively:

    Obviously you have to adjust for the fact that the installed player base has grown dramatically in the last 10 years alone, but still highly impressive. Finally, the comparison with movies. Avatar is the highest-grossing film ever made. Even if you adjust for inflation. Gone for the Wind would have grossed something around 1.6 billion in today’s currency.

    Rockstar’s philosophy of putting all eggs in one basket at a time seems to be paying off handsomely, even if it isn’t all that fashionable to do these days where most big studies juggle many big games at once. I know that CDPR has taken inspiration from them. We’ll see if 2077 will be as good as Witcher 3 was, but this method deserves to be emulated by more big developers/publishers. We’ll get fewer, but better games.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    GTA games should be prohibited, they're promoting decadent values with their glorification of criminals.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Just a small economic note.

    Germany, Northern Italy, Benelux still the most advanced parts of Europe

    Germany and Benelux, sure. Northern Italy is not doing badly, but it is no longer at the frontier in per capita GDP, even if you look at it in isolation. You might still find individual provinces like Lombary or South Tyrol doing very well, but taken together, it’s no longer at Germany’s level. Scandinavia is now ahead of it by a non-trivial margin, and from that map, Scandinavia was a rural backwater in the 1500s.

    So, history is not always destiny (thankfully or not).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Polish Perspective
    This graph illustrates my point regarding Northern Italy:

    https://i.imgur.com/ThsGeHv.png

    That's per capita growth since the year 2000 until 2016. The source is OECD.

    Only South Tyrol(which is not even a "real" Italian province, and demographically, culturally and politically is very connected to the South Germanic manufacturing belt) has shown positive growth since 2000.

    The rest of Northern Italy is either as poor, or poorer than they were almost 20 years ago now. Maybe 1-1.5% growth from 2017 until 2020 will mean that they will recoup their losses, but even if they did, they would end up exactly where they were in 2000.

    Northern Italy, while being more advanced than the Southern part, is no longer keeping up with Scandinavia, Netherlands or Germany.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. @Polish Perspective
    Re: Sanctions on Russia.

    It seems that the ruble lost most today since 2016, though if you take a longer-view perspective, the losses are quite marginal:

    https://i.imgur.com/Bgna4op.png

    There also seems to be somewhat of a rout in certain companies on the Moscow stock exchange. From /r/Europe:

    - Rusal lost ~40% in 2 days.
    - En+ lost ~35% in 2 days.
    - Nornikel lost ~18% in 1 day.
    - The 50 wealthiest citizens of Russia lost ~$12 billion today

    This won't affect Russia as a country, but it is clearly a hammer blow to some oligarchs. We'll see if these losses will be persistent or ephemeral.

    Whether or not they are an incitement to a coup, it might even be useful in the long run. Oligarchs will not succeed in ousting Putin even if they wanted to, but this episode will (hopefully) force some to show their disloyalty, at least their economic losses are durable and won't rebound quickly.

    I think in the final analysis, this move is really an act of desperation. Russia is not folding and Washington is increasingly at its wits' end. Trump having completely folded and bent over to neo-Cohenists means that confrontation will the US with increase, but what tools do they really have left? Any significant leverage? Putin is far more secure in his position than any Russian leader for many generations.

    The timing is bad for ZOG, too. The oil price is now going up, Russian forex reserves are increasing rapidly and Russia has won the 'optics' game in the Syrian conflict so far. How many even believe the latest false-flag "gas attack"? Even normies I talk to are cynical. Both on economics and on politics, Russia is today in a far better position than it has been for years, and its hand keeps getting better. It better not get cocky and overplay it.

    How many even believe the latest false-flag “gas attack”? Even normies I talk to are cynical.

    Maybe in Poland.

    But Western citizens I think tend to have more faith in their governments and elites, even if its misplaced. Certainly doesn’t seem to be any substantial skepticism in, say, /r/worldnews, where expressing doubt about the politically correct version of the gas attacks gets you downvoted and branded as a Russian troll.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    But Western citizens I think tend to have more faith in their governments and elites
     
    Mounting evidence that High-IQ is dysgenic...

    Just sayin'...

    Peace.
    , @German_reader

    But Western citizens I think tend to have more faith in their governments and elites
     
    It's not just that, this whole "Assad is gassing children! We need to do something" nonsense fits perfectly into dominant Western narratives about the supposed lessons of 20th century history (always another Auschwitz to be prevented...you had that crap already to an absurd extent during the Bosnian war which also added its own contribution to the mythology of humanitarian interventionism with the Srebrenica massacre). And in the US it also feeds into all manner of national myths about America being perfectly good, vanquishing evil etc. which, despite all the evidence to the contrary, seems to be a completely unshakeable belief for many Americans.
    It's depressing, but a large percentage of Westerners, not least supposedly educated ones, are really gullible and self-righteous Manichaeans about those issues.
    , @Mitleser

    But Western citizens I think tend to have more faith in their governments and elites, even if its misplaced.
     
    Such people won't change their minds until they pay for the mistakes of their governments and elites.
    Unfortunately, Americans are usually shielded from them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. @Polish Perspective
    And now, for something completely different:

    GTA V is apparently the best-selling game of all time in terms of revenue. More impressively, it even beats the highest-grossing movies by a longshot.

    Here's the platform breakdown:

    https://i.imgur.com/P4U2nyA.jpg

    So, not great news for the "PC masterrace". Console players may be peasants, but they rake in the profits. How the games have stacked up progressively:

    https://i.imgur.com/yqezyNi.png

    Obviously you have to adjust for the fact that the installed player base has grown dramatically in the last 10 years alone, but still highly impressive. Finally, the comparison with movies. Avatar is the highest-grossing film ever made. Even if you adjust for inflation. Gone for the Wind would have grossed something around 1.6 billion in today's currency.

    https://i.imgur.com/oPqfnVE.png

    Rockstar's philosophy of putting all eggs in one basket at a time seems to be paying off handsomely, even if it isn't all that fashionable to do these days where most big studies juggle many big games at once. I know that CDPR has taken inspiration from them. We'll see if 2077 will be as good as Witcher 3 was, but this method deserves to be emulated by more big developers/publishers. We'll get fewer, but better games.

    GTA games should be prohibited, they’re promoting decadent values with their glorification of criminals.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @Anatoly Karlin

    How many even believe the latest false-flag “gas attack”? Even normies I talk to are cynical.
     
    Maybe in Poland.

    But Western citizens I think tend to have more faith in their governments and elites, even if its misplaced. Certainly doesn't seem to be any substantial skepticism in, say, /r/worldnews, where expressing doubt about the politically correct version of the gas attacks gets you downvoted and branded as a Russian troll.

    But Western citizens I think tend to have more faith in their governments and elites

    Mounting evidence that High-IQ is dysgenic…

    Just sayin’…

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    Just sayin’…

    Thank the Good Lord that we have high caste S. Asians making beautiful brown high IQ babies with Nordic princesses to save us from ourselves. :)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @Jaakko Raipala
    Women are already eugenic in mating choices. That's the whole reason high IQ women have low birth rates - they are unwilling to accept lower status mates. Men are more willing to date lower status women and IQ among men is positively correlated with reproductive success as high IQ men can turn their intelligence into career success which translates to mating success. High IQ women have no such option and their mate pool is reduced by the high status men dating lower status women.

    If you want more eugenic fertility by changing mating choices, you need to change the choices of men, not women. Women already prefer mates who display proxies for IQ such as educational or career success. For more eugenic fertility, you need to change the preferences of men away from the prettiest women and more towards women with STEM degrees, high paying careers and other proxies for IQ. Good luck with changing those preferences...

    Delusional ideas about women have to be one of the biggest problems in the alt-right.

    The idea that women make dysgenic mating choices generally comes from high IQ but socially inept men who discover the manosphere, or in worse cases, the sluthate community.

    These men wrongly assume that their own high intelligence means they possess superior genetic fitness. IQ is good, but that’s hardly the only consideration. Good looks signal many positive attributes (virility, courage, strength, health, etc.), and social mastery is very obviously fitness-maximizing.

    In the same way men preferring pretty women is not dysgenic. Beauty in women signals many positive things. Beauty is also positively correlated with intelligence to begin with.

    Now there is the matter that men are not attracted to women smarter than they are (annoying), but the reverse is true as well.

    The issue is less people’s inherent sexual preferences but rather the manner in which modern industrial civilization alters reproductive strategies. Economic and financial independence for women means that the more talented women (and, to be fair, men) delay reproduction to a considerable extent. At the same time modern abundance and social assistance allow the lower classes to support more children than would otherwise be possible.

    Women, to be clear, are not to blame for this. It’s not as if women had any role whatsoever in creating this system.

    In preindustrial times it was quite the opposite–the most successful had the most children.

    Read More
    • Replies: @notanon

    The idea that women make dysgenic mating choices generally comes from high IQ but socially inept men who discover the manosphere, or in worse cases, the sluthate community.
     
    the media/academia telling the truth about genetics > environment would greatly change mating choices among women on the left side of the bell curve.
    , @Toronto Russian

    These men wrongly assume that their own high intelligence means they possess superior genetic fitness. IQ is good, but that’s hardly the only consideration. Good looks signal many positive attributes (virility, courage, strength, health, etc.), and social mastery is very obviously fitness-maximizing.
     
    There were Soviet experiments to selectively breed smart rats. One of the populations became total neurotics in the 5th generation, another in the 3rd, and in yet another one (imported from England) smart rats had weak nervous systems that programmed them to lose dominance fights to dumb rats. So, IQ is truly not everything.
    In Russian: http://web.archive.org/web/20040105183944/http://www.znanie-sila.ru/golden/issue2print_9.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @Anatoly Karlin

    How many even believe the latest false-flag “gas attack”? Even normies I talk to are cynical.
     
    Maybe in Poland.

    But Western citizens I think tend to have more faith in their governments and elites, even if its misplaced. Certainly doesn't seem to be any substantial skepticism in, say, /r/worldnews, where expressing doubt about the politically correct version of the gas attacks gets you downvoted and branded as a Russian troll.

    But Western citizens I think tend to have more faith in their governments and elites

    It’s not just that, this whole “Assad is gassing children! We need to do something” nonsense fits perfectly into dominant Western narratives about the supposed lessons of 20th century history (always another Auschwitz to be prevented…you had that crap already to an absurd extent during the Bosnian war which also added its own contribution to the mythology of humanitarian interventionism with the Srebrenica massacre). And in the US it also feeds into all manner of national myths about America being perfectly good, vanquishing evil etc. which, despite all the evidence to the contrary, seems to be a completely unshakeable belief for many Americans.
    It’s depressing, but a large percentage of Westerners, not least supposedly educated ones, are really gullible and self-righteous Manichaeans about those issues.

    Read More
    • Agree: Randal
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    I think my real blackpill on this was when I read and posted about that French poll in which 62% of Front National (!) supporters said they were in favor of bombing Syria in April 2017.

    62% of Front National voters and MLP supporters supported the strikes – that is virtually the same as those evil “globalist” En Marche!/Macron supporters.

    Ergo for Fillon/conservative voters. Hamon supporters were 50/50, while Melenchon voters were actually opposed, at 45% to 55%.
     
    Far from an exclusively American problem.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. @German_reader

    But Western citizens I think tend to have more faith in their governments and elites
     
    It's not just that, this whole "Assad is gassing children! We need to do something" nonsense fits perfectly into dominant Western narratives about the supposed lessons of 20th century history (always another Auschwitz to be prevented...you had that crap already to an absurd extent during the Bosnian war which also added its own contribution to the mythology of humanitarian interventionism with the Srebrenica massacre). And in the US it also feeds into all manner of national myths about America being perfectly good, vanquishing evil etc. which, despite all the evidence to the contrary, seems to be a completely unshakeable belief for many Americans.
    It's depressing, but a large percentage of Westerners, not least supposedly educated ones, are really gullible and self-righteous Manichaeans about those issues.

    I think my real blackpill on this was when I read and posted about that French poll in which 62% of Front National (!) supporters said they were in favor of bombing Syria in April 2017.

    62% of Front National voters and MLP supporters supported the strikes – that is virtually the same as those evil “globalist” En Marche!/Macron supporters.

    Ergo for Fillon/conservative voters. Hamon supporters were 50/50, while Melenchon voters were actually opposed, at 45% to 55%.

    Far from an exclusively American problem.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    Far from an exclusively American problem.
     
    Certainly not, there are quite a few fanatic interventionists in Germany as well, not least among supporters of the Greens. I guess it's their way of proving they're good Germans, solidly belonging to the Western community of values.
    As for the French, well, they've traditionally held similar delusions as the Americans about their own role in world history. Not having won a war since 1918 and usually limited to kicking around blacks somewhere in Africa, moral grandstanding about Syria must do a lot for their national ego.
    , @iffen
    Far from an exclusively American problem.

    True, but for some it is a convenient and simple explanation that serves.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. @Polish Perspective
    Re: Sanctions on Russia.

    It seems that the ruble lost most today since 2016, though if you take a longer-view perspective, the losses are quite marginal:

    https://i.imgur.com/Bgna4op.png

    There also seems to be somewhat of a rout in certain companies on the Moscow stock exchange. From /r/Europe:

    - Rusal lost ~40% in 2 days.
    - En+ lost ~35% in 2 days.
    - Nornikel lost ~18% in 1 day.
    - The 50 wealthiest citizens of Russia lost ~$12 billion today

    This won't affect Russia as a country, but it is clearly a hammer blow to some oligarchs. We'll see if these losses will be persistent or ephemeral.

    Whether or not they are an incitement to a coup, it might even be useful in the long run. Oligarchs will not succeed in ousting Putin even if they wanted to, but this episode will (hopefully) force some to show their disloyalty, at least their economic losses are durable and won't rebound quickly.

    I think in the final analysis, this move is really an act of desperation. Russia is not folding and Washington is increasingly at its wits' end. Trump having completely folded and bent over to neo-Cohenists means that confrontation will the US with increase, but what tools do they really have left? Any significant leverage? Putin is far more secure in his position than any Russian leader for many generations.

    The timing is bad for ZOG, too. The oil price is now going up, Russian forex reserves are increasing rapidly and Russia has won the 'optics' game in the Syrian conflict so far. How many even believe the latest false-flag "gas attack"? Even normies I talk to are cynical. Both on economics and on politics, Russia is today in a far better position than it has been for years, and its hand keeps getting better. It better not get cocky and overplay it.

    How many even believe the latest false-flag “gas attack”? Even normies I talk to are cynical.

    My impression is that most of my social and family contacts are willing to express cynicism about government up to a point, but still see outright scepticism about the Syrian chemical attacks as a step too far. It requires them stepping too far outside their comfort zone in questioning their fundamental assumptions about the basic goodness of their government and ruling elites, and the basic honesty (in general, allowing for convenient exceptions mostly amongst media supporting those they see as political opponents) of the media they rely upon for information about the world.

    That’s bad enough, especially given that most of these people lived through the Iraq debacle and really have no excuse for not knowing better, but what is truly disturbing is that most of them take the same broad position on the Skripal nonsense – and that really is profound idiocy. Again, it seems to be because questioning it threatens a basic patriotic (misguided, but nevertheless) sense in them.

    These stories are threatening to ordinary folk in ways that general cynicism about politicians or “the media”, or corporate power, are not.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    I used to think that refuge in audacity only happens on a non-national level.
    , @Polish Perspective

    still see outright scepticism about the Syrian chemical attacks as a step too far. It requires them stepping too far outside their comfort zone in questioning their fundamental assumptions about the basic goodness of their government and the media
     
    I see. Well, one of the advantages of living in a low trust society - and there aren't many - is that people have far fewer inhibitions to express public dissent and furthermore they are less likely to receive flak from others for doing so.

    A key part of your normie Western shitlib's moral foundation is that they are simply "better" than the right-wing rubes. I'm talking better in terms of morality, though educational snobbery certainly plays into this as well.

    The major publishing houses know this, so they feed these people a steady diet of propaganda. One thing that redpilled me even before I got into questions about identity, race and hbd was how the Iraq war was sold. I wasn't old enough to see it live and understand it, but I read books about it when I was a teen and I was astonished. The same thing happened again with the Libya invasion.

    It made me realise that education is really wasted on most people because most people cannot be taught critical thinking. I know that's a pessimistic viewpoint, but I honestly don't see how you can come to any different conclusion. And I'm not even talking about "if someone doesn't agree with me, then they're a sheep!".

    I have more respect for genuine left-wing radicals, even if I don't agree with them, then the average normie, because the former have actually applied themselves to think about the world away from the mainstream narrative, even if I think their conclusions are wrong. (Of course, this doesn't mean that everything that is a consensus opinion has to be knee-jerk rejected, that's also stupid in a sense. But most people never adopt a single heterodox opinion in their entire life on anything.

    Nevertheless, there are societies where people are more willing to express heresy and dissent with established wisdom, and mine is one of them. At least for now.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. @Anatoly Karlin

    How many even believe the latest false-flag “gas attack”? Even normies I talk to are cynical.
     
    Maybe in Poland.

    But Western citizens I think tend to have more faith in their governments and elites, even if its misplaced. Certainly doesn't seem to be any substantial skepticism in, say, /r/worldnews, where expressing doubt about the politically correct version of the gas attacks gets you downvoted and branded as a Russian troll.

    But Western citizens I think tend to have more faith in their governments and elites, even if its misplaced.

    Such people won’t change their minds until they pay for the mistakes of their governments and elites.
    Unfortunately, Americans are usually shielded from them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @Anatoly Karlin
    I think my real blackpill on this was when I read and posted about that French poll in which 62% of Front National (!) supporters said they were in favor of bombing Syria in April 2017.

    62% of Front National voters and MLP supporters supported the strikes – that is virtually the same as those evil “globalist” En Marche!/Macron supporters.

    Ergo for Fillon/conservative voters. Hamon supporters were 50/50, while Melenchon voters were actually opposed, at 45% to 55%.
     
    Far from an exclusively American problem.

    Far from an exclusively American problem.

    Certainly not, there are quite a few fanatic interventionists in Germany as well, not least among supporters of the Greens. I guess it’s their way of proving they’re good Germans, solidly belonging to the Western community of values.
    As for the French, well, they’ve traditionally held similar delusions as the Americans about their own role in world history. Not having won a war since 1918 and usually limited to kicking around blacks somewhere in Africa, moral grandstanding about Syria must do a lot for their national ego.

    Read More
    • Replies: @songbird
    I wonder how the North Africans in France feel. A lot of Islamists attack the West because of interventions, but does the average normal Muslim in the West support them any less in polls? Maybe, even more, depending on sects. No idea.

    I mean, Bashar al-Assad is an Allawite. You know what the partisans say: Christians to Lebanon; Allawites into the sea.

    You think the French have had a long losing streak? How about Arabs? They had their independence movements thinking they'd become like Europe. France had mini-successes: nukes, the Concorde, the Ariane, Airbus. All government stuff and working with England, but still it is something. They've had writers and artists too. Not so with Arabs.

    A lot seem to be angry too. People who burn hundreds of cars aren't peaceniks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. @Polish Perspective
    Re: Sanctions on Russia.

    It seems that the ruble lost most today since 2016, though if you take a longer-view perspective, the losses are quite marginal:

    https://i.imgur.com/Bgna4op.png

    There also seems to be somewhat of a rout in certain companies on the Moscow stock exchange. From /r/Europe:

    - Rusal lost ~40% in 2 days.
    - En+ lost ~35% in 2 days.
    - Nornikel lost ~18% in 1 day.
    - The 50 wealthiest citizens of Russia lost ~$12 billion today

    This won't affect Russia as a country, but it is clearly a hammer blow to some oligarchs. We'll see if these losses will be persistent or ephemeral.

    Whether or not they are an incitement to a coup, it might even be useful in the long run. Oligarchs will not succeed in ousting Putin even if they wanted to, but this episode will (hopefully) force some to show their disloyalty, at least their economic losses are durable and won't rebound quickly.

    I think in the final analysis, this move is really an act of desperation. Russia is not folding and Washington is increasingly at its wits' end. Trump having completely folded and bent over to neo-Cohenists means that confrontation will the US with increase, but what tools do they really have left? Any significant leverage? Putin is far more secure in his position than any Russian leader for many generations.

    The timing is bad for ZOG, too. The oil price is now going up, Russian forex reserves are increasing rapidly and Russia has won the 'optics' game in the Syrian conflict so far. How many even believe the latest false-flag "gas attack"? Even normies I talk to are cynical. Both on economics and on politics, Russia is today in a far better position than it has been for years, and its hand keeps getting better. It better not get cocky and overplay it.

    - Rusal lost ~40% in 2 days.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Anonymous[392] • Disclaimer says:

    This Samsung Notebook 9 is great. Just got one myself and love it. It is very light weight and has a great battery.

    https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B078BBZK1T

    If you are poor, go with a Dell Inspiron for half the price. Or even better just use a chromebook if all you are doing is blogging.

    If you are willing to wait, go to slickdeals and wait till they have a sale on something you like.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  45. @Randal

    How many even believe the latest false-flag “gas attack”? Even normies I talk to are cynical.
     
    My impression is that most of my social and family contacts are willing to express cynicism about government up to a point, but still see outright scepticism about the Syrian chemical attacks as a step too far. It requires them stepping too far outside their comfort zone in questioning their fundamental assumptions about the basic goodness of their government and ruling elites, and the basic honesty (in general, allowing for convenient exceptions mostly amongst media supporting those they see as political opponents) of the media they rely upon for information about the world.

    That's bad enough, especially given that most of these people lived through the Iraq debacle and really have no excuse for not knowing better, but what is truly disturbing is that most of them take the same broad position on the Skripal nonsense - and that really is profound idiocy. Again, it seems to be because questioning it threatens a basic patriotic (misguided, but nevertheless) sense in them.

    These stories are threatening to ordinary folk in ways that general cynicism about politicians or "the media", or corporate power, are not.

    I used to think that refuge in audacity only happens on a non-national level.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal
    If you look it up you'll probably find that "refuge in audacity" is defined as: "behaving like a UK government minister".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. @Daniel Chieh
    I used to think that refuge in audacity only happens on a non-national level.

    If you look it up you’ll probably find that “refuge in audacity” is defined as: “behaving like a UK government minister”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. 1. Re The French (or any other people) supporting intervention in Syria:

    Polls of Trump supporters show that they want open borders. So what? It’s called revealed preference. They still voted for anti immigration Trump just like FN voters voted for pro-Assad Marine, so who cares what they say in a poll?

    If you guys seriously think that the average Frenchmen, German, Brit or whatever are hankering for war with Syria, you are out of your minds.

    There are people in the West who are passionate about Syria, but they are all passionately against intervention.

    Try to put yourself in a normies shoes: the question that they think they are answering is: “Should we bomb Assad in retaliation for war crimes he has absolutely, 100% for sure committed?”

    Remember, the normie likely couldn’t find Syria on the map. So to him, he hears that question and just shrugs and says “sounds good”. He doesn’t know that Assad may not have done what he is accused of, or that the alternative to Assad are jihadists and/or chaos. Explain that stuff to him and you’d get a completely different answer. You guys are acting like the normie thinks, “Yeah kill that bastard Assad and give the country to ISIS! WWIII with Russia! Fuck yeah!”. That isn’t the way normies think. They are too busy worried about “Keeping Up With the Kardashians”.

    2. The reason I’m so convinced this is a false flag is because if it isn’t, then why the rush to judgement? Why are we initially hearing that yeah for sure Assad did this? Shouldn’t there be an investigation?

    If the Western governments were saying “We believe Assad was behind this but we can’t be sure until we have investigated further”, then I would be inclined to believe them, even though the timing is suspicious to say the least.

    3. If you guys don’t realize that Trump knows that this is a false flag then you have let your TDS damage your brains. Trump said he wanted to leave so the Deep State taught him a lesson. Trump won’t mouth off like that again in the future, that’s for sure.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  48. AP says:

    OT: I’m in Moscow. Still my favorite city in the world. No noticeable decline from 2013, my last trip there. It’s a bit cheaper, but actually it’s gotten nicer. Metro is cleaner – there was rare graffiti before, now none. I notice fewer Caucasians, more Central Asians (lots on the green line north of the center, working in fast food in the center, etc.). Some guy with a huge Ukrainian trident tattoo was on Red Square.

    Read More
    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    OT: I’m in Moscow. Still my favorite city in the world. No noticeable decline from 2013, my last trip there. It’s a bit cheaper, but actually it’s gotten nicer. Metro is cleaner – there was rare graffiti before, now none.
     
    Yes Moscow is getting nicer, in various ways, every year.

    (So are other world cities like London and New York - the 21st century is favouring the largest cities).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. @Greasy William
    Since the Russians here have "goycotted" my questions about economic reform, I will offer my own thoughts on the matter. Some of this stuff may be old news to most people here.

    1. China actually began it's economic liberalization before Russia did. China's liberalization started in 1978 after the Cultural Revolution. Russia did not begin it's liberalization until the late 80's. But even if Russia's case, liberalization started before the collapse of the USSR.

    2. Boris Yeltsin is one of the most underrated leaders in world history. It was Yeltsin, not Putin, who "made Russia great again". The country he inherited was in absolute shambles and despite massive internal opposition, severe brain drain and collapsing commodities prices, he managed to push through important economic reforms while beginning the important work of rebuilding state institutions.

    3. I had no idea that Putin had been part of the Yeltsin clique. That explains why after coming to power he initially continued the reform path for his first few years. Land reform in particular had been something Yeltsin had really wanted but just didn't have the juice to get through. And now because of that reform Russia is even ever bigger agricultural superpower than it was under the Tsars.

    4. Chinese economic liberalization was from 1978 to 2003 whereas Russian liberalization was from 1987 to 2004 (approximately, in both cases). Chinese reform was more modest and over a longer period, so relatively little hardship resulted. Russia's shock therapy, in contrast, caused a whole host of short and medium term problems.

    5. It's interesting that the end of liberalization for both countries happened at around the same time. And in Russia's case, liberalization did not just cease, it was actively reversed. Even so, the current Russian economy is a little bit freer than the current Chinese economy according to international metrics. This is probably because China has never pushed through the massive land reform that Russia did.

    6. The widespread assumption in the West seems to be that Putin and Xi both want economic liberalization in principle, but either aren't politically strong enough to do so or are worried about it weakening their holds on power. But I'm not really sure that's the case. I have not really seen anything to indicate that Putin and Xi believe in western style capitalism.

    When Putin and Xi talk about "reform", they mean getting rid of corruption, removing excessive regulations on private business and running SOE's more efficiently and profitably.

    But when it comes to outright privatizing SOE's and allowing more foreign investment/control, I don't think Putin/Xi are interested in that. They are true believers in state capitalism.

    7. If China isn't going to economically liberalize, then my prediction about China becoming a democracy in 20 to 30 years is off. That prediction was always contingent upon China selling off the SOE's and I said as much at the time.

    Yes, please tell me more about the great Boris Yeltsin, the man who saved Russia.
    If you’re still cheerleading for Trump at this point you’re even more of a brainlet than I thought.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Parbes
    He is just a stupid third-rate Jewish neocon Russophobe demagogue shilling for Anglo-Zio-Nazism while imagining himself to be some kind of skilled hustler.
    , @Greasy William
    do you want Assad to stay on or not?

    You have two choices:

    1. Trump prevents the US from toppling Assad

    2. Pence takes over and the US removes Assad, possibly starting WWIII in the process


    What's it gonna be?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. @AP
    OT: I'm in Moscow. Still my favorite city in the world. No noticeable decline from 2013, my last trip there. It's a bit cheaper, but actually it's gotten nicer. Metro is cleaner - there was rare graffiti before, now none. I notice fewer Caucasians, more Central Asians (lots on the green line north of the center, working in fast food in the center, etc.). Some guy with a huge Ukrainian trident tattoo was on Red Square.

    OT: I’m in Moscow. Still my favorite city in the world. No noticeable decline from 2013, my last trip there. It’s a bit cheaper, but actually it’s gotten nicer. Metro is cleaner – there was rare graffiti before, now none.

    Yes Moscow is getting nicer, in various ways, every year.

    (So are other world cities like London and New York – the 21st century is favouring the largest cities).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    London
     
    :D

    https://twitter.com/MayorofLondon/status/982906526334668800
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. @German_reader
    But they didn't part ways over economic issues...as I understand it, Glossy went ballistic when AK criticized Stalin for promoting Lysenkoism and having genuine geneticists executed or sent to the Gulag.
    Expecting AK to show reverence towards Stalin is a bit much imo.

    There has been a notable shift in his worldview since he was blogging at sublime oblivion. Shilling for muh ‘free markets’, his obvious distaste for ordinary Russians and quoting trash sources like the economist to back his posts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    ... and quoting trash sources like the economist to back his posts.
     
    Surprise surprise, the only concrete claim in your jeremiad is - well, trash.

    Last time I mentioned The Economist: November 2017 (reprint of an interesting graph)

    Last time I mentioned The Economist in a non-Open Thread: February 2017 (reference to Obama's interview with them, in a negative context)

    Last post substantively about The Economist: January 2013 (the title "So Who’s The New Clown At The Economist’s Russia Desk?" is descriptive enough)

    Why do sovoks love to lie so much?
    , @ussr andy
    >his obvious distaste for ordinary Russians


    Russia is full of aggressive vatniks though. Whose speech is full of allusions to gay rape (нагнуть etc)

    watch an evolution, or Communism, or some such topic, video on YT in Russian and in German. Compare the civility of the discussions in the comments.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. @Yevardian
    Yes, please tell me more about the great Boris Yeltsin, the man who saved Russia.
    If you're still cheerleading for Trump at this point you're even more of a brainlet than I thought.

    He is just a stupid third-rate Jewish neocon Russophobe demagogue shilling for Anglo-Zio-Nazism while imagining himself to be some kind of skilled hustler.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Greasy William
    This is completely unacceptable! You must not speak of me in such a fashion! I demand that you apologize immediately for what you just wrote!
    , @Yevardian
    Don't associate me with Saker fanboys.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. @Parbes
    He is just a stupid third-rate Jewish neocon Russophobe demagogue shilling for Anglo-Zio-Nazism while imagining himself to be some kind of skilled hustler.

    This is completely unacceptable! You must not speak of me in such a fashion! I demand that you apologize immediately for what you just wrote!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Parbes
    Go jump in the lake, you Jewish neocon dingbat. You need to apologize, repent, and do penance for all the criminal cretinous crap you have spewed on this blog for years, scum.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. @Parbes
    He is just a stupid third-rate Jewish neocon Russophobe demagogue shilling for Anglo-Zio-Nazism while imagining himself to be some kind of skilled hustler.

    Don’t associate me with Saker fanboys.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Parbes
    Huh? What? Who said or implied anything about "Saker fanboys"???
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. @Yevardian
    Yes, please tell me more about the great Boris Yeltsin, the man who saved Russia.
    If you're still cheerleading for Trump at this point you're even more of a brainlet than I thought.

    do you want Assad to stay on or not?

    You have two choices:

    1. Trump prevents the US from toppling Assad

    2. Pence takes over and the US removes Assad, possibly starting WWIII in the process

    What’s it gonna be?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. @Dmitry

    OT: I’m in Moscow. Still my favorite city in the world. No noticeable decline from 2013, my last trip there. It’s a bit cheaper, but actually it’s gotten nicer. Metro is cleaner – there was rare graffiti before, now none.
     
    Yes Moscow is getting nicer, in various ways, every year.

    (So are other world cities like London and New York - the 21st century is favouring the largest cities).

    London

    :D

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pericles
    Sadiq Khan, the gift that keeps on giving.

    Only when they outlaw acid will the britbong rise.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. @Yevardian
    There has been a notable shift in his worldview since he was blogging at sublime oblivion. Shilling for muh 'free markets', his obvious distaste for ordinary Russians and quoting trash sources like the economist to back his posts.

    … and quoting trash sources like the economist to back his posts.

    Surprise surprise, the only concrete claim in your jeremiad is – well, trash.

    Last time I mentioned The Economist: November 2017 (reprint of an interesting graph)

    Last time I mentioned The Economist in a non-Open Thread: February 2017 (reference to Obama’s interview with them, in a negative context)

    Last post substantively about The Economist: January 2013 (the title “So Who’s The New Clown At The Economist’s Russia Desk?” is descriptive enough)

    Why do sovoks love to lie so much?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Greasy William
    in his defense, you really have started saying racist things about Russians ever since you've moved back. Even I've noticed it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @Anatoly Karlin

    ... and quoting trash sources like the economist to back his posts.
     
    Surprise surprise, the only concrete claim in your jeremiad is - well, trash.

    Last time I mentioned The Economist: November 2017 (reprint of an interesting graph)

    Last time I mentioned The Economist in a non-Open Thread: February 2017 (reference to Obama's interview with them, in a negative context)

    Last post substantively about The Economist: January 2013 (the title "So Who’s The New Clown At The Economist’s Russia Desk?" is descriptive enough)

    Why do sovoks love to lie so much?

    in his defense, you really have started saying racist things about Russians ever since you’ve moved back. Even I’ve noticed it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    I have been saying racist things about Russians for ages. E.g., https://www.unz.com/akarlin/translation-a-hell-of-their-own-making/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. do you want Assad to stay on or not?

    You have two choices:

    1. Trump prevents the US from toppling Assad

    2. Pence takes over and the US removes Assad, possibly starting WWIII in the process

    It appears to me you’ve just pulled this out of your backside.

    The reason Assad is still there is precisely that the US can’t remove him without an unacceptable risk of “starting WW3″. He isn’t still there because Obama or Trump like him being there, and he would almost certainly still be there if Clinton had been elected, or even if the likes of Pence or McCain were in charge in Washington.

    Just being a fanatic on a topic doesn’t make the impossible possible, no matter how much they desperately want it to be so. Once Russia intervened directly in Syria, there was no realistic possibility for the US to overthrow Assad without most likely going to war with Russia. That’s precisely why the US regime and the various lobbies were so incandescently angry about it. The chances that Russia would sit by and let the US overthrow Assad, or let the US destroy its expeditionary force there in order to do so are not zero, but they are probably pretty close to it.

    So the only benefit of Trump over Pence or Clinton, in relation to Syria, is that he’s arguably less likely to start WW3 over Syria, not that Assad remains. Asserting “Pence takes over and removes Assad” suggests complete ignorance of the realities involved.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Greasy William
    Trump won't risk WWIII to topple Assad. Pence would. It's that simple.
    , @reiner Tor

    the only benefit of Trump over Pence or Clinton, in relation to Syria, is that he’s arguably less likely to start WW3 over Syria
     
    But is he? I personally don’t think Clinton would have followed through her campaign promise of a no-fly zone. And she would probably be more risk-averse than Trump. She would also have less pressure on her due to no Russiagate. And Putin could always send $50,000,000 to the Clinton Foundation.

    Pence is more difficult to predict. He might very well be worse than Trump. But he’s only there because Trump was elected.

    I think we need to own up to the fact that we might very well have made things worse by supporting Trump over Clinton.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. @Greasy William
    in his defense, you really have started saying racist things about Russians ever since you've moved back. Even I've noticed it.

    I have been saying racist things about Russians for ages. E.g., https://www.unz.com/akarlin/translation-a-hell-of-their-own-making/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. @Randal

    do you want Assad to stay on or not?

    You have two choices:

    1. Trump prevents the US from toppling Assad

    2. Pence takes over and the US removes Assad, possibly starting WWIII in the process
     
    It appears to me you've just pulled this out of your backside.

    The reason Assad is still there is precisely that the US can't remove him without an unacceptable risk of "starting WW3". He isn't still there because Obama or Trump like him being there, and he would almost certainly still be there if Clinton had been elected, or even if the likes of Pence or McCain were in charge in Washington.

    Just being a fanatic on a topic doesn't make the impossible possible, no matter how much they desperately want it to be so. Once Russia intervened directly in Syria, there was no realistic possibility for the US to overthrow Assad without most likely going to war with Russia. That's precisely why the US regime and the various lobbies were so incandescently angry about it. The chances that Russia would sit by and let the US overthrow Assad, or let the US destroy its expeditionary force there in order to do so are not zero, but they are probably pretty close to it.

    So the only benefit of Trump over Pence or Clinton, in relation to Syria, is that he's arguably less likely to start WW3 over Syria, not that Assad remains. Asserting "Pence takes over and removes Assad" suggests complete ignorance of the realities involved.

    Trump won’t risk WWIII to topple Assad. Pence would. It’s that simple.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Yevardian
    I think it's been established at this point Trump neither has any political inclinations of his own, or any control over his administration. I mean, he's appointed Michael Bolton. He was crying about the Iran detente before he got elected.

    If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck...
    , @Randal

    Trump won’t risk WWIII to topple Assad. Pence would. It’s that simple.
     
    Better, but still not good enough. Here's a reasonable statement of the situation:

    Trump might risk WW3 in Syria (whether it's through indulging his fantasies about Iran or just sheer bumbling incompetence resulting in his being ignored or led by the nose by the neocon/militarist types around him). Pence might risk WW3 in Syria (more likely due to fantasies and less to bumbling than in Trump's case).

    It's reasonable to suggest Pence might be more likely to risk it than Trump, but we don't know with any confidence how much more likely. It's probably actually unlikely in either case, when it comes down to it. The possibility of nuclear war tends to have a remarkably sobering effect even on the most gung ho of leaders. But when you are talking about WW3, small risks loom rather large, especially when the supposed gains they are traded for accrue to other people.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. @Greasy William
    Trump won't risk WWIII to topple Assad. Pence would. It's that simple.

    I think it’s been established at this point Trump neither has any political inclinations of his own, or any control over his administration. I mean, he’s appointed Michael Bolton. He was crying about the Iran detente before he got elected.

    If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Matra
    I mean, he’s appointed Michael Bolton.

    This celebrity obsession of Trump's is getting out of hand!

    Russia could close its airspace to European airlines flying to Asia, an increasingly big part of their business. That won't directly impact the US but it would punish European countries following US policy towards Russia. As Russia isn't signed up to the international agreement on airspace rights this option would allow it to target individual countries rather than the EU as a whole.
    , @Pericles

    I mean, he’s appointed Michael Bolton.

     

    Admittedly, that is pretty bad.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. @Greasy William
    This is completely unacceptable! You must not speak of me in such a fashion! I demand that you apologize immediately for what you just wrote!

    Go jump in the lake, you Jewish neocon dingbat. You need to apologize, repent, and do penance for all the criminal cretinous crap you have spewed on this blog for years, scum.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. @Yevardian
    Don't associate me with Saker fanboys.

    Huh? What? Who said or implied anything about “Saker fanboys”???

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. @Jaakko Raipala
    Women are already eugenic in mating choices. That's the whole reason high IQ women have low birth rates - they are unwilling to accept lower status mates. Men are more willing to date lower status women and IQ among men is positively correlated with reproductive success as high IQ men can turn their intelligence into career success which translates to mating success. High IQ women have no such option and their mate pool is reduced by the high status men dating lower status women.

    If you want more eugenic fertility by changing mating choices, you need to change the choices of men, not women. Women already prefer mates who display proxies for IQ such as educational or career success. For more eugenic fertility, you need to change the preferences of men away from the prettiest women and more towards women with STEM degrees, high paying careers and other proxies for IQ. Good luck with changing those preferences...

    Delusional ideas about women have to be one of the biggest problems in the alt-right.

    In the immortal words of Don Penciotti:

    I’ve had smart and I’ve had pretty…..And I prefer pretty.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. @Yevardian
    I think it's been established at this point Trump neither has any political inclinations of his own, or any control over his administration. I mean, he's appointed Michael Bolton. He was crying about the Iran detente before he got elected.

    If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck...

    I mean, he’s appointed Michael Bolton.

    This celebrity obsession of Trump’s is getting out of hand!

    Russia could close its airspace to European airlines flying to Asia, an increasingly big part of their business. That won’t directly impact the US but it would punish European countries following US policy towards Russia. As Russia isn’t signed up to the international agreement on airspace rights this option would allow it to target individual countries rather than the EU as a whole.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Yevardian
    Lol. that typo.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. @Matra
    I mean, he’s appointed Michael Bolton.

    This celebrity obsession of Trump's is getting out of hand!

    Russia could close its airspace to European airlines flying to Asia, an increasingly big part of their business. That won't directly impact the US but it would punish European countries following US policy towards Russia. As Russia isn't signed up to the international agreement on airspace rights this option would allow it to target individual countries rather than the EU as a whole.

    Lol. that typo.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. @Rosie

    I wonder if telling the truth (i.e. genetics > environment) would change women’s mating choices enough to reverse it.
     
    Are you blaming dysgenics on women's mating choices? If so, you are wrong to do so.


    https://www.scotsman.com/lifestyle/sexy-science-why-music-really-is-the-way-to-a-woman-s-heart-1-1081833

    I suspect a bullying instinct among men evolved to eliminate more creative/intelligent rivals, because they are more attractive to females.

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/2150994-songbird-gets-angry-when-its-rivals-are-brilliant-at-singing/

    Are you blaming dysgenics on women’s mating choices?

    yes – and climate change

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosie
    How about that evidence I asked you for?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @Jaakko Raipala
    Women are already eugenic in mating choices. That's the whole reason high IQ women have low birth rates - they are unwilling to accept lower status mates. Men are more willing to date lower status women and IQ among men is positively correlated with reproductive success as high IQ men can turn their intelligence into career success which translates to mating success. High IQ women have no such option and their mate pool is reduced by the high status men dating lower status women.

    If you want more eugenic fertility by changing mating choices, you need to change the choices of men, not women. Women already prefer mates who display proxies for IQ such as educational or career success. For more eugenic fertility, you need to change the preferences of men away from the prettiest women and more towards women with STEM degrees, high paying careers and other proxies for IQ. Good luck with changing those preferences...

    Delusional ideas about women have to be one of the biggest problems in the alt-right.

    Delusional ideas about women have to be one of the biggest problems in the alt-right.

    whose problem is delusional ideas about the mating choices of women on the left side of the bell curve?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. @Thorfinnsson
    The idea that women make dysgenic mating choices generally comes from high IQ but socially inept men who discover the manosphere, or in worse cases, the sluthate community.

    These men wrongly assume that their own high intelligence means they possess superior genetic fitness. IQ is good, but that's hardly the only consideration. Good looks signal many positive attributes (virility, courage, strength, health, etc.), and social mastery is very obviously fitness-maximizing.

    In the same way men preferring pretty women is not dysgenic. Beauty in women signals many positive things. Beauty is also positively correlated with intelligence to begin with.

    Now there is the matter that men are not attracted to women smarter than they are (annoying), but the reverse is true as well.

    The issue is less people's inherent sexual preferences but rather the manner in which modern industrial civilization alters reproductive strategies. Economic and financial independence for women means that the more talented women (and, to be fair, men) delay reproduction to a considerable extent. At the same time modern abundance and social assistance allow the lower classes to support more children than would otherwise be possible.

    Women, to be clear, are not to blame for this. It's not as if women had any role whatsoever in creating this system.

    In preindustrial times it was quite the opposite--the most successful had the most children.

    The idea that women make dysgenic mating choices generally comes from high IQ but socially inept men who discover the manosphere, or in worse cases, the sluthate community.

    the media/academia telling the truth about genetics > environment would greatly change mating choices among women on the left side of the bell curve.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson


    the media/academia telling the truth about genetics > environment would greatly change mating choices among women on the left side of the bell curve.
     
    I doubt that very much. Are you suggesting it would keep them from fornicating with negroes? That's primarily the province of women (or in this case, one woman) that Silvio Berlosconi referred to as, "[email protected]#$able lardass."

    Women on the left side of the bell curve are impulsive, socially unconstrained, and economically not dependent on men. They fornicate because it's fun, get pregnant, and that's that. Sometimes the guy sticks around, sometimes not. In any case her bills get paid.

    Telling the truth might instead inspire people on the right half of the bell curve to once again practice moral and social control on behalf of the left half.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. @notanon

    The idea that women make dysgenic mating choices generally comes from high IQ but socially inept men who discover the manosphere, or in worse cases, the sluthate community.
     
    the media/academia telling the truth about genetics > environment would greatly change mating choices among women on the left side of the bell curve.

    the media/academia telling the truth about genetics > environment would greatly change mating choices among women on the left side of the bell curve.

    I doubt that very much. Are you suggesting it would keep them from fornicating with negroes? That’s primarily the province of women (or in this case, one woman) that Silvio Berlosconi referred to as, “[email protected]#$able lardass.”

    Women on the left side of the bell curve are impulsive, socially unconstrained, and economically not dependent on men. They fornicate because it’s fun, get pregnant, and that’s that. Sometimes the guy sticks around, sometimes not. In any case her bills get paid.

    Telling the truth might instead inspire people on the right half of the bell curve to once again practice moral and social control on behalf of the left half.

    Read More
    • Replies: @notanon

    I doubt that very much.
     
    I know better.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. @Thorfinnsson


    the media/academia telling the truth about genetics > environment would greatly change mating choices among women on the left side of the bell curve.
     
    I doubt that very much. Are you suggesting it would keep them from fornicating with negroes? That's primarily the province of women (or in this case, one woman) that Silvio Berlosconi referred to as, "[email protected]#$able lardass."

    Women on the left side of the bell curve are impulsive, socially unconstrained, and economically not dependent on men. They fornicate because it's fun, get pregnant, and that's that. Sometimes the guy sticks around, sometimes not. In any case her bills get paid.

    Telling the truth might instead inspire people on the right half of the bell curve to once again practice moral and social control on behalf of the left half.

    I doubt that very much.

    I know better.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. @German_reader

    Far from an exclusively American problem.
     
    Certainly not, there are quite a few fanatic interventionists in Germany as well, not least among supporters of the Greens. I guess it's their way of proving they're good Germans, solidly belonging to the Western community of values.
    As for the French, well, they've traditionally held similar delusions as the Americans about their own role in world history. Not having won a war since 1918 and usually limited to kicking around blacks somewhere in Africa, moral grandstanding about Syria must do a lot for their national ego.

    I wonder how the North Africans in France feel. A lot of Islamists attack the West because of interventions, but does the average normal Muslim in the West support them any less in polls? Maybe, even more, depending on sects. No idea.

    I mean, Bashar al-Assad is an Allawite. You know what the partisans say: Christians to Lebanon; Allawites into the sea.

    You think the French have had a long losing streak? How about Arabs? They had their independence movements thinking they’d become like Europe. France had mini-successes: nukes, the Concorde, the Ariane, Airbus. All government stuff and working with England, but still it is something. They’ve had writers and artists too. Not so with Arabs.

    A lot seem to be angry too. People who burn hundreds of cars aren’t peaceniks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    I'd suppose a lot of Sunni Muslims in Europe are in favour of bombing Assad's regime, the Arab and Turkish satellite channels they watch must be full of atrocity propaganda, and it's their co-religionists who are (supposedly) being gassed after all. Interesting question though, I wonder if anybody has collected data about that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. @songbird
    I wonder how the North Africans in France feel. A lot of Islamists attack the West because of interventions, but does the average normal Muslim in the West support them any less in polls? Maybe, even more, depending on sects. No idea.

    I mean, Bashar al-Assad is an Allawite. You know what the partisans say: Christians to Lebanon; Allawites into the sea.

    You think the French have had a long losing streak? How about Arabs? They had their independence movements thinking they'd become like Europe. France had mini-successes: nukes, the Concorde, the Ariane, Airbus. All government stuff and working with England, but still it is something. They've had writers and artists too. Not so with Arabs.

    A lot seem to be angry too. People who burn hundreds of cars aren't peaceniks.

    I’d suppose a lot of Sunni Muslims in Europe are in favour of bombing Assad’s regime, the Arab and Turkish satellite channels they watch must be full of atrocity propaganda, and it’s their co-religionists who are (supposedly) being gassed after all. Interesting question though, I wonder if anybody has collected data about that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    French Muslims disproportionately vote Communist, while Communists are the least (relatively speaking) enthusiastic about bombing Assad (45% vs. 60% for the others in 2017).

    However, it could just be that non-Muslim Communists are just really anti-interventionist.
    , @Talha

    I’d suppose a lot of Sunni Muslims in Europe are in favour of bombing Assad’s regime
     
    I don't like Assad's regime as far as I can throw them - I'd love for them to be booted out tomorrow.

    The problem is who will replace them - that might be worse. Sometimes better the devil you know...

    I mean, look at Libya - no thanks!

    As such, I'm for immediate cessation of hostilities and coming to the negotiating table. I'm following the lead of scholars like Shaykh Muhammad Yacoubi on this (who is currently in exile in Morocco).

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. @notanon

    Are you blaming dysgenics on women’s mating choices?
     
    yes - and climate change

    How about that evidence I asked you for?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    That dysgenics is primarily a female problem is pretty well-known, e.g. https://jaymans.wordpress.com/2014/07/28/idiocracy-can-wait/

    It is also common sense. Having many children hampers intelligent successful men much less than intelligent successful women.
    , @notanon
    left-side dysgenics is different from right-side dysgenics - they have kids but as they don't need male support as much (cos welfare) there's less need (as far as they currently know) for them to be choosy on IQ. if the media/academia told the truth they might still mostly have sex with chads but they'd mostly *reproduce* with nerds.

    guaranteed.

    there's no evidence for this yet cos everyone is currently being lied to about genetics > environment but if you know those kinds of populations you'd know what i'm saying is true - the only question is although it would have a big impact on the left-side how much of an impact it would have on the overall population average?

    (nb i'm not actually blaming women for this as the behavior i am talking about is based on them being fed false information. i was being sarcastic cos feminists annoy me.)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. @Thorfinnsson
    The idea that women make dysgenic mating choices generally comes from high IQ but socially inept men who discover the manosphere, or in worse cases, the sluthate community.

    These men wrongly assume that their own high intelligence means they possess superior genetic fitness. IQ is good, but that's hardly the only consideration. Good looks signal many positive attributes (virility, courage, strength, health, etc.), and social mastery is very obviously fitness-maximizing.

    In the same way men preferring pretty women is not dysgenic. Beauty in women signals many positive things. Beauty is also positively correlated with intelligence to begin with.

    Now there is the matter that men are not attracted to women smarter than they are (annoying), but the reverse is true as well.

    The issue is less people's inherent sexual preferences but rather the manner in which modern industrial civilization alters reproductive strategies. Economic and financial independence for women means that the more talented women (and, to be fair, men) delay reproduction to a considerable extent. At the same time modern abundance and social assistance allow the lower classes to support more children than would otherwise be possible.

    Women, to be clear, are not to blame for this. It's not as if women had any role whatsoever in creating this system.

    In preindustrial times it was quite the opposite--the most successful had the most children.

    These men wrongly assume that their own high intelligence means they possess superior genetic fitness. IQ is good, but that’s hardly the only consideration. Good looks signal many positive attributes (virility, courage, strength, health, etc.), and social mastery is very obviously fitness-maximizing.

    There were Soviet experiments to selectively breed smart rats. One of the populations became total neurotics in the 5th generation, another in the 3rd, and in yet another one (imported from England) smart rats had weak nervous systems that programmed them to lose dominance fights to dumb rats. So, IQ is truly not everything.
    In Russian: http://web.archive.org/web/20040105183944/http://www.znanie-sila.ru/golden/issue2print_9.html

    Read More
    • LOL: Anatoly Karlin
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. @Polish Perspective
    Just a small economic note.

    Germany, Northern Italy, Benelux still the most advanced parts of Europe
     
    Germany and Benelux, sure. Northern Italy is not doing badly, but it is no longer at the frontier in per capita GDP, even if you look at it in isolation. You might still find individual provinces like Lombary or South Tyrol doing very well, but taken together, it's no longer at Germany's level. Scandinavia is now ahead of it by a non-trivial margin, and from that map, Scandinavia was a rural backwater in the 1500s.

    So, history is not always destiny (thankfully or not).

    This graph illustrates my point regarding Northern Italy:

    That’s per capita growth since the year 2000 until 2016. The source is OECD.

    Only South Tyrol(which is not even a “real” Italian province, and demographically, culturally and politically is very connected to the South Germanic manufacturing belt) has shown positive growth since 2000.

    The rest of Northern Italy is either as poor, or poorer than they were almost 20 years ago now. Maybe 1-1.5% growth from 2017 until 2020 will mean that they will recoup their losses, but even if they did, they would end up exactly where they were in 2000.

    Northern Italy, while being more advanced than the Southern part, is no longer keeping up with Scandinavia, Netherlands or Germany.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    Very interesting map, thanks.

    Strong catch up growth across Eastern Europe. Meanwhile, the two EU-15 countries with the most cumbersome bureaucracies (Italy and Greece) have shown the least growth.

    Despite the crisis, the Iberian peninsula has actually done about as well as France - nothing to write home about, but not catastrophic either.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @Randal

    How many even believe the latest false-flag “gas attack”? Even normies I talk to are cynical.
     
    My impression is that most of my social and family contacts are willing to express cynicism about government up to a point, but still see outright scepticism about the Syrian chemical attacks as a step too far. It requires them stepping too far outside their comfort zone in questioning their fundamental assumptions about the basic goodness of their government and ruling elites, and the basic honesty (in general, allowing for convenient exceptions mostly amongst media supporting those they see as political opponents) of the media they rely upon for information about the world.

    That's bad enough, especially given that most of these people lived through the Iraq debacle and really have no excuse for not knowing better, but what is truly disturbing is that most of them take the same broad position on the Skripal nonsense - and that really is profound idiocy. Again, it seems to be because questioning it threatens a basic patriotic (misguided, but nevertheless) sense in them.

    These stories are threatening to ordinary folk in ways that general cynicism about politicians or "the media", or corporate power, are not.

    still see outright scepticism about the Syrian chemical attacks as a step too far. It requires them stepping too far outside their comfort zone in questioning their fundamental assumptions about the basic goodness of their government and the media

    I see. Well, one of the advantages of living in a low trust society – and there aren’t many – is that people have far fewer inhibitions to express public dissent and furthermore they are less likely to receive flak from others for doing so.

    A key part of your normie Western shitlib’s moral foundation is that they are simply “better” than the right-wing rubes. I’m talking better in terms of morality, though educational snobbery certainly plays into this as well.

    The major publishing houses know this, so they feed these people a steady diet of propaganda. One thing that redpilled me even before I got into questions about identity, race and hbd was how the Iraq war was sold. I wasn’t old enough to see it live and understand it, but I read books about it when I was a teen and I was astonished. The same thing happened again with the Libya invasion.

    It made me realise that education is really wasted on most people because most people cannot be taught critical thinking. I know that’s a pessimistic viewpoint, but I honestly don’t see how you can come to any different conclusion. And I’m not even talking about “if someone doesn’t agree with me, then they’re a sheep!”.

    I have more respect for genuine left-wing radicals, even if I don’t agree with them, then the average normie, because the former have actually applied themselves to think about the world away from the mainstream narrative, even if I think their conclusions are wrong. (Of course, this doesn’t mean that everything that is a consensus opinion has to be knee-jerk rejected, that’s also stupid in a sense. But most people never adopt a single heterodox opinion in their entire life on anything.

    Nevertheless, there are societies where people are more willing to express heresy and dissent with established wisdom, and mine is one of them. At least for now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @notanon

    most people cannot be taught critical thinking
     
    sure they can - they use it all the time when discussing sports, weather, their hobbies etc

    the problem is people who *trust* the media are incapable of critical thinking on any subject the media is currently gas-lighting them on

    ergo to get them to start thinking for themselves you have to destroy their trust in the media priesthood - it's not politics, it's a reformation
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. @German_reader
    I'd suppose a lot of Sunni Muslims in Europe are in favour of bombing Assad's regime, the Arab and Turkish satellite channels they watch must be full of atrocity propaganda, and it's their co-religionists who are (supposedly) being gassed after all. Interesting question though, I wonder if anybody has collected data about that.

    French Muslims disproportionately vote Communist, while Communists are the least (relatively speaking) enthusiastic about bombing Assad (45% vs. 60% for the others in 2017).

    However, it could just be that non-Muslim Communists are just really anti-interventionist.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. @Rosie
    How about that evidence I asked you for?

    That dysgenics is primarily a female problem is pretty well-known, e.g. https://jaymans.wordpress.com/2014/07/28/idiocracy-can-wait/

    It is also common sense. Having many children hampers intelligent successful men much less than intelligent successful women.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jaakko Raipala
    No, that means dysgenics is mainly a male problem. It is high IQ males who are willing to mate with lower IQ females and to have children with lower than IQ potential than their own.

    High IQ females tend not to accept lower IQ men as mates which means that when they do have children, it is highly eugenic, but they have a high risk of never finding a mate. Thus high IQ women have lower but more eugenic fertility than high IQ men. It is the extremely eugenic desires of high IQ women and the lack of eugenic desires among high IQ men that may create idiocracy.

    There's of course no way to change these innate preferences but a society can work around them. It used to be taboo to marry outside of your class. Aristocrat families didn't accept servant brides for their sons; the son of the lord maybe had such affairs but eventually a good marriage was arranged. My traced line of ancestry has landowners marrying daughters of landowners for centuries until the taboos broke in the 20th century - my reckless great-uncle still got disinherited for marrying a penniless waitress.

    These taboos maintained eugenic fertility within classes like aristocrats, landowners, merchants etc by limiting the *males* who were tempted to use their wealth to attract some pretty but poor woman. (People of course didn't necessarily comprehend the eugenic aspect, they were thinking about the wealth and status of the family.) Women tended to limit themselves by not wanting to marry down.

    Liberalism brought us dysgenic fertility by allowing successful men to marry anyone they want without shame and turns out they want young, pretty women above everything else. There is no eugenics to be gained by rolling back "women's liberation" or putting some social pressure on high IQ women who are already de facto eugenicists. There might be eugenics to be gained from canceling "men's liberation" and pressuring successful men to consider IQ proxies when selecting mates like old bourgeois society used to do.

    , @Rosie
    You misunderstood. I didn't mean to say that women's reproductive behavior is not dysgenic. That is a separate question.

    I only meant to say that women's mating preferences are not dysgenic.

    Birth control and abortion are dysgenic, and we often colloquially remark that "women are postponing childbirth." In fact, it is often couples that postpone childbirth, which brings me to another source of dysgenic pressure: the end of job security. This is very discouraging to high-IQ men and women with foresight and the anxiety that goes along with that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. @Polish Perspective
    This graph illustrates my point regarding Northern Italy:

    https://i.imgur.com/ThsGeHv.png

    That's per capita growth since the year 2000 until 2016. The source is OECD.

    Only South Tyrol(which is not even a "real" Italian province, and demographically, culturally and politically is very connected to the South Germanic manufacturing belt) has shown positive growth since 2000.

    The rest of Northern Italy is either as poor, or poorer than they were almost 20 years ago now. Maybe 1-1.5% growth from 2017 until 2020 will mean that they will recoup their losses, but even if they did, they would end up exactly where they were in 2000.

    Northern Italy, while being more advanced than the Southern part, is no longer keeping up with Scandinavia, Netherlands or Germany.

    Very interesting map, thanks.

    Strong catch up growth across Eastern Europe. Meanwhile, the two EU-15 countries with the most cumbersome bureaucracies (Italy and Greece) have shown the least growth.

    Despite the crisis, the Iberian peninsula has actually done about as well as France – nothing to write home about, but not catastrophic either.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Polish Perspective

    Strong catch up growth across Eastern Europe.
     
    Hungary is the negative outlier, though. This is the entire V4, indexed to 2000.

    https://i.imgur.com/dY2RfI9.png

    (Click to enlarge)

    Contrary to delusional claims about a supposed 'economic miracle' in Poland, the performance of my country has been above-average but far from spectacular. The real outperformer, though rarely noticed or metioned, is in fact Slovakia.

    The Slovaks began as about 20% richer than Poland in 1992 (the earliest year we have independent data from them) and has since grown slightly faster and maintained that. Czech performance has been so-so, though they started at a very high level. Nevertheless, during the 1990s they grew almost nothing and during the 16 years from 2000 to 2016, their growth performance was not great by any stretch of the imagination. One cannot just excuse that on high initial income.

    They are neighbors with Slovakia and the post-2008 divergence between Slovak and Czech economic performance is very notable, and in some ways humiliating for Czechs.

    However, the real negative outlier, as previously mentioned, is really Hungary. While it began as richer than Poland, it was still significantly poorer than Czechia during the early 1990s.

    To drive home the point, absolute per capita levels in constant currency:

    https://i.imgur.com/dgWdXm4.png

    (Click to enlarge)

    We have to appreciate that Orban inherited a country on the brink of bankruptcym in 2010. Reiner may whine (justifiably) about corruption, but we have to understand what an epic mess his predecessors left behind. Voting for Fidesz, even aside issues of immigration, makes sense in this light. This is not even a partisan point, even the Hungarian socialists themselves admitted as much:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Őszöd_speech

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. @Greasy William
    Trump won't risk WWIII to topple Assad. Pence would. It's that simple.

    Trump won’t risk WWIII to topple Assad. Pence would. It’s that simple.

    Better, but still not good enough. Here’s a reasonable statement of the situation:

    Trump might risk WW3 in Syria (whether it’s through indulging his fantasies about Iran or just sheer bumbling incompetence resulting in his being ignored or led by the nose by the neocon/militarist types around him). Pence might risk WW3 in Syria (more likely due to fantasies and less to bumbling than in Trump’s case).

    It’s reasonable to suggest Pence might be more likely to risk it than Trump, but we don’t know with any confidence how much more likely. It’s probably actually unlikely in either case, when it comes down to it. The possibility of nuclear war tends to have a remarkably sobering effect even on the most gung ho of leaders. But when you are talking about WW3, small risks loom rather large, especially when the supposed gains they are traded for accrue to other people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Greasy William
    Except that we know for certain that Trump supports Assad remaining, deescalation with Russia and pulling the US troops out. We know this because he has repeatedly said as much despite gaining no advantage, and plenty of grief, from saying those things.

    On the other hand, we also know for absolute certain that Pence supports the US toppling Assad and confrontation with Russia. We knows this because Pence has repeatedly said as much despite such statements putting him in conflict with Trump, his boss.


    You just don't like Trump.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. @Randal

    Trump won’t risk WWIII to topple Assad. Pence would. It’s that simple.
     
    Better, but still not good enough. Here's a reasonable statement of the situation:

    Trump might risk WW3 in Syria (whether it's through indulging his fantasies about Iran or just sheer bumbling incompetence resulting in his being ignored or led by the nose by the neocon/militarist types around him). Pence might risk WW3 in Syria (more likely due to fantasies and less to bumbling than in Trump's case).

    It's reasonable to suggest Pence might be more likely to risk it than Trump, but we don't know with any confidence how much more likely. It's probably actually unlikely in either case, when it comes down to it. The possibility of nuclear war tends to have a remarkably sobering effect even on the most gung ho of leaders. But when you are talking about WW3, small risks loom rather large, especially when the supposed gains they are traded for accrue to other people.

    Except that we know for certain that Trump supports Assad remaining, deescalation with Russia and pulling the US troops out. We know this because he has repeatedly said as much despite gaining no advantage, and plenty of grief, from saying those things.

    On the other hand, we also know for absolute certain that Pence supports the US toppling Assad and confrontation with Russia. We knows this because Pence has repeatedly said as much despite such statements putting him in conflict with Trump, his boss.

    You just don’t like Trump.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    Except that we know for certain that Trump supports Assad remaining, deescalation with Russia and pulling the US troops out. We know this because he has repeatedly said as much despite gaining no advantage, and plenty of grief, from saying those things.
     
    No, we absolutely do not "know" any such thing. What Trump says means little - that much has become very clear. He contradicts himself regularly, and indeed if he really, as you speculate, supported Assad remaining in power he would not have initiated this line of R2P stupidity about chemical weapons allegations that has ended where we are today, and he certainly would not have continued it now, to the gratuitous lengths he has taken it. Even if in the end reason prevails and he pulls the punch on this occasion, that line gratuitously massively strengthens the hand of those trying to manipulate US forces into overthrowing Assad.

    And of course it's fatuous to claim Trump has gained nothing from posing as an opponent of US interventionist wars - that was a significant part of his electoral appeal.

    On the other hand, we also know for absolute certain that Pence supports the US toppling Assad and confrontation with Russia. We knows this because Pence has repeatedly said as much despite such statements putting him in conflict with Trump, his boss.
     
    Indeed, but we also know that many politicians come out with bombastic nonsense when they don't have responsibility for actually lighting the fuse.

    You just don’t like Trump.
     
    I'm certainly taking a strong dislike to him now, as he reveals his true colours on this R2P/neocon stupidity in Syria. But that's a response to his actions. In the past I've always quite liked him and been generally a supporter, and certainly a very strong advocate of him over the alternative on offer at the election.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @Yevardian
    There has been a notable shift in his worldview since he was blogging at sublime oblivion. Shilling for muh 'free markets', his obvious distaste for ordinary Russians and quoting trash sources like the economist to back his posts.

    >his obvious distaste for ordinary Russians

    Russia is full of aggressive vatniks though. Whose speech is full of allusions to gay rape (нагнуть etc)

    watch an evolution, or Communism, or some such topic, video on YT in Russian and in German. Compare the civility of the discussions in the comments.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ussr andy
    even liberals act in ways which in the West (esp. Protestant) are considered déclassé. there's a channel of some Russian Navalny fanboy (no doubt CIA or Soros) that panders to young Westerners. He swears with abandon - sh**, f**k, etc. Completely unaware just how r**arded it sounds to swear in what is one's second language.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. @ussr andy
    >his obvious distaste for ordinary Russians


    Russia is full of aggressive vatniks though. Whose speech is full of allusions to gay rape (нагнуть etc)

    watch an evolution, or Communism, or some such topic, video on YT in Russian and in German. Compare the civility of the discussions in the comments.

    even liberals act in ways which in the West (esp. Protestant) are considered déclassé. there’s a channel of some Russian Navalny fanboy (no doubt CIA or Soros) that panders to young Westerners. He swears with abandon – sh**, f**k, etc. Completely unaware just how r**arded it sounds to swear in what is one’s second language.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ussr andy
    even college-educated Russians can't string a sentence together (when it's some controversial topic - evolution, Ukraine, cold fusion etc) without using prison language (кукарекать etc). 1990's were a national tragedy and a huge set
    back. One day someone will put a body count on it (same with desegregation and deinstitutionalization and the Black crime localhoast that happened to America) and that will be the body count of liberalism and market fundamentalism.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. @ussr andy
    even liberals act in ways which in the West (esp. Protestant) are considered déclassé. there's a channel of some Russian Navalny fanboy (no doubt CIA or Soros) that panders to young Westerners. He swears with abandon - sh**, f**k, etc. Completely unaware just how r**arded it sounds to swear in what is one's second language.

    even college-educated Russians can’t string a sentence together (when it’s some controversial topic – evolution, Ukraine, cold fusion etc) without using prison language (кукарекать etc). 1990′s were a national tragedy and a huge set
    back. One day someone will put a body count on it (same with desegregation and deinstitutionalization and the Black crime localhoast that happened to America) and that will be the body count of liberalism and market fundamentalism.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. @Greasy William
    Except that we know for certain that Trump supports Assad remaining, deescalation with Russia and pulling the US troops out. We know this because he has repeatedly said as much despite gaining no advantage, and plenty of grief, from saying those things.

    On the other hand, we also know for absolute certain that Pence supports the US toppling Assad and confrontation with Russia. We knows this because Pence has repeatedly said as much despite such statements putting him in conflict with Trump, his boss.


    You just don't like Trump.

    Except that we know for certain that Trump supports Assad remaining, deescalation with Russia and pulling the US troops out. We know this because he has repeatedly said as much despite gaining no advantage, and plenty of grief, from saying those things.

    No, we absolutely do not “know” any such thing. What Trump says means little – that much has become very clear. He contradicts himself regularly, and indeed if he really, as you speculate, supported Assad remaining in power he would not have initiated this line of R2P stupidity about chemical weapons allegations that has ended where we are today, and he certainly would not have continued it now, to the gratuitous lengths he has taken it. Even if in the end reason prevails and he pulls the punch on this occasion, that line gratuitously massively strengthens the hand of those trying to manipulate US forces into overthrowing Assad.

    And of course it’s fatuous to claim Trump has gained nothing from posing as an opponent of US interventionist wars – that was a significant part of his electoral appeal.

    On the other hand, we also know for absolute certain that Pence supports the US toppling Assad and confrontation with Russia. We knows this because Pence has repeatedly said as much despite such statements putting him in conflict with Trump, his boss.

    Indeed, but we also know that many politicians come out with bombastic nonsense when they don’t have responsibility for actually lighting the fuse.

    You just don’t like Trump.

    I’m certainly taking a strong dislike to him now, as he reveals his true colours on this R2P/neocon stupidity in Syria. But that’s a response to his actions. In the past I’ve always quite liked him and been generally a supporter, and certainly a very strong advocate of him over the alternative on offer at the election.

    Read More
    • Replies: @notanon
    blaming Trump for the Syria thing is silly

    the worst you can say about Trump is he ran too late and the swamp was too strong by the time he got there
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. @Rosie

    I wonder if telling the truth (i.e. genetics > environment) would change women’s mating choices enough to reverse it.
     
    Are you blaming dysgenics on women's mating choices? If so, you are wrong to do so.


    https://www.scotsman.com/lifestyle/sexy-science-why-music-really-is-the-way-to-a-woman-s-heart-1-1081833

    I suspect a bullying instinct among men evolved to eliminate more creative/intelligent rivals, because they are more attractive to females.

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/2150994-songbird-gets-angry-when-its-rivals-are-brilliant-at-singing/

    >I suspect a bullying instinct among men evolved to eliminate more creative/intelligent rivals,

    it’s not the intelligent that are bullied but the socially inept.
    “Just be normal, ffs” – TRS

    Read More
    • Replies: @ussr andy
    and oh, it's not just men, girls bully girls just as well ("excuthe me but we sit here?!!")

    regardless, 98% of that is prolly due to integration (and thus a self-inflicted problem), anyway.
    , @Polish Perspective
    Both, I think. A lot of intelligent people happen to be socially inept. There's even research which shows that once you hit 140 IQ or above, your capability to connect with the proles dramatically diminishes and that socially handicaps you. As it happens, no matter how clever you are, that will not always help you in social interactions. Which the duller elements of society knows and often exploit. Then again, an intelligent person can screw the dumb ones in ways they can often not even imagine (literally).

    I also don't even think bullying is always on the grounds of intelligence. I remember growing up watching a very talented musician get bullied by his classmates. He was neither socially awkward nor was he ugly, if anything he was above-average in looks. I think Rosie may be onto something that some bullying is done by inferiors who fear their rivals. The guy in question was obviously going to be a threat to a lot of these guys getting the "best"(often just the most attractive barbies) girls. Both good-looking and a talented musician is a combo frankly neither of them can beat. So what do they do? They lower his social capital by making him emasculated and weak in front of girls, to make themselves appear stronger. That gels well with Rosie's links about rivals.

    Rape even works the same way in some circumstances. "Weaker" men use rape because they cannot conventionally compete with other men. Rape can of course also be used as a weapon of humiliation and/or "revenge" against other tribes. You could arguably see it in Western Europe today. Most of these prole Arabs have little conventional chance vs the natives, at least once you get out of high school (which is when segmentation really starts to happen). Rape can be seen as a weapon both to "get back" (for perceived "injustice" of being perpetually low-status) as well just as weapon of war/humiliation.

    Right now, their numbers are relatively small and there is also increasing segregation, but unless this pattern changes, and there is no reason to think it suddenly will, then it will lead to blows once it becomes an inescapable fact of life, even in formerly segregated areas. Or at least I hope so. The blackpill is that it could become South Africa, where whites are perma-cucked and just whine and pray to imaginary jeebus while they are getting butchered and brutalised. But not every white nation will become South Africa. I just hope neither becomes, though some are certainly heading that way (Sweden, I'm looking at you).

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. @ussr andy
    >I suspect a bullying instinct among men evolved to eliminate more creative/intelligent rivals,

    it's not the intelligent that are bullied but the socially inept.
    "Just be normal, ffs" - TRS

    and oh, it’s not just men, girls bully girls just as well (“excuthe me but we sit here?!!”)

    regardless, 98% of that is prolly due to integration (and thus a self-inflicted problem), anyway.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. @Anatoly Karlin
    Very interesting map, thanks.

    Strong catch up growth across Eastern Europe. Meanwhile, the two EU-15 countries with the most cumbersome bureaucracies (Italy and Greece) have shown the least growth.

    Despite the crisis, the Iberian peninsula has actually done about as well as France - nothing to write home about, but not catastrophic either.

    Strong catch up growth across Eastern Europe.

    Hungary is the negative outlier, though. This is the entire V4, indexed to 2000.

    (Click to enlarge)

    Contrary to delusional claims about a supposed ‘economic miracle’ in Poland, the performance of my country has been above-average but far from spectacular. The real outperformer, though rarely noticed or metioned, is in fact Slovakia.

    The Slovaks began as about 20% richer than Poland in 1992 (the earliest year we have independent data from them) and has since grown slightly faster and maintained that. Czech performance has been so-so, though they started at a very high level. Nevertheless, during the 1990s they grew almost nothing and during the 16 years from 2000 to 2016, their growth performance was not great by any stretch of the imagination. One cannot just excuse that on high initial income.

    They are neighbors with Slovakia and the post-2008 divergence between Slovak and Czech economic performance is very notable, and in some ways humiliating for Czechs.

    However, the real negative outlier, as previously mentioned, is really Hungary. While it began as richer than Poland, it was still significantly poorer than Czechia during the early 1990s.

    To drive home the point, absolute per capita levels in constant currency:

    (Click to enlarge)

    We have to appreciate that Orban inherited a country on the brink of bankruptcym in 2010. Reiner may whine (justifiably) about corruption, but we have to understand what an epic mess his predecessors left behind. Voting for Fidesz, even aside issues of immigration, makes sense in this light. This is not even a partisan point, even the Hungarian socialists themselves admitted as much:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Őszöd_speech

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Yes, however bad Orbán is, he cannot even come close to how bad the horrible socialists and liberals were 2002-2010. Hungary is a negative outlier because of the leftist government 2002-2010.

    And I’m only talking about economic performance, not LGBTQWERTY rights or immigration or whatever, where the Hungarian left is mostly like the western one.

    Of course, the leftist government was also extremely corrupt.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. @Talha

    But Western citizens I think tend to have more faith in their governments and elites
     
    Mounting evidence that High-IQ is dysgenic...

    Just sayin'...

    Peace.

    Just sayin’…

    Thank the Good Lord that we have high caste S. Asians making beautiful brown high IQ babies with Nordic princesses to save us from ourselves. :)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    We're doing our part...because we care...

    Also, on the side note - all of my kids are white - like WHITE. I was actually kind of shocked that none of them came out with very serious Pakistani looks. Well, the last guy is a bit tanned and has thicker eyebrows, but that's about it.

    With my sister-in-law, who married a fairly swarthy Egyptian (with almost afro-style hair), both her daughters are very white and one of them got the light green eyes and blonde (though frizzy) hair. The other one is dark-haired and brown-eyed but got very straight hair - even though my sister in-law actually has curly hair also.

    European genes are fairly strong in expressing themselves when they want to - I have certainly been surprised thus far - we'll see what happens when they try to have another.

    I was talking this over with a brother recently and the whole concept of "dysgenic" is really up for grabs - since what it really means is:
    "tending to promote survival of or reproduction by less well-adapted individuals (such as the weak or diseased) especially at the expense of well-adapted individuals (such as the strong or healthy)"
    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dysgenic

    If High-IQ leads to maladaptation (as men like Dutton have mentioned*) then it is dysgenic once the dust clears. It's not about what one likes - selection doesn't care for feelz - it's about what survives and propagates.We might like less hairy bodies, but if looking like a bear is advantageous, it will flourish...until it isn't.

    We were talking about how it might be a great thing to have a 5-10% Sub-Saharan admixture (I don't know if I do or not - thinking about doing a test) to keep an "edge" with regards to instinct.

    Peace.

    *He's actually got a book coming out soon:
    http://books.imprint.co.uk/book/?gcoi=71157100317440

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. @ussr andy
    >I suspect a bullying instinct among men evolved to eliminate more creative/intelligent rivals,

    it's not the intelligent that are bullied but the socially inept.
    "Just be normal, ffs" - TRS

    Both, I think. A lot of intelligent people happen to be socially inept. There’s even research which shows that once you hit 140 IQ or above, your capability to connect with the proles dramatically diminishes and that socially handicaps you. As it happens, no matter how clever you are, that will not always help you in social interactions. Which the duller elements of society knows and often exploit. Then again, an intelligent person can screw the dumb ones in ways they can often not even imagine (literally).

    I also don’t even think bullying is always on the grounds of intelligence. I remember growing up watching a very talented musician get bullied by his classmates. He was neither socially awkward nor was he ugly, if anything he was above-average in looks. I think Rosie may be onto something that some bullying is done by inferiors who fear their rivals. The guy in question was obviously going to be a threat to a lot of these guys getting the “best”(often just the most attractive barbies) girls. Both good-looking and a talented musician is a combo frankly neither of them can beat. So what do they do? They lower his social capital by making him emasculated and weak in front of girls, to make themselves appear stronger. That gels well with Rosie’s links about rivals.

    Rape even works the same way in some circumstances. “Weaker” men use rape because they cannot conventionally compete with other men. Rape can of course also be used as a weapon of humiliation and/or “revenge” against other tribes. You could arguably see it in Western Europe today. Most of these prole Arabs have little conventional chance vs the natives, at least once you get out of high school (which is when segmentation really starts to happen). Rape can be seen as a weapon both to “get back” (for perceived “injustice” of being perpetually low-status) as well just as weapon of war/humiliation.

    Right now, their numbers are relatively small and there is also increasing segregation, but unless this pattern changes, and there is no reason to think it suddenly will, then it will lead to blows once it becomes an inescapable fact of life, even in formerly segregated areas. Or at least I hope so. The blackpill is that it could become South Africa, where whites are perma-cucked and just whine and pray to imaginary jeebus while they are getting butchered and brutalised. But not every white nation will become South Africa. I just hope neither becomes, though some are certainly heading that way (Sweden, I’m looking at you).

    Read More
    • Replies: @ussr andy
    integrating prole spawn (dumb and violent, likely raised by single mothers) and brown kids (earlier onset of maturity) with the rest is pathalogical enough in itself. hence why I said self-inflicted. and hence why some countries have three-track highschool (which is under huge attack by sh*tlib do-gooders because inequality or something.)

    actually, I think single motherhood is even worse than prolehood per se. Compare Cartman (middle class single mother) vs Kenny (alcoholic trailer trash, but married, parents.)

    rape... dunno, I dimly remember in Blank Slate where he discusses whether rape was about power or an opportunistic procreation strategy (I think prolly a bit of both, certainly before the pill, otherwise it wouldn't exist.)

    JBP says violence comes from inequality, not from poverty pet se. there's little violence in prole neighborhoods and little violence in fancy-shmancy neighborhoods but a lot when they share physical space. Thing is, when you're confronted with people who have it better and you see there's but little space at the top, violence becomes an acceptable means of advancing in the dominance hierarchy.

    But I think, even here, the threshold varies widely. As I said in some other thread, some go through wars and stuff without losing their basic humanity while others will go on a rape and looting spree when there's a 2-hour electricity blackout or a police strike.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. @Anatoly Karlin
    I think my real blackpill on this was when I read and posted about that French poll in which 62% of Front National (!) supporters said they were in favor of bombing Syria in April 2017.

    62% of Front National voters and MLP supporters supported the strikes – that is virtually the same as those evil “globalist” En Marche!/Macron supporters.

    Ergo for Fillon/conservative voters. Hamon supporters were 50/50, while Melenchon voters were actually opposed, at 45% to 55%.
     
    Far from an exclusively American problem.

    Far from an exclusively American problem.

    True, but for some it is a convenient and simple explanation that serves.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @Rosie
    How about that evidence I asked you for?

    left-side dysgenics is different from right-side dysgenics – they have kids but as they don’t need male support as much (cos welfare) there’s less need (as far as they currently know) for them to be choosy on IQ. if the media/academia told the truth they might still mostly have sex with chads but they’d mostly *reproduce* with nerds.

    guaranteed.

    there’s no evidence for this yet cos everyone is currently being lied to about genetics > environment but if you know those kinds of populations you’d know what i’m saying is true – the only question is although it would have a big impact on the left-side how much of an impact it would have on the overall population average?

    (nb i’m not actually blaming women for this as the behavior i am talking about is based on them being fed false information. i was being sarcastic cos feminists annoy me.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @notanon

    if the media/academia told the truth they might still mostly have sex with chads but they’d mostly *reproduce* with nerds.
     
    in reality it's a spectrum so if you imagine the chad-nerd spectrum going from 1 to 5 then women who currently prefer type 1 would switch to type 2, women who currently prefer type 2 would switch to type 3 etc.

    obviously if you're one of the lucky 1% who are both chad and nerd it won't make a difference.
    , @Thorfinnsson
    This is dumb on two levels.

    The first is thinking that reproducing with chads is dysgenic.

    The second is thinking that accurate media propaganda will cause the most R-selected women to switch to k-selected reproduction.
    , @Rosie
    Sorry to keep dumping long posts, but this is an interesting thread.

    I can't claim to speak on the behavior of the left side of the bell curve. As for economically independent women on the right side, I would expect them to choose musicians, artists, poets, and philosophers.

    I share your indignation at the deceit concerning the genetics of intelligence, and I would hope dissemination of that information would influence women's mating behaviors, but I don't know that it would.

    You have to remember, some women have always fallen through the cracks. Not long ago, there was some discussion here about "fallen women." If they were lucky, they could find a place in a workhouse. If not, they would die young of malnutrition or untreated disease or they would bleed to death after a botched back-alley abortion.

    The best way to channel women into healthy marriages is to improve economic prospects for young men. That way, when girls and young women fall pregnant, the father can marry and support the family. If he fails to do so, the taxpayer can take that up with him now that we have paternity testing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. @Polish Perspective

    still see outright scepticism about the Syrian chemical attacks as a step too far. It requires them stepping too far outside their comfort zone in questioning their fundamental assumptions about the basic goodness of their government and the media
     
    I see. Well, one of the advantages of living in a low trust society - and there aren't many - is that people have far fewer inhibitions to express public dissent and furthermore they are less likely to receive flak from others for doing so.

    A key part of your normie Western shitlib's moral foundation is that they are simply "better" than the right-wing rubes. I'm talking better in terms of morality, though educational snobbery certainly plays into this as well.

    The major publishing houses know this, so they feed these people a steady diet of propaganda. One thing that redpilled me even before I got into questions about identity, race and hbd was how the Iraq war was sold. I wasn't old enough to see it live and understand it, but I read books about it when I was a teen and I was astonished. The same thing happened again with the Libya invasion.

    It made me realise that education is really wasted on most people because most people cannot be taught critical thinking. I know that's a pessimistic viewpoint, but I honestly don't see how you can come to any different conclusion. And I'm not even talking about "if someone doesn't agree with me, then they're a sheep!".

    I have more respect for genuine left-wing radicals, even if I don't agree with them, then the average normie, because the former have actually applied themselves to think about the world away from the mainstream narrative, even if I think their conclusions are wrong. (Of course, this doesn't mean that everything that is a consensus opinion has to be knee-jerk rejected, that's also stupid in a sense. But most people never adopt a single heterodox opinion in their entire life on anything.

    Nevertheless, there are societies where people are more willing to express heresy and dissent with established wisdom, and mine is one of them. At least for now.

    most people cannot be taught critical thinking

    sure they can – they use it all the time when discussing sports, weather, their hobbies etc

    the problem is people who *trust* the media are incapable of critical thinking on any subject the media is currently gas-lighting them on

    ergo to get them to start thinking for themselves you have to destroy their trust in the media priesthood – it’s not politics, it’s a reformation

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. @Randal

    Except that we know for certain that Trump supports Assad remaining, deescalation with Russia and pulling the US troops out. We know this because he has repeatedly said as much despite gaining no advantage, and plenty of grief, from saying those things.
     
    No, we absolutely do not "know" any such thing. What Trump says means little - that much has become very clear. He contradicts himself regularly, and indeed if he really, as you speculate, supported Assad remaining in power he would not have initiated this line of R2P stupidity about chemical weapons allegations that has ended where we are today, and he certainly would not have continued it now, to the gratuitous lengths he has taken it. Even if in the end reason prevails and he pulls the punch on this occasion, that line gratuitously massively strengthens the hand of those trying to manipulate US forces into overthrowing Assad.

    And of course it's fatuous to claim Trump has gained nothing from posing as an opponent of US interventionist wars - that was a significant part of his electoral appeal.

    On the other hand, we also know for absolute certain that Pence supports the US toppling Assad and confrontation with Russia. We knows this because Pence has repeatedly said as much despite such statements putting him in conflict with Trump, his boss.
     
    Indeed, but we also know that many politicians come out with bombastic nonsense when they don't have responsibility for actually lighting the fuse.

    You just don’t like Trump.
     
    I'm certainly taking a strong dislike to him now, as he reveals his true colours on this R2P/neocon stupidity in Syria. But that's a response to his actions. In the past I've always quite liked him and been generally a supporter, and certainly a very strong advocate of him over the alternative on offer at the election.

    blaming Trump for the Syria thing is silly

    the worst you can say about Trump is he ran too late and the swamp was too strong by the time he got there

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    blaming Trump for the Syria thing is silly

    the worst you can say about Trump is he ran too late and the swamp was too strong by the time he got there

     

    On the contrary, excusing him is silly. Is he the President or is he just some kind of puppet? If he's the latter, whose fault is that?

    Trump did not have to appoint the noxious Haley to parade around the UN making inflammatory accusations and threats. He chose to do that, and the least worst thing you could say about it is that it shows very poor character judgement on Trump's part.

    Trump did not have to respond last year or this year to transparently highly suspect allegations of supposed chemical attacks like an emotionally incontinent child, weeping crocodile tears about the suffering children and declaring some kind of R2P-inspired idiocy about a need and supposed justification for military action in response. He chose to do that.

    Trump did not have to actually launch a missile attack on Syria last year, in a criminal act of aggression, then let the Haley creature make open and explicit threats in the name of the US government that further such supposed attacks would be met with punishment. He chose to do that, or to let it be done in his name.

    Trump did not have to respond to this latest highly suspect supposed chemical attack by making childish tweets about "animal Assad" and promising "big consequences" and a "forceful" response. Nor did he have to come out with leftist child-rhetoric like: "we're talking about humanity and it can't be allowed to happen". He chose to do that, and did it enthusiastically.

    Trump created the momentum on this, that has all the worst elements of the warmongering US political and media elites excited and jumping up and down calling for war because they think they have a real chance at getting the war they've always wanted. He has command responsibility, and more than that he has direct personal responsibility.

    There's no defending him any more after this, even if somehow sanity prevails.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. @notanon
    blaming Trump for the Syria thing is silly

    the worst you can say about Trump is he ran too late and the swamp was too strong by the time he got there

    blaming Trump for the Syria thing is silly

    the worst you can say about Trump is he ran too late and the swamp was too strong by the time he got there

    On the contrary, excusing him is silly. Is he the President or is he just some kind of puppet? If he’s the latter, whose fault is that?

    Trump did not have to appoint the noxious Haley to parade around the UN making inflammatory accusations and threats. He chose to do that, and the least worst thing you could say about it is that it shows very poor character judgement on Trump’s part.

    Trump did not have to respond last year or this year to transparently highly suspect allegations of supposed chemical attacks like an emotionally incontinent child, weeping crocodile tears about the suffering children and declaring some kind of R2P-inspired idiocy about a need and supposed justification for military action in response. He chose to do that.

    Trump did not have to actually launch a missile attack on Syria last year, in a criminal act of aggression, then let the Haley creature make open and explicit threats in the name of the US government that further such supposed attacks would be met with punishment. He chose to do that, or to let it be done in his name.

    Trump did not have to respond to this latest highly suspect supposed chemical attack by making childish tweets about “animal Assad” and promising “big consequences” and a “forceful” response. Nor did he have to come out with leftist child-rhetoric like: “we’re talking about humanity and it can’t be allowed to happen”. He chose to do that, and did it enthusiastically.

    Trump created the momentum on this, that has all the worst elements of the warmongering US political and media elites excited and jumping up and down calling for war because they think they have a real chance at getting the war they’ve always wanted. He has command responsibility, and more than that he has direct personal responsibility.

    There’s no defending him any more after this, even if somehow sanity prevails.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. @Polish Perspective
    Both, I think. A lot of intelligent people happen to be socially inept. There's even research which shows that once you hit 140 IQ or above, your capability to connect with the proles dramatically diminishes and that socially handicaps you. As it happens, no matter how clever you are, that will not always help you in social interactions. Which the duller elements of society knows and often exploit. Then again, an intelligent person can screw the dumb ones in ways they can often not even imagine (literally).

    I also don't even think bullying is always on the grounds of intelligence. I remember growing up watching a very talented musician get bullied by his classmates. He was neither socially awkward nor was he ugly, if anything he was above-average in looks. I think Rosie may be onto something that some bullying is done by inferiors who fear their rivals. The guy in question was obviously going to be a threat to a lot of these guys getting the "best"(often just the most attractive barbies) girls. Both good-looking and a talented musician is a combo frankly neither of them can beat. So what do they do? They lower his social capital by making him emasculated and weak in front of girls, to make themselves appear stronger. That gels well with Rosie's links about rivals.

    Rape even works the same way in some circumstances. "Weaker" men use rape because they cannot conventionally compete with other men. Rape can of course also be used as a weapon of humiliation and/or "revenge" against other tribes. You could arguably see it in Western Europe today. Most of these prole Arabs have little conventional chance vs the natives, at least once you get out of high school (which is when segmentation really starts to happen). Rape can be seen as a weapon both to "get back" (for perceived "injustice" of being perpetually low-status) as well just as weapon of war/humiliation.

    Right now, their numbers are relatively small and there is also increasing segregation, but unless this pattern changes, and there is no reason to think it suddenly will, then it will lead to blows once it becomes an inescapable fact of life, even in formerly segregated areas. Or at least I hope so. The blackpill is that it could become South Africa, where whites are perma-cucked and just whine and pray to imaginary jeebus while they are getting butchered and brutalised. But not every white nation will become South Africa. I just hope neither becomes, though some are certainly heading that way (Sweden, I'm looking at you).

    integrating prole spawn (dumb and violent, likely raised by single mothers) and brown kids (earlier onset of maturity) with the rest is pathalogical enough in itself. hence why I said self-inflicted. and hence why some countries have three-track highschool (which is under huge attack by sh*tlib do-gooders because inequality or something.)

    actually, I think single motherhood is even worse than prolehood per se. Compare Cartman (middle class single mother) vs Kenny (alcoholic trailer trash, but married, parents.)

    rape… dunno, I dimly remember in Blank Slate where he discusses whether rape was about power or an opportunistic procreation strategy (I think prolly a bit of both, certainly before the pill, otherwise it wouldn’t exist.)

    JBP says violence comes from inequality, not from poverty pet se. there’s little violence in prole neighborhoods and little violence in fancy-shmancy neighborhoods but a lot when they share physical space. Thing is, when you’re confronted with people who have it better and you see there’s but little space at the top, violence becomes an acceptable means of advancing in the dominance hierarchy.

    But I think, even here, the threshold varies widely. As I said in some other thread, some go through wars and stuff without losing their basic humanity while others will go on a rape and looting spree when there’s a 2-hour electricity blackout or a police strike.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. @notanon
    left-side dysgenics is different from right-side dysgenics - they have kids but as they don't need male support as much (cos welfare) there's less need (as far as they currently know) for them to be choosy on IQ. if the media/academia told the truth they might still mostly have sex with chads but they'd mostly *reproduce* with nerds.

    guaranteed.

    there's no evidence for this yet cos everyone is currently being lied to about genetics > environment but if you know those kinds of populations you'd know what i'm saying is true - the only question is although it would have a big impact on the left-side how much of an impact it would have on the overall population average?

    (nb i'm not actually blaming women for this as the behavior i am talking about is based on them being fed false information. i was being sarcastic cos feminists annoy me.)

    if the media/academia told the truth they might still mostly have sex with chads but they’d mostly *reproduce* with nerds.

    in reality it’s a spectrum so if you imagine the chad-nerd spectrum going from 1 to 5 then women who currently prefer type 1 would switch to type 2, women who currently prefer type 2 would switch to type 3 etc.

    obviously if you’re one of the lucky 1% who are both chad and nerd it won’t make a difference.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. @notanon
    left-side dysgenics is different from right-side dysgenics - they have kids but as they don't need male support as much (cos welfare) there's less need (as far as they currently know) for them to be choosy on IQ. if the media/academia told the truth they might still mostly have sex with chads but they'd mostly *reproduce* with nerds.

    guaranteed.

    there's no evidence for this yet cos everyone is currently being lied to about genetics > environment but if you know those kinds of populations you'd know what i'm saying is true - the only question is although it would have a big impact on the left-side how much of an impact it would have on the overall population average?

    (nb i'm not actually blaming women for this as the behavior i am talking about is based on them being fed false information. i was being sarcastic cos feminists annoy me.)

    This is dumb on two levels.

    The first is thinking that reproducing with chads is dysgenic.

    The second is thinking that accurate media propaganda will cause the most R-selected women to switch to k-selected reproduction.

    Read More
    • Replies: @notanon

    The first is thinking that reproducing with chads is dysgenic
     
    okay to spell it out more clearly

    say the eugenic optimum is some mixture of IQ (which i'm calling nerd) and overall physical health (which i'm calling chad) i'm saying women on the right-side of the Bell curve already pretty much make their mating choices around that optimum whereas with women on the left-side it's skewed in the chad direction and that if media/academia told the truth they would shift towards a more 50/50 balance almost straight away. you wouldn't notice much difference until the kids grew up but it would be there.

    #

    The second is thinking that accurate media propaganda will cause the most R-selected women to switch to k-selected reproduction.
     
    the most r-selected are the most likely as they care least about love/romance and will see it as a purely practical transaction
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. OT: Most economic journalism is typically running commentary on inflation, profits etc with little longer term perspective. This is especially true in developing countries where academic research is often spotty and cannot fill the same role as in developed nations. There’s also language barriers.

    Given Sailer’s recent China vs India blogpost, I thought I’d do a PSA on Indian economic commentary. CMIE is one of the better sites you’d come across. In particular, their CEO does insightful commentary, often with a longer time perspective. His latest is an interesting deep-dive behind the headlines.

    There are long-standing questions over the quality of either Chinese or Indian GDP data, but the key difference between the two is that China’s population is consistently more upbeat about its economic prospects than their Indian equivalents when asked. This is especially the case in the last few years. When the data is fuzzy/unreliable, it is remarkable how useful it is to just ask people outright. You won’t get an absolute number, but you’ll get a relative sense of how well things are going, beyond topline numbers. India’s economic situation is not great, especially given that most of the survey’s only concern the formal sector, which employs only 9% of their workforce.

    CMIE has done large household surveys, especially on employment, which cover both informal and formal. Mr Vyas writes about this in his earlier Op-Eds. Anyone wanting to deepen their understanding about India’s future prospects ought to read him. Another resource is http://www.ideasforindia.in which gathers a lot of academics and lets them publish their thoughts and research.

    As a sidenote, he also fulfulls my personal criteria for a domain expert: he’s native to the land(and is not a transplant), he has no obvious party affiliation and he is fully conversant with that country’s policy elites (goes to their events, is often name-checked in the elite debate and quoted by others etc). This makes India easier to follow than China, which has very few domain experts living in China who are both fluent in English and write for both an international audience and an Indian one.

    Many “experts on China” are just washed-up gringos who sit in NY, DC or LA with often a shaky grasp on Mandarin and little to non-existent relevance in the domestic debate. This makes it a harder country to follow, given that you more or less need to have decent Mandarin fluency to follow the elite debate in China (or rely on Chinese professors living in the West, but their work tend to historical, or at least narrowly defined in small areas and they are often not influential in China, though there are exceptions). The Indian elite policy debate, given that the language it is conducted in is English, does not suffer from these defects. If you want to know more about India, you ought to exploit this fact, given the large amount of domain experts in India writing in a language far more accessible to us. Mr. Vyas is certainly one of them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  102. @Anatoly Karlin
    That dysgenics is primarily a female problem is pretty well-known, e.g. https://jaymans.wordpress.com/2014/07/28/idiocracy-can-wait/

    It is also common sense. Having many children hampers intelligent successful men much less than intelligent successful women.

    No, that means dysgenics is mainly a male problem. It is high IQ males who are willing to mate with lower IQ females and to have children with lower than IQ potential than their own.

    High IQ females tend not to accept lower IQ men as mates which means that when they do have children, it is highly eugenic, but they have a high risk of never finding a mate. Thus high IQ women have lower but more eugenic fertility than high IQ men. It is the extremely eugenic desires of high IQ women and the lack of eugenic desires among high IQ men that may create idiocracy.

    There’s of course no way to change these innate preferences but a society can work around them. It used to be taboo to marry outside of your class. Aristocrat families didn’t accept servant brides for their sons; the son of the lord maybe had such affairs but eventually a good marriage was arranged. My traced line of ancestry has landowners marrying daughters of landowners for centuries until the taboos broke in the 20th century – my reckless great-uncle still got disinherited for marrying a penniless waitress.

    These taboos maintained eugenic fertility within classes like aristocrats, landowners, merchants etc by limiting the *males* who were tempted to use their wealth to attract some pretty but poor woman. (People of course didn’t necessarily comprehend the eugenic aspect, they were thinking about the wealth and status of the family.) Women tended to limit themselves by not wanting to marry down.

    Liberalism brought us dysgenic fertility by allowing successful men to marry anyone they want without shame and turns out they want young, pretty women above everything else. There is no eugenics to be gained by rolling back “women’s liberation” or putting some social pressure on high IQ women who are already de facto eugenicists. There might be eugenics to be gained from canceling “men’s liberation” and pressuring successful men to consider IQ proxies when selecting mates like old bourgeois society used to do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson

    No, that means dysgenics is mainly a male problem. It is high IQ males who are willing to mate with lower IQ females and to have children with lower than IQ potential than their own.

    High IQ females tend not to accept lower IQ men as mates which means that when they do have children, it is highly eugenic, but they have a high risk of never finding a mate. Thus high IQ women have lower but more eugenic fertility than high IQ men. It is the extremely eugenic desires of high IQ women and the lack of eugenic desires among high IQ men that may create idiocracy.
     

    This is not dysgenic. Human fitness is not down to only IQ.

    It's also not really an issue in that not only is mean female IQ lower than mean male (by around 3 points IIRC) but female IQ has a narrower range. Over the IQ of 140 there are eight times as many men as women if memory serves.

    There’s of course no way to change these innate preferences but a society can work around them. It used to be taboo to marry outside of your class. Aristocrat families didn’t accept servant brides for their sons; the son of the lord maybe had such affairs but eventually a good marriage was arranged. My traced line of ancestry has landowners marrying daughters of landowners for centuries until the taboos broke in the 20th century – my reckless great-uncle still got disinherited for marrying a penniless waitress.

    These taboos maintained eugenic fertility within classes like aristocrats, landowners, merchants etc by limiting the *males* who were tempted to use their wealth to attract some pretty but poor woman. (People of course didn’t necessarily comprehend the eugenic aspect, they were thinking about the wealth and status of the family.) Women tended to limit themselves by not wanting to marry down.
     

    It's still taboo to marry outside of your class. I get routinely shamed for dating women far below my social class. All data also shows that assortative mating is going up, not down.

    Truly pretty girls are nearly all from higher classes as well as only they have the discipline and money to actually look good. They also have the resources and social knowledge to come into contact with high status men. The exception is when a prole girl gets discovered...for stripping or porn.

    In practice successful men also do not marry young girls, as society is heavily stratified by age and there's a bizarre taboo against dating 18-22 year old girls when you're over 30.

    Liberalism brought us dysgenic fertility by allowing successful men to marry anyone they want without shame and turns out they want young, pretty women above everything else. There is no eugenics to be gained by rolling back “women’s liberation” or putting some social pressure on high IQ women who are already de facto eugenicists. There might be eugenics to be gained from canceling “men’s liberation” and pressuring successful men to consider IQ proxies when selecting mates like old bourgeois society used to do.
     

    Of course there is.

    Eliminate female economic independence and high status women will married by 20 in general.

    , @Rosie

    There might be eugenics to be gained from canceling “men’s liberation” and pressuring successful men to consider IQ proxies when selecting mates like old bourgeois society used to do.
     
    The alt-Right makes a lot of noise about East Asian IQ, but I am not worried about it. East Asians are a threat because they steal our men. The real IQ threat comes from the Indian brahmins who have an extraordinarily high IQ as a result of caste endogamy.

    They have verbal as well as visuospatial prowess and are therefore a particular threat to both ruling-class Whites and middle-class Whites working in the tech sector. Oh, and they steal our men, too.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. @iffen
    Just sayin’…

    Thank the Good Lord that we have high caste S. Asians making beautiful brown high IQ babies with Nordic princesses to save us from ourselves. :)

    We’re doing our part…because we care…

    Also, on the side note – all of my kids are white – like WHITE. I was actually kind of shocked that none of them came out with very serious Pakistani looks. Well, the last guy is a bit tanned and has thicker eyebrows, but that’s about it.

    With my sister-in-law, who married a fairly swarthy Egyptian (with almost afro-style hair), both her daughters are very white and one of them got the light green eyes and blonde (though frizzy) hair. The other one is dark-haired and brown-eyed but got very straight hair – even though my sister in-law actually has curly hair also.

    European genes are fairly strong in expressing themselves when they want to – I have certainly been surprised thus far – we’ll see what happens when they try to have another.

    I was talking this over with a brother recently and the whole concept of “dysgenic” is really up for grabs – since what it really means is:
    “tending to promote survival of or reproduction by less well-adapted individuals (such as the weak or diseased) especially at the expense of well-adapted individuals (such as the strong or healthy)”

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dysgenic

    If High-IQ leads to maladaptation (as men like Dutton have mentioned*) then it is dysgenic once the dust clears. It’s not about what one likes – selection doesn’t care for feelz – it’s about what survives and propagates.We might like less hairy bodies, but if looking like a bear is advantageous, it will flourish…until it isn’t.

    We were talking about how it might be a great thing to have a 5-10% Sub-Saharan admixture (I don’t know if I do or not – thinking about doing a test) to keep an “edge” with regards to instinct.

    Peace.

    *He’s actually got a book coming out soon:

    http://books.imprint.co.uk/book/?gcoi=71157100317440

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    Also, on the side note – all of my kids are white – like WHITE.

    Good for them and you. There’s no denying that white privilege is the bee’s knees. However, just be forewarned that when that white skin gets 60-70 years old, it is going to look sad up against brown or black skin.

    “tending to promote survival of or reproduction by less well-adapted individuals (such as the weak or diseased) especially at the expense of well-adapted individuals (such as the strong or healthy)”

    The average IQ may be falling, but it is at the bottom of page three on the list of things that I worry about. Although, I can see well enough that shifting the curve to the left will reduce the right side tail, which would not be a good thing.

    Also, the politics of many of those most interested in “dysgenics” doesn’t appeal to me.

    In any case, the main problems that we have are high IQ people making very bad decisions. So I don’t see how worrying about a 1-2 point decline in the average can correct that situation.

    We were talking about how it might be a great thing to have a 5-10% Sub-Saharan admixture (I don’t know if I do or not – thinking about doing a test) to keep an “edge” with regards to instinct.

    This is off the chart so I’m not going to comment.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. @German_reader
    I'd suppose a lot of Sunni Muslims in Europe are in favour of bombing Assad's regime, the Arab and Turkish satellite channels they watch must be full of atrocity propaganda, and it's their co-religionists who are (supposedly) being gassed after all. Interesting question though, I wonder if anybody has collected data about that.

    I’d suppose a lot of Sunni Muslims in Europe are in favour of bombing Assad’s regime

    I don’t like Assad’s regime as far as I can throw them – I’d love for them to be booted out tomorrow.

    The problem is who will replace them – that might be worse. Sometimes better the devil you know…

    I mean, look at Libya – no thanks!

    As such, I’m for immediate cessation of hostilities and coming to the negotiating table. I’m following the lead of scholars like Shaykh Muhammad Yacoubi on this (who is currently in exile in Morocco).

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. @Jaakko Raipala
    No, that means dysgenics is mainly a male problem. It is high IQ males who are willing to mate with lower IQ females and to have children with lower than IQ potential than their own.

    High IQ females tend not to accept lower IQ men as mates which means that when they do have children, it is highly eugenic, but they have a high risk of never finding a mate. Thus high IQ women have lower but more eugenic fertility than high IQ men. It is the extremely eugenic desires of high IQ women and the lack of eugenic desires among high IQ men that may create idiocracy.

    There's of course no way to change these innate preferences but a society can work around them. It used to be taboo to marry outside of your class. Aristocrat families didn't accept servant brides for their sons; the son of the lord maybe had such affairs but eventually a good marriage was arranged. My traced line of ancestry has landowners marrying daughters of landowners for centuries until the taboos broke in the 20th century - my reckless great-uncle still got disinherited for marrying a penniless waitress.

    These taboos maintained eugenic fertility within classes like aristocrats, landowners, merchants etc by limiting the *males* who were tempted to use their wealth to attract some pretty but poor woman. (People of course didn't necessarily comprehend the eugenic aspect, they were thinking about the wealth and status of the family.) Women tended to limit themselves by not wanting to marry down.

    Liberalism brought us dysgenic fertility by allowing successful men to marry anyone they want without shame and turns out they want young, pretty women above everything else. There is no eugenics to be gained by rolling back "women's liberation" or putting some social pressure on high IQ women who are already de facto eugenicists. There might be eugenics to be gained from canceling "men's liberation" and pressuring successful men to consider IQ proxies when selecting mates like old bourgeois society used to do.

    No, that means dysgenics is mainly a male problem. It is high IQ males who are willing to mate with lower IQ females and to have children with lower than IQ potential than their own.

    High IQ females tend not to accept lower IQ men as mates which means that when they do have children, it is highly eugenic, but they have a high risk of never finding a mate. Thus high IQ women have lower but more eugenic fertility than high IQ men. It is the extremely eugenic desires of high IQ women and the lack of eugenic desires among high IQ men that may create idiocracy.

    This is not dysgenic. Human fitness is not down to only IQ.

    It’s also not really an issue in that not only is mean female IQ lower than mean male (by around 3 points IIRC) but female IQ has a narrower range. Over the IQ of 140 there are eight times as many men as women if memory serves.

    There’s of course no way to change these innate preferences but a society can work around them. It used to be taboo to marry outside of your class. Aristocrat families didn’t accept servant brides for their sons; the son of the lord maybe had such affairs but eventually a good marriage was arranged. My traced line of ancestry has landowners marrying daughters of landowners for centuries until the taboos broke in the 20th century – my reckless great-uncle still got disinherited for marrying a penniless waitress.

    These taboos maintained eugenic fertility within classes like aristocrats, landowners, merchants etc by limiting the *males* who were tempted to use their wealth to attract some pretty but poor woman. (People of course didn’t necessarily comprehend the eugenic aspect, they were thinking about the wealth and status of the family.) Women tended to limit themselves by not wanting to marry down.

    It’s still taboo to marry outside of your class. I get routinely shamed for dating women far below my social class. All data also shows that assortative mating is going up, not down.

    Truly pretty girls are nearly all from higher classes as well as only they have the discipline and money to actually look good. They also have the resources and social knowledge to come into contact with high status men. The exception is when a prole girl gets discovered…for stripping or porn.

    In practice successful men also do not marry young girls, as society is heavily stratified by age and there’s a bizarre taboo against dating 18-22 year old girls when you’re over 30.

    Liberalism brought us dysgenic fertility by allowing successful men to marry anyone they want without shame and turns out they want young, pretty women above everything else. There is no eugenics to be gained by rolling back “women’s liberation” or putting some social pressure on high IQ women who are already de facto eugenicists. There might be eugenics to be gained from canceling “men’s liberation” and pressuring successful men to consider IQ proxies when selecting mates like old bourgeois society used to do.

    Of course there is.

    Eliminate female economic independence and high status women will married by 20 in general.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    In practice successful men also do not marry young girls, as society is heavily stratified by age and there’s a bizarre taboo against dating 18-22 year old girls when you’re over 30.

     

    Don't run for the US senate. Everyone will call you a creep.
    , @Jaakko Raipala

    It’s still taboo to marry outside of your class. I get routinely shamed for dating women far below my social class.
     
    Shaming is not very comparable to being disowned and disinherited in a traditional society.

    All this talk about "female independence" being the problem again misses that there didn't used to be much male independence either. Let's say you were from a landowner family and your father disapproved of your marriage, disowning you and giving the inheritance to another son. What would you do? There wasn't any option of "get a student loan, sign up for school, get a job and then you tell your father that you don't need him". Failing family expectations was a fast road to poverty and selling yourself to serfdom.

    Modern society has broken the power that class and family had over individuals by creating many routes to a living that are totally independent of family background. The state has also crushed much of this power, eg. my great-uncle got disinherited because of a scandalous marriage but the courts would not accept that reason today and would enforce a minimum share of inheritance. You can now go against the wishes of your family without crushing material consequences.

    All data also shows that assortative mating is going up, not down.
     
    But that might still mean the female regular doctor marrying a male surgeon. You will always see the female desire for a higher status mate re-appear in every context.
    , @Rosie

    Eliminate female economic independence and high status women will married by 20 in general.
     
    I don't think that's a good idea. There is a tendency on the Right to oppose everything that is new. A degree of skepticism is certainly warranted, and that is what distinguishes us as men and women of the Right.

    The problem is that in this case the progressives may be correct. Women do not mature as quickly as once thought. Our brains apparently continue developing past our early twenties.

    Women who have children very early tend to get restless and feel they have "missed out." Divorce is much more common when a couple marries young, often because of an unplanned pregnancy.

    For me, it was very clear to me when I was ready, and I might have realized it even sooner if I had known the signs. Middle to late twenties is the Goldilocks standard, and given low infant mortality, there is really no reason to start any sooner than that. Marriage at 22 or 23, a few years as a couple to adjust to married life, and then children. Feeling that she has enjoyed her youth, a woman may choose to have more children than she would have otherwise, exactly because she is not in such a hurry to "get her life (and her body) back."

    , @Rosie

    It’s also not really an issue in that not only is mean female IQ lower than mean male (by around 3 points IIRC) but female IQ has a narrower range. Over the IQ of 140 there are eight times as many men as women if memory serves.
     
    This is tremendously important, and if we are to have a healthy patriarchy, we can't forget that working class women are likely to be married to an intellectual inferior who is not really fit for leadership and indeed may abuse his authority. Better men must be prepared to intervene.

    A man's home is not his castle unless he is an aristocrat, and coverture is not coming back.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. Anonymous[164] • Disclaimer says:
    @Thorfinnsson

    No, that means dysgenics is mainly a male problem. It is high IQ males who are willing to mate with lower IQ females and to have children with lower than IQ potential than their own.

    High IQ females tend not to accept lower IQ men as mates which means that when they do have children, it is highly eugenic, but they have a high risk of never finding a mate. Thus high IQ women have lower but more eugenic fertility than high IQ men. It is the extremely eugenic desires of high IQ women and the lack of eugenic desires among high IQ men that may create idiocracy.
     

    This is not dysgenic. Human fitness is not down to only IQ.

    It's also not really an issue in that not only is mean female IQ lower than mean male (by around 3 points IIRC) but female IQ has a narrower range. Over the IQ of 140 there are eight times as many men as women if memory serves.

    There’s of course no way to change these innate preferences but a society can work around them. It used to be taboo to marry outside of your class. Aristocrat families didn’t accept servant brides for their sons; the son of the lord maybe had such affairs but eventually a good marriage was arranged. My traced line of ancestry has landowners marrying daughters of landowners for centuries until the taboos broke in the 20th century – my reckless great-uncle still got disinherited for marrying a penniless waitress.

    These taboos maintained eugenic fertility within classes like aristocrats, landowners, merchants etc by limiting the *males* who were tempted to use their wealth to attract some pretty but poor woman. (People of course didn’t necessarily comprehend the eugenic aspect, they were thinking about the wealth and status of the family.) Women tended to limit themselves by not wanting to marry down.
     

    It's still taboo to marry outside of your class. I get routinely shamed for dating women far below my social class. All data also shows that assortative mating is going up, not down.

    Truly pretty girls are nearly all from higher classes as well as only they have the discipline and money to actually look good. They also have the resources and social knowledge to come into contact with high status men. The exception is when a prole girl gets discovered...for stripping or porn.

    In practice successful men also do not marry young girls, as society is heavily stratified by age and there's a bizarre taboo against dating 18-22 year old girls when you're over 30.

    Liberalism brought us dysgenic fertility by allowing successful men to marry anyone they want without shame and turns out they want young, pretty women above everything else. There is no eugenics to be gained by rolling back “women’s liberation” or putting some social pressure on high IQ women who are already de facto eugenicists. There might be eugenics to be gained from canceling “men’s liberation” and pressuring successful men to consider IQ proxies when selecting mates like old bourgeois society used to do.
     

    Of course there is.

    Eliminate female economic independence and high status women will married by 20 in general.

    In practice successful men also do not marry young girls, as society is heavily stratified by age and there’s a bizarre taboo against dating 18-22 year old girls when you’re over 30.

    Don’t run for the US senate. Everyone will call you a creep.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosie

    Don’t run for the US senate. Everyone will call you a creep.
     
    I don't like this, and I would not encourage my daughters to marry a man ten years older than they are for all sorts of reasons.

    First, if you are still single at 30, during your twenties you must have been either seducing young women, bedding prostitutes, or going without, none of which are ideal.

    Second, if you marry an older woman, he will see you as a dependent juvenile rather than an adult partner. A young woman marrying an older, established man has a certain whiff of quasiprostitution about it. If you don't get married when you are young and poor, how do you know your wife married you for live and companionship? The answer is that you don't, and lack of trust will remain an issue, though not necessarily a fatal one.

    As I noted above, women also need time to grow up and figure out who they are and what they want, for the sake of everyone's best interests.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. What a crazy world.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  108. anon[218] • Disclaimer says:

    There is no eugenics to be gained by rolling back “women’s liberation” or putting some social pressure on high IQ women who are already de facto eugenicists. There might be eugenics to be gained from canceling “men’s liberation” and pressuring successful men to consider IQ proxies when selecting mates like old bourgeois society used to do.

    Nah. Just follow original plan or Mr. Karlin: abolish sex completely and grow newer and better Russians in artificial wombs. This is the way of the future.

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/paper-review-artificial-wombs/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    Nah. Just follow original plan or Mr. Karlin: abolish sex completely and grow newer and better Russians in artificial wombs. This is the way of the future.

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/paper-review-artificial-wombs/
     
    This kind of thing is why Karlin is irreplaceable on the anglo-net - afterall, who else is advocating these days to create a new breed of man in artificial lamb's wombs.
    , @Mitleser
    The solutions to our present demographic problems are in past and/or future.
    Both are viable and should be tested.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. @Thorfinnsson

    No, that means dysgenics is mainly a male problem. It is high IQ males who are willing to mate with lower IQ females and to have children with lower than IQ potential than their own.

    High IQ females tend not to accept lower IQ men as mates which means that when they do have children, it is highly eugenic, but they have a high risk of never finding a mate. Thus high IQ women have lower but more eugenic fertility than high IQ men. It is the extremely eugenic desires of high IQ women and the lack of eugenic desires among high IQ men that may create idiocracy.
     

    This is not dysgenic. Human fitness is not down to only IQ.

    It's also not really an issue in that not only is mean female IQ lower than mean male (by around 3 points IIRC) but female IQ has a narrower range. Over the IQ of 140 there are eight times as many men as women if memory serves.

    There’s of course no way to change these innate preferences but a society can work around them. It used to be taboo to marry outside of your class. Aristocrat families didn’t accept servant brides for their sons; the son of the lord maybe had such affairs but eventually a good marriage was arranged. My traced line of ancestry has landowners marrying daughters of landowners for centuries until the taboos broke in the 20th century – my reckless great-uncle still got disinherited for marrying a penniless waitress.

    These taboos maintained eugenic fertility within classes like aristocrats, landowners, merchants etc by limiting the *males* who were tempted to use their wealth to attract some pretty but poor woman. (People of course didn’t necessarily comprehend the eugenic aspect, they were thinking about the wealth and status of the family.) Women tended to limit themselves by not wanting to marry down.
     

    It's still taboo to marry outside of your class. I get routinely shamed for dating women far below my social class. All data also shows that assortative mating is going up, not down.

    Truly pretty girls are nearly all from higher classes as well as only they have the discipline and money to actually look good. They also have the resources and social knowledge to come into contact with high status men. The exception is when a prole girl gets discovered...for stripping or porn.

    In practice successful men also do not marry young girls, as society is heavily stratified by age and there's a bizarre taboo against dating 18-22 year old girls when you're over 30.

    Liberalism brought us dysgenic fertility by allowing successful men to marry anyone they want without shame and turns out they want young, pretty women above everything else. There is no eugenics to be gained by rolling back “women’s liberation” or putting some social pressure on high IQ women who are already de facto eugenicists. There might be eugenics to be gained from canceling “men’s liberation” and pressuring successful men to consider IQ proxies when selecting mates like old bourgeois society used to do.
     

    Of course there is.

    Eliminate female economic independence and high status women will married by 20 in general.

    It’s still taboo to marry outside of your class. I get routinely shamed for dating women far below my social class.

    Shaming is not very comparable to being disowned and disinherited in a traditional society.

    All this talk about “female independence” being the problem again misses that there didn’t used to be much male independence either. Let’s say you were from a landowner family and your father disapproved of your marriage, disowning you and giving the inheritance to another son. What would you do? There wasn’t any option of “get a student loan, sign up for school, get a job and then you tell your father that you don’t need him”. Failing family expectations was a fast road to poverty and selling yourself to serfdom.

    Modern society has broken the power that class and family had over individuals by creating many routes to a living that are totally independent of family background. The state has also crushed much of this power, eg. my great-uncle got disinherited because of a scandalous marriage but the courts would not accept that reason today and would enforce a minimum share of inheritance. You can now go against the wishes of your family without crushing material consequences.

    All data also shows that assortative mating is going up, not down.

    But that might still mean the female regular doctor marrying a male surgeon. You will always see the female desire for a higher status mate re-appear in every context.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    It feels like you're being intentionally disingenuous. Reduced female status means that more resources go to men, who tend to "irresponsibly" use it for women and increase overall procreation especially by successful men(and beauty is highly corresponded with healthy, if not "high iq" children). Even with polygamy banned this still happened either through bastardy or serial monogamy, any casual analysis of history pre-mass feminism demonstrates this.

    Like one Scottish commentator used to say, there always seemed to be a few extra bright kids in the class then who "fell from the sky" but everyone knew that they were the result of the indiscretions of magistrates.

    Its simply this: men are much more into sex than women. With more resources given to men, a lot more sex will happen and in more combinations. You're going to have better results.
    , @Thorfinnsson


    Shaming is not very comparable to being disowned and disinherited in a traditional society.
     
    It is certainly not the same but it has an influence. I am of course in favor of restoring traditional strictures as you are, as such strictures are more effective then mere gossip and frowning.

    All this talk about “female independence” being the problem again misses that there didn’t used to be much male independence either. Let’s say you were from a landowner family and your father disapproved of your marriage, disowning you and giving the inheritance to another son. What would you do? There wasn’t any option of “get a student loan, sign up for school, get a job and then you tell your father that you don’t need him”. Failing family expectations was a fast road to poverty and selling yourself to serfdom.
     
    You make a good point I hadn't considered, and I will incorporate it into my thinking on this subject.

    There was, however, always an option of working outside of that. The option is easier now, but even in Medieval times there was geographic and social mobility.


    Modern society has broken the power that class and family had over individuals by creating many routes to a living that are totally independent of family background. The state has also crushed much of this power, eg. my great-uncle got disinherited because of a scandalous marriage but the courts would not accept that reason today and would enforce a minimum share of inheritance. You can now go against the wishes of your family without crushing material consequences.
     
    With respect to family control over job prospects this was eroded centuries ago, relatively speaking. I could not put a precise year on it, but certainly a talented but poor man could've moved to Amsterdam 400 years ago and done quite well. There were such stories in classical antiquity as well.

    The inheritance issue depends on the country. The rule in question does not exist in my country or, to my knowledge, other Anglo-Saxon countries. Here your will is not constrained by any laws.


    But that might still mean the female regular doctor marrying a male surgeon. You will always see the female desire for a higher status mate re-appear in every context.
     
    Indeed, which is why I told that other commenter that female mating preferences themselves are not dysgenic. What is dysgenic is delaying elite female reproduction until the 30s--or even 40s in a lot of sad cases.

    To you I counsel that men valuing beauty is not dysgenic at all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. Anonymous[204] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jaakko Raipala

    It’s still taboo to marry outside of your class. I get routinely shamed for dating women far below my social class.
     
    Shaming is not very comparable to being disowned and disinherited in a traditional society.

    All this talk about "female independence" being the problem again misses that there didn't used to be much male independence either. Let's say you were from a landowner family and your father disapproved of your marriage, disowning you and giving the inheritance to another son. What would you do? There wasn't any option of "get a student loan, sign up for school, get a job and then you tell your father that you don't need him". Failing family expectations was a fast road to poverty and selling yourself to serfdom.

    Modern society has broken the power that class and family had over individuals by creating many routes to a living that are totally independent of family background. The state has also crushed much of this power, eg. my great-uncle got disinherited because of a scandalous marriage but the courts would not accept that reason today and would enforce a minimum share of inheritance. You can now go against the wishes of your family without crushing material consequences.

    All data also shows that assortative mating is going up, not down.
     
    But that might still mean the female regular doctor marrying a male surgeon. You will always see the female desire for a higher status mate re-appear in every context.

    It feels like you’re being intentionally disingenuous. Reduced female status means that more resources go to men, who tend to “irresponsibly” use it for women and increase overall procreation especially by successful men(and beauty is highly corresponded with healthy, if not “high iq” children). Even with polygamy banned this still happened either through bastardy or serial monogamy, any casual analysis of history pre-mass feminism demonstrates this.

    Like one Scottish commentator used to say, there always seemed to be a few extra bright kids in the class then who “fell from the sky” but everyone knew that they were the result of the indiscretions of magistrates.

    Its simply this: men are much more into sex than women. With more resources given to men, a lot more sex will happen and in more combinations. You’re going to have better results.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. @anon

    There is no eugenics to be gained by rolling back “women’s liberation” or putting some social pressure on high IQ women who are already de facto eugenicists. There might be eugenics to be gained from canceling “men’s liberation” and pressuring successful men to consider IQ proxies when selecting mates like old bourgeois society used to do.

     

    Nah. Just follow original plan or Mr. Karlin: abolish sex completely and grow newer and better Russians in artificial wombs. This is the way of the future.

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/paper-review-artificial-wombs/

    Nah. Just follow original plan or Mr. Karlin: abolish sex completely and grow newer and better Russians in artificial wombs. This is the way of the future.

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/paper-review-artificial-wombs/

    This kind of thing is why Karlin is irreplaceable on the anglo-net – afterall, who else is advocating these days to create a new breed of man in artificial lamb’s wombs.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. @Anatoly Karlin
    That dysgenics is primarily a female problem is pretty well-known, e.g. https://jaymans.wordpress.com/2014/07/28/idiocracy-can-wait/

    It is also common sense. Having many children hampers intelligent successful men much less than intelligent successful women.

    You misunderstood. I didn’t mean to say that women’s reproductive behavior is not dysgenic. That is a separate question.

    I only meant to say that women’s mating preferences are not dysgenic.

    Birth control and abortion are dysgenic, and we often colloquially remark that “women are postponing childbirth.” In fact, it is often couples that postpone childbirth, which brings me to another source of dysgenic pressure: the end of job security. This is very discouraging to high-IQ men and women with foresight and the anxiety that goes along with that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @notanon

    I didn’t mean to say that women’s reproductive behavior is not dysgenic. That is a separate question. I only meant to say that women’s mating preferences are not dysgenic....snip...it is often couples that postpone childbirth, which brings me to another source of dysgenic pressure: the end of job security
     
    yes - the problem on the right-side isn't mating choices but actual reproductive behavior which at least among the 100-115 type range is largely an economic problem imo: stagnant wages + housing costs, + job security etc.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. @Thorfinnsson

    No, that means dysgenics is mainly a male problem. It is high IQ males who are willing to mate with lower IQ females and to have children with lower than IQ potential than their own.

    High IQ females tend not to accept lower IQ men as mates which means that when they do have children, it is highly eugenic, but they have a high risk of never finding a mate. Thus high IQ women have lower but more eugenic fertility than high IQ men. It is the extremely eugenic desires of high IQ women and the lack of eugenic desires among high IQ men that may create idiocracy.
     

    This is not dysgenic. Human fitness is not down to only IQ.

    It's also not really an issue in that not only is mean female IQ lower than mean male (by around 3 points IIRC) but female IQ has a narrower range. Over the IQ of 140 there are eight times as many men as women if memory serves.

    There’s of course no way to change these innate preferences but a society can work around them. It used to be taboo to marry outside of your class. Aristocrat families didn’t accept servant brides for their sons; the son of the lord maybe had such affairs but eventually a good marriage was arranged. My traced line of ancestry has landowners marrying daughters of landowners for centuries until the taboos broke in the 20th century – my reckless great-uncle still got disinherited for marrying a penniless waitress.

    These taboos maintained eugenic fertility within classes like aristocrats, landowners, merchants etc by limiting the *males* who were tempted to use their wealth to attract some pretty but poor woman. (People of course didn’t necessarily comprehend the eugenic aspect, they were thinking about the wealth and status of the family.) Women tended to limit themselves by not wanting to marry down.
     

    It's still taboo to marry outside of your class. I get routinely shamed for dating women far below my social class. All data also shows that assortative mating is going up, not down.

    Truly pretty girls are nearly all from higher classes as well as only they have the discipline and money to actually look good. They also have the resources and social knowledge to come into contact with high status men. The exception is when a prole girl gets discovered...for stripping or porn.

    In practice successful men also do not marry young girls, as society is heavily stratified by age and there's a bizarre taboo against dating 18-22 year old girls when you're over 30.

    Liberalism brought us dysgenic fertility by allowing successful men to marry anyone they want without shame and turns out they want young, pretty women above everything else. There is no eugenics to be gained by rolling back “women’s liberation” or putting some social pressure on high IQ women who are already de facto eugenicists. There might be eugenics to be gained from canceling “men’s liberation” and pressuring successful men to consider IQ proxies when selecting mates like old bourgeois society used to do.
     

    Of course there is.

    Eliminate female economic independence and high status women will married by 20 in general.

    Eliminate female economic independence and high status women will married by 20 in general.

    I don’t think that’s a good idea. There is a tendency on the Right to oppose everything that is new. A degree of skepticism is certainly warranted, and that is what distinguishes us as men and women of the Right.

    The problem is that in this case the progressives may be correct. Women do not mature as quickly as once thought. Our brains apparently continue developing past our early twenties.

    Women who have children very early tend to get restless and feel they have “missed out.” Divorce is much more common when a couple marries young, often because of an unplanned pregnancy.

    For me, it was very clear to me when I was ready, and I might have realized it even sooner if I had known the signs. Middle to late twenties is the Goldilocks standard, and given low infant mortality, there is really no reason to start any sooner than that. Marriage at 22 or 23, a few years as a couple to adjust to married life, and then children. Feeling that she has enjoyed her youth, a woman may choose to have more children than she would have otherwise, exactly because she is not in such a hurry to “get her life (and her body) back.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. @Anonymous

    In practice successful men also do not marry young girls, as society is heavily stratified by age and there’s a bizarre taboo against dating 18-22 year old girls when you’re over 30.

     

    Don't run for the US senate. Everyone will call you a creep.

    Don’t run for the US senate. Everyone will call you a creep.

    I don’t like this, and I would not encourage my daughters to marry a man ten years older than they are for all sorts of reasons.

    First, if you are still single at 30, during your twenties you must have been either seducing young women, bedding prostitutes, or going without, none of which are ideal.

    Second, if you marry an older woman, he will see you as a dependent juvenile rather than an adult partner. A young woman marrying an older, established man has a certain whiff of quasiprostitution about it. If you don’t get married when you are young and poor, how do you know your wife married you for live and companionship? The answer is that you don’t, and lack of trust will remain an issue, though not necessarily a fatal one.

    As I noted above, women also need time to grow up and figure out who they are and what they want, for the sake of everyone’s best interests.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson


    I don’t like this, and I would not encourage my daughters to marry a man ten years older than they are for all sorts of reasons.

    First, if you are still single at 30, during your twenties you must have been either seducing young women, bedding prostitutes, or going without, none of which are ideal.
     
    Being single at 30 as a successful man is quite normal--nor even new. During Greek classical antiquity the upper class typical marriage was a 30 year old man with a 15 year old woman. While I am not going to claim that the promiscuous behavior you allude to is optimal, it doesn't destroy a man's ability to love the way it does a woman.


    As I noted above, women also need time to grow up and figure out who they are and what they want, for the sake of everyone’s best interests.
     
    No, it isn't. It is in society's best interests for the best women to begin reproducing as soon as they are able. What they want is frankly irrelevant for society, though should be taken into consideration for their own benefit.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. @Jaakko Raipala
    No, that means dysgenics is mainly a male problem. It is high IQ males who are willing to mate with lower IQ females and to have children with lower than IQ potential than their own.

    High IQ females tend not to accept lower IQ men as mates which means that when they do have children, it is highly eugenic, but they have a high risk of never finding a mate. Thus high IQ women have lower but more eugenic fertility than high IQ men. It is the extremely eugenic desires of high IQ women and the lack of eugenic desires among high IQ men that may create idiocracy.

    There's of course no way to change these innate preferences but a society can work around them. It used to be taboo to marry outside of your class. Aristocrat families didn't accept servant brides for their sons; the son of the lord maybe had such affairs but eventually a good marriage was arranged. My traced line of ancestry has landowners marrying daughters of landowners for centuries until the taboos broke in the 20th century - my reckless great-uncle still got disinherited for marrying a penniless waitress.

    These taboos maintained eugenic fertility within classes like aristocrats, landowners, merchants etc by limiting the *males* who were tempted to use their wealth to attract some pretty but poor woman. (People of course didn't necessarily comprehend the eugenic aspect, they were thinking about the wealth and status of the family.) Women tended to limit themselves by not wanting to marry down.

    Liberalism brought us dysgenic fertility by allowing successful men to marry anyone they want without shame and turns out they want young, pretty women above everything else. There is no eugenics to be gained by rolling back "women's liberation" or putting some social pressure on high IQ women who are already de facto eugenicists. There might be eugenics to be gained from canceling "men's liberation" and pressuring successful men to consider IQ proxies when selecting mates like old bourgeois society used to do.

    There might be eugenics to be gained from canceling “men’s liberation” and pressuring successful men to consider IQ proxies when selecting mates like old bourgeois society used to do.

    The alt-Right makes a lot of noise about East Asian IQ, but I am not worried about it. East Asians are a threat because they steal our men. The real IQ threat comes from the Indian brahmins who have an extraordinarily high IQ as a result of caste endogamy.

    They have verbal as well as visuospatial prowess and are therefore a particular threat to both ruling-class Whites and middle-class Whites working in the tech sector. Oh, and they steal our men, too.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. @notanon
    left-side dysgenics is different from right-side dysgenics - they have kids but as they don't need male support as much (cos welfare) there's less need (as far as they currently know) for them to be choosy on IQ. if the media/academia told the truth they might still mostly have sex with chads but they'd mostly *reproduce* with nerds.

    guaranteed.

    there's no evidence for this yet cos everyone is currently being lied to about genetics > environment but if you know those kinds of populations you'd know what i'm saying is true - the only question is although it would have a big impact on the left-side how much of an impact it would have on the overall population average?

    (nb i'm not actually blaming women for this as the behavior i am talking about is based on them being fed false information. i was being sarcastic cos feminists annoy me.)

    Sorry to keep dumping long posts, but this is an interesting thread.

    I can’t claim to speak on the behavior of the left side of the bell curve. As for economically independent women on the right side, I would expect them to choose musicians, artists, poets, and philosophers.

    I share your indignation at the deceit concerning the genetics of intelligence, and I would hope dissemination of that information would influence women’s mating behaviors, but I don’t know that it would.

    You have to remember, some women have always fallen through the cracks. Not long ago, there was some discussion here about “fallen women.” If they were lucky, they could find a place in a workhouse. If not, they would die young of malnutrition or untreated disease or they would bleed to death after a botched back-alley abortion.

    The best way to channel women into healthy marriages is to improve economic prospects for young men. That way, when girls and young women fall pregnant, the father can marry and support the family. If he fails to do so, the taxpayer can take that up with him now that we have paternity testing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Heritage Paid Training Placements Summer 2018 – Further Information and How To Apply

    We are excited to be able to offer a number of training placements for undergraduates or recent graduates (graduated within the last 18 months) who are interested in gaining skills and experience as preparation for a career in heritage, and identify, as having Black, Asian or other Minority Ethnic Heritage or mixed heritage (please see below for more information why). There are placements available at:

    • Historic England,
    • English Heritage
    • The National Trust
    • Historic Houses
    • Llanthony Secunda Priory Trust
    • The Heritage Alliance.

    The placements programme is managed and coordinated by Historic England [sic]

    https://www.historicengland.org.uk/services-skills/training-skills/work-based-training/paid-training-placements/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  118. @Thorfinnsson

    No, that means dysgenics is mainly a male problem. It is high IQ males who are willing to mate with lower IQ females and to have children with lower than IQ potential than their own.

    High IQ females tend not to accept lower IQ men as mates which means that when they do have children, it is highly eugenic, but they have a high risk of never finding a mate. Thus high IQ women have lower but more eugenic fertility than high IQ men. It is the extremely eugenic desires of high IQ women and the lack of eugenic desires among high IQ men that may create idiocracy.
     

    This is not dysgenic. Human fitness is not down to only IQ.

    It's also not really an issue in that not only is mean female IQ lower than mean male (by around 3 points IIRC) but female IQ has a narrower range. Over the IQ of 140 there are eight times as many men as women if memory serves.

    There’s of course no way to change these innate preferences but a society can work around them. It used to be taboo to marry outside of your class. Aristocrat families didn’t accept servant brides for their sons; the son of the lord maybe had such affairs but eventually a good marriage was arranged. My traced line of ancestry has landowners marrying daughters of landowners for centuries until the taboos broke in the 20th century – my reckless great-uncle still got disinherited for marrying a penniless waitress.

    These taboos maintained eugenic fertility within classes like aristocrats, landowners, merchants etc by limiting the *males* who were tempted to use their wealth to attract some pretty but poor woman. (People of course didn’t necessarily comprehend the eugenic aspect, they were thinking about the wealth and status of the family.) Women tended to limit themselves by not wanting to marry down.
     

    It's still taboo to marry outside of your class. I get routinely shamed for dating women far below my social class. All data also shows that assortative mating is going up, not down.

    Truly pretty girls are nearly all from higher classes as well as only they have the discipline and money to actually look good. They also have the resources and social knowledge to come into contact with high status men. The exception is when a prole girl gets discovered...for stripping or porn.

    In practice successful men also do not marry young girls, as society is heavily stratified by age and there's a bizarre taboo against dating 18-22 year old girls when you're over 30.

    Liberalism brought us dysgenic fertility by allowing successful men to marry anyone they want without shame and turns out they want young, pretty women above everything else. There is no eugenics to be gained by rolling back “women’s liberation” or putting some social pressure on high IQ women who are already de facto eugenicists. There might be eugenics to be gained from canceling “men’s liberation” and pressuring successful men to consider IQ proxies when selecting mates like old bourgeois society used to do.
     

    Of course there is.

    Eliminate female economic independence and high status women will married by 20 in general.

    It’s also not really an issue in that not only is mean female IQ lower than mean male (by around 3 points IIRC) but female IQ has a narrower range. Over the IQ of 140 there are eight times as many men as women if memory serves.

    This is tremendously important, and if we are to have a healthy patriarchy, we can’t forget that working class women are likely to be married to an intellectual inferior who is not really fit for leadership and indeed may abuse his authority. Better men must be prepared to intervene.

    A man’s home is not his castle unless he is an aristocrat, and coverture is not coming back.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson


    This is tremendously important, and if we are to have a healthy patriarchy, we can’t forget that working class women are likely to be married to an intellectual inferior who is not really fit for leadership and indeed may abuse his authority. Better men must be prepared to intervene.

    A man’s home is not his castle unless he is an aristocrat, and coverture is not coming back.
     
    There is no reason whatsoever coverture can't come back, and as a legitimist I suggest it should come back.

    But that said you're making the same error as Notanon in focusing on IQ or wealth. Plenty of working class women are with men who are dumber than they are but none the less obey and adore for other reasons such as attractiveness, social dominance, or simply violence. I know in considerable detail as I employ these people.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. @Jaakko Raipala

    It’s still taboo to marry outside of your class. I get routinely shamed for dating women far below my social class.
     
    Shaming is not very comparable to being disowned and disinherited in a traditional society.

    All this talk about "female independence" being the problem again misses that there didn't used to be much male independence either. Let's say you were from a landowner family and your father disapproved of your marriage, disowning you and giving the inheritance to another son. What would you do? There wasn't any option of "get a student loan, sign up for school, get a job and then you tell your father that you don't need him". Failing family expectations was a fast road to poverty and selling yourself to serfdom.

    Modern society has broken the power that class and family had over individuals by creating many routes to a living that are totally independent of family background. The state has also crushed much of this power, eg. my great-uncle got disinherited because of a scandalous marriage but the courts would not accept that reason today and would enforce a minimum share of inheritance. You can now go against the wishes of your family without crushing material consequences.

    All data also shows that assortative mating is going up, not down.
     
    But that might still mean the female regular doctor marrying a male surgeon. You will always see the female desire for a higher status mate re-appear in every context.

    Shaming is not very comparable to being disowned and disinherited in a traditional society.

    It is certainly not the same but it has an influence. I am of course in favor of restoring traditional strictures as you are, as such strictures are more effective then mere gossip and frowning.

    All this talk about “female independence” being the problem again misses that there didn’t used to be much male independence either. Let’s say you were from a landowner family and your father disapproved of your marriage, disowning you and giving the inheritance to another son. What would you do? There wasn’t any option of “get a student loan, sign up for school, get a job and then you tell your father that you don’t need him”. Failing family expectations was a fast road to poverty and selling yourself to serfdom.

    You make a good point I hadn’t considered, and I will incorporate it into my thinking on this subject.

    There was, however, always an option of working outside of that. The option is easier now, but even in Medieval times there was geographic and social mobility.

    Modern society has broken the power that class and family had over individuals by creating many routes to a living that are totally independent of family background. The state has also crushed much of this power, eg. my great-uncle got disinherited because of a scandalous marriage but the courts would not accept that reason today and would enforce a minimum share of inheritance. You can now go against the wishes of your family without crushing material consequences.

    With respect to family control over job prospects this was eroded centuries ago, relatively speaking. I could not put a precise year on it, but certainly a talented but poor man could’ve moved to Amsterdam 400 years ago and done quite well. There were such stories in classical antiquity as well.

    The inheritance issue depends on the country. The rule in question does not exist in my country or, to my knowledge, other Anglo-Saxon countries. Here your will is not constrained by any laws.

    But that might still mean the female regular doctor marrying a male surgeon. You will always see the female desire for a higher status mate re-appear in every context.

    Indeed, which is why I told that other commenter that female mating preferences themselves are not dysgenic. What is dysgenic is delaying elite female reproduction until the 30s–or even 40s in a lot of sad cases.

    To you I counsel that men valuing beauty is not dysgenic at all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. @Rosie

    Don’t run for the US senate. Everyone will call you a creep.
     
    I don't like this, and I would not encourage my daughters to marry a man ten years older than they are for all sorts of reasons.

    First, if you are still single at 30, during your twenties you must have been either seducing young women, bedding prostitutes, or going without, none of which are ideal.

    Second, if you marry an older woman, he will see you as a dependent juvenile rather than an adult partner. A young woman marrying an older, established man has a certain whiff of quasiprostitution about it. If you don't get married when you are young and poor, how do you know your wife married you for live and companionship? The answer is that you don't, and lack of trust will remain an issue, though not necessarily a fatal one.

    As I noted above, women also need time to grow up and figure out who they are and what they want, for the sake of everyone's best interests.

    I don’t like this, and I would not encourage my daughters to marry a man ten years older than they are for all sorts of reasons.

    First, if you are still single at 30, during your twenties you must have been either seducing young women, bedding prostitutes, or going without, none of which are ideal.

    Being single at 30 as a successful man is quite normal–nor even new. During Greek classical antiquity the upper class typical marriage was a 30 year old man with a 15 year old woman. While I am not going to claim that the promiscuous behavior you allude to is optimal, it doesn’t destroy a man’s ability to love the way it does a woman.

    As I noted above, women also need time to grow up and figure out who they are and what they want, for the sake of everyone’s best interests.

    No, it isn’t. It is in society’s best interests for the best women to begin reproducing as soon as they are able. What they want is frankly irrelevant for society, though should be taken into consideration for their own benefit.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosie

    Being single at 30 as a successful man is quite normal–nor even new. During Greek classical antiquity the upper class typical marriage was a 30 year old man with a 15 year old woman.

     

    Gross.

    While I am not going to claim that the promiscuous behavior you allude to is optimal, it doesn’t destroy a man’s ability to love the way it does a woman.
     
    1. How do you know it destroys a woman's ability to love? I have seen no evidence of this other than a correlation between number of prior sexual partners and likelihood of divorce. This proves nothing. Presumably, the more partners you go through before finding one who wants to marry you, the less likely you are to be a good spouse.

    2. Moreover, if it does in fact destroy a woman's ability to love, philandering should be dealt with severely because it deprives another man of a loving wife by logical necessity.


    No, it isn’t. It is in society’s best interests for the best women to begin reproducing as soon as they are able. What they want is frankly irrelevant for society, though should be taken into consideration for their own benefit.
     
    This statement assumes that women's best interests are separate from society's best interests. This, of course, only makes sense if you don't consider women as part of society. It is reasonable to expect women to be mothers. It is not reasonable to expect girls to be mothers. This is the fundamental error the alt-Right makes about women. Many wrongly assume girls become women at puberty.

    As I said, early marriage contributes to divorce risk, which is bad for the whole family.

    , @notanon

    During Greek classical antiquity the upper class typical marriage was a 30 year old man with a 15 year old woman.
     
    and in western Europe it was early 20s for both parties which i think is probably optimal - the current problems with that traditional European marriage pattern are mostly economic imo (including the negative effects of education being turned into an accreditation scam leading to people spending too long in education without earnings)

    It is in society’s best interests for the best women to begin reproducing as soon as they are able.
     
    i think voluntary assortative mating on fully adult characteristics is better e.g. around early 20s - the only reason for making it earlier in the past was high child mortality imo - which we no longer an issue.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. @Rosie

    It’s also not really an issue in that not only is mean female IQ lower than mean male (by around 3 points IIRC) but female IQ has a narrower range. Over the IQ of 140 there are eight times as many men as women if memory serves.
     
    This is tremendously important, and if we are to have a healthy patriarchy, we can't forget that working class women are likely to be married to an intellectual inferior who is not really fit for leadership and indeed may abuse his authority. Better men must be prepared to intervene.

    A man's home is not his castle unless he is an aristocrat, and coverture is not coming back.

    This is tremendously important, and if we are to have a healthy patriarchy, we can’t forget that working class women are likely to be married to an intellectual inferior who is not really fit for leadership and indeed may abuse his authority. Better men must be prepared to intervene.

    A man’s home is not his castle unless he is an aristocrat, and coverture is not coming back.

    There is no reason whatsoever coverture can’t come back, and as a legitimist I suggest it should come back.

    But that said you’re making the same error as Notanon in focusing on IQ or wealth. Plenty of working class women are with men who are dumber than they are but none the less obey and adore for other reasons such as attractiveness, social dominance, or simply violence. I know in considerable detail as I employ these people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosie

    There is no reason whatsoever coverture can’t come back, and as a legitimist I suggest it should come back.
     
    No.

    But that said you’re making the same error as Notanon in focusing on IQ or wealth. Plenty of working class women are with men who are dumber than they are but none the less obey and adore for other reasons such as attractiveness, social dominance, or simply violence. I know in considerable detail as I employ these people.
     
    How is that a good or healthy situation?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. @Thorfinnsson


    This is tremendously important, and if we are to have a healthy patriarchy, we can’t forget that working class women are likely to be married to an intellectual inferior who is not really fit for leadership and indeed may abuse his authority. Better men must be prepared to intervene.

    A man’s home is not his castle unless he is an aristocrat, and coverture is not coming back.
     
    There is no reason whatsoever coverture can't come back, and as a legitimist I suggest it should come back.

    But that said you're making the same error as Notanon in focusing on IQ or wealth. Plenty of working class women are with men who are dumber than they are but none the less obey and adore for other reasons such as attractiveness, social dominance, or simply violence. I know in considerable detail as I employ these people.

    There is no reason whatsoever coverture can’t come back, and as a legitimist I suggest it should come back.

    No.

    But that said you’re making the same error as Notanon in focusing on IQ or wealth. Plenty of working class women are with men who are dumber than they are but none the less obey and adore for other reasons such as attractiveness, social dominance, or simply violence. I know in considerable detail as I employ these people.

    How is that a good or healthy situation?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. @Thorfinnsson


    I don’t like this, and I would not encourage my daughters to marry a man ten years older than they are for all sorts of reasons.

    First, if you are still single at 30, during your twenties you must have been either seducing young women, bedding prostitutes, or going without, none of which are ideal.
     
    Being single at 30 as a successful man is quite normal--nor even new. During Greek classical antiquity the upper class typical marriage was a 30 year old man with a 15 year old woman. While I am not going to claim that the promiscuous behavior you allude to is optimal, it doesn't destroy a man's ability to love the way it does a woman.


    As I noted above, women also need time to grow up and figure out who they are and what they want, for the sake of everyone’s best interests.
     
    No, it isn't. It is in society's best interests for the best women to begin reproducing as soon as they are able. What they want is frankly irrelevant for society, though should be taken into consideration for their own benefit.

    Being single at 30 as a successful man is quite normal–nor even new. During Greek classical antiquity the upper class typical marriage was a 30 year old man with a 15 year old woman.

    Gross.

    While I am not going to claim that the promiscuous behavior you allude to is optimal, it doesn’t destroy a man’s ability to love the way it does a woman.

    1. How do you know it destroys a woman’s ability to love? I have seen no evidence of this other than a correlation between number of prior sexual partners and likelihood of divorce. This proves nothing. Presumably, the more partners you go through before finding one who wants to marry you, the less likely you are to be a good spouse.

    2. Moreover, if it does in fact destroy a woman’s ability to love, philandering should be dealt with severely because it deprives another man of a loving wife by logical necessity.

    No, it isn’t. It is in society’s best interests for the best women to begin reproducing as soon as they are able. What they want is frankly irrelevant for society, though should be taken into consideration for their own benefit.

    This statement assumes that women’s best interests are separate from society’s best interests. This, of course, only makes sense if you don’t consider women as part of society. It is reasonable to expect women to be mothers. It is not reasonable to expect girls to be mothers. This is the fundamental error the alt-Right makes about women. Many wrongly assume girls become women at puberty.

    As I said, early marriage contributes to divorce risk, which is bad for the whole family.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson


    Gross.

     

    Why?


    1. How do you know it destroys a woman’s ability to love? I have seen no evidence of this other than a correlation between number of prior sexual partners and likelihood of divorce. This proves nothing. Presumably, the more partners you go through before finding one who wants to marry you, the less likely you are to be a good spouse.
     
    Uhh...didn't you just answer your own question here?


    2. Moreover, if it does in fact destroy a woman’s ability to love, philandering should be dealt with severely because it deprives another man of a loving wife by logical necessity.
     
    I don't disagree.


    This statement assumes that women’s best interests are separate from society’s best interests. This, of course, only makes sense if you don’t consider women as part of society. It is reasonable to expect women to be mothers. It is not reasonable to expect girls to be mothers. This is the fundamental error the alt-Right makes about women. Many wrongly assume girls become women at puberty.
     
    Well, on this level, I shouldn't need to pay capital gains taxes. It's in society's interests that I pay no taxes on my dividend income.


    As I said, early marriage contributes to divorce risk, which is bad for the whole family.
     
    Ban divorce. Problem solved.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. @Thorfinnsson
    This is dumb on two levels.

    The first is thinking that reproducing with chads is dysgenic.

    The second is thinking that accurate media propaganda will cause the most R-selected women to switch to k-selected reproduction.

    The first is thinking that reproducing with chads is dysgenic

    okay to spell it out more clearly

    say the eugenic optimum is some mixture of IQ (which i’m calling nerd) and overall physical health (which i’m calling chad) i’m saying women on the right-side of the Bell curve already pretty much make their mating choices around that optimum whereas with women on the left-side it’s skewed in the chad direction and that if media/academia told the truth they would shift towards a more 50/50 balance almost straight away. you wouldn’t notice much difference until the kids grew up but it would be there.

    #

    The second is thinking that accurate media propaganda will cause the most R-selected women to switch to k-selected reproduction.

    the most r-selected are the most likely as they care least about love/romance and will see it as a purely practical transaction

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. Being single at 30 as a successful man is quite normal–nor even new. During Greek classical antiquity the upper class typical marriage was a 30 year old man with a 15 year old woman.

    BTW, apart from the fact that there is no such thing as a 15 year old woman, my understanding is that the men of antiquity had other sexual outlets. It’s not a healthy model, especially for teenage boys.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Clearly someone has never read her Shakespeare. Women were considered nubile at menarche, usually 15 and began courtship soon after. Divorce/death lead to serial monogamy, essentially further increase in successful male genes.

    This is why talking to women is pointless. Feels > all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. @Rosie
    You misunderstood. I didn't mean to say that women's reproductive behavior is not dysgenic. That is a separate question.

    I only meant to say that women's mating preferences are not dysgenic.

    Birth control and abortion are dysgenic, and we often colloquially remark that "women are postponing childbirth." In fact, it is often couples that postpone childbirth, which brings me to another source of dysgenic pressure: the end of job security. This is very discouraging to high-IQ men and women with foresight and the anxiety that goes along with that.

    I didn’t mean to say that women’s reproductive behavior is not dysgenic. That is a separate question. I only meant to say that women’s mating preferences are not dysgenic….snip…it is often couples that postpone childbirth, which brings me to another source of dysgenic pressure: the end of job security

    yes – the problem on the right-side isn’t mating choices but actual reproductive behavior which at least among the 100-115 type range is largely an economic problem imo: stagnant wages + housing costs, + job security etc.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. @Thorfinnsson


    I don’t like this, and I would not encourage my daughters to marry a man ten years older than they are for all sorts of reasons.

    First, if you are still single at 30, during your twenties you must have been either seducing young women, bedding prostitutes, or going without, none of which are ideal.
     
    Being single at 30 as a successful man is quite normal--nor even new. During Greek classical antiquity the upper class typical marriage was a 30 year old man with a 15 year old woman. While I am not going to claim that the promiscuous behavior you allude to is optimal, it doesn't destroy a man's ability to love the way it does a woman.


    As I noted above, women also need time to grow up and figure out who they are and what they want, for the sake of everyone’s best interests.
     
    No, it isn't. It is in society's best interests for the best women to begin reproducing as soon as they are able. What they want is frankly irrelevant for society, though should be taken into consideration for their own benefit.

    During Greek classical antiquity the upper class typical marriage was a 30 year old man with a 15 year old woman.

    and in western Europe it was early 20s for both parties which i think is probably optimal – the current problems with that traditional European marriage pattern are mostly economic imo (including the negative effects of education being turned into an accreditation scam leading to people spending too long in education without earnings)

    It is in society’s best interests for the best women to begin reproducing as soon as they are able.

    i think voluntary assortative mating on fully adult characteristics is better e.g. around early 20s – the only reason for making it earlier in the past was high child mortality imo – which we no longer an issue.

    Read More
    • Agree: Rosie
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. Anonymous[220] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    Being single at 30 as a successful man is quite normal–nor even new. During Greek classical antiquity the upper class typical marriage was a 30 year old man with a 15 year old woman.
     
    BTW, apart from the fact that there is no such thing as a 15 year old woman, my understanding is that the men of antiquity had other sexual outlets. It's not a healthy model, especially for teenage boys.

    Clearly someone has never read her Shakespeare. Women were considered nubile at menarche, usually 15 and began courtship soon after. Divorce/death lead to serial monogamy, essentially further increase in successful male genes.

    This is why talking to women is pointless. Feels > all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosie

    Clearly someone has never read her Shakespeare. Women were considered nubile at menarche, usually 15 and began courtship soon after.
     
    That's quite a piece of logic there, fam.

    I don't agree with marrying girls off at 15.
    Therefore, I haven't read Shakespeare.

    Divorce/death lead to serial monogamy, essentially further increase in successful male genes.
     
    K. What's your point? Are you saying serial monogamy should be acceptable nowadays?

    This is why talking to women is pointless. Feels > all.
     
    I often get the impression that it's pointless to talk to anyone who says talking to women is pointless. Your chief concern is not truth or understanding but confirming your own contemptuous attitudes about women.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. @Rosie

    Being single at 30 as a successful man is quite normal–nor even new. During Greek classical antiquity the upper class typical marriage was a 30 year old man with a 15 year old woman.

     

    Gross.

    While I am not going to claim that the promiscuous behavior you allude to is optimal, it doesn’t destroy a man’s ability to love the way it does a woman.
     
    1. How do you know it destroys a woman's ability to love? I have seen no evidence of this other than a correlation between number of prior sexual partners and likelihood of divorce. This proves nothing. Presumably, the more partners you go through before finding one who wants to marry you, the less likely you are to be a good spouse.

    2. Moreover, if it does in fact destroy a woman's ability to love, philandering should be dealt with severely because it deprives another man of a loving wife by logical necessity.


    No, it isn’t. It is in society’s best interests for the best women to begin reproducing as soon as they are able. What they want is frankly irrelevant for society, though should be taken into consideration for their own benefit.
     
    This statement assumes that women's best interests are separate from society's best interests. This, of course, only makes sense if you don't consider women as part of society. It is reasonable to expect women to be mothers. It is not reasonable to expect girls to be mothers. This is the fundamental error the alt-Right makes about women. Many wrongly assume girls become women at puberty.

    As I said, early marriage contributes to divorce risk, which is bad for the whole family.

    Gross.

    Why?

    1. How do you know it destroys a woman’s ability to love? I have seen no evidence of this other than a correlation between number of prior sexual partners and likelihood of divorce. This proves nothing. Presumably, the more partners you go through before finding one who wants to marry you, the less likely you are to be a good spouse.

    Uhh…didn’t you just answer your own question here?

    2. Moreover, if it does in fact destroy a woman’s ability to love, philandering should be dealt with severely because it deprives another man of a loving wife by logical necessity.

    I don’t disagree.

    This statement assumes that women’s best interests are separate from society’s best interests. This, of course, only makes sense if you don’t consider women as part of society. It is reasonable to expect women to be mothers. It is not reasonable to expect girls to be mothers. This is the fundamental error the alt-Right makes about women. Many wrongly assume girls become women at puberty.

    Well, on this level, I shouldn’t need to pay capital gains taxes. It’s in society’s interests that I pay no taxes on my dividend income.

    As I said, early marriage contributes to divorce risk, which is bad for the whole family.

    Ban divorce. Problem solved.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosie

    Why?
     
    Things that are gross are gross for no particular reason. Disgust is not a rational response, but it is often a healthy one.

    Fifteen year old girls are not attracted to leering 30 year old men.


    Uhh…didn’t you just answer your own question here?
     
    No. A correlation between number of premarital sex partners and divorce risk in no way proves causation. Religiosity, for example, is correlated with lower divorce risk and fewer sex partners, and could be the causal factor behind both of these. You said sleeping around "destroys a woman's ability to love." That is a claim of causation that requires supporting evidence.

    Well, on this level, I shouldn’t need to pay capital gains taxes. It’s in society’s interests that I pay no taxes on my dividend income.
     
    That is a utilitarian calculation that I don't have the knowledge to evaluate.

    I will say this. One could just as easily ridicule your point of view by saying that the state should be free to take your property without compensation on the grounds that the needs of society are paramount and individual interests don't matter, even if those individuals comprise 50% of the population.


    Ban divorce. Problem solved.
     
    Except that the woman is still unhappy as a result of having been deprived of her youth, but I can see that means nothing to you.

    Coercion is sometimes necessary, but should always be a last resort.

    BTW if we ban divorce, does that mean we can stop obsessing over women's sexual histories? Like you said, problem solved.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. @Anonymous
    Clearly someone has never read her Shakespeare. Women were considered nubile at menarche, usually 15 and began courtship soon after. Divorce/death lead to serial monogamy, essentially further increase in successful male genes.

    This is why talking to women is pointless. Feels > all.

    Clearly someone has never read her Shakespeare. Women were considered nubile at menarche, usually 15 and began courtship soon after.

    That’s quite a piece of logic there, fam.

    I don’t agree with marrying girls off at 15.
    Therefore, I haven’t read Shakespeare.

    Divorce/death lead to serial monogamy, essentially further increase in successful male genes.

    K. What’s your point? Are you saying serial monogamy should be acceptable nowadays?

    This is why talking to women is pointless. Feels > all.

    I often get the impression that it’s pointless to talk to anyone who says talking to women is pointless. Your chief concern is not truth or understanding but confirming your own contemptuous attitudes about women.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. @Thorfinnsson


    Gross.

     

    Why?


    1. How do you know it destroys a woman’s ability to love? I have seen no evidence of this other than a correlation between number of prior sexual partners and likelihood of divorce. This proves nothing. Presumably, the more partners you go through before finding one who wants to marry you, the less likely you are to be a good spouse.
     
    Uhh...didn't you just answer your own question here?


    2. Moreover, if it does in fact destroy a woman’s ability to love, philandering should be dealt with severely because it deprives another man of a loving wife by logical necessity.
     
    I don't disagree.


    This statement assumes that women’s best interests are separate from society’s best interests. This, of course, only makes sense if you don’t consider women as part of society. It is reasonable to expect women to be mothers. It is not reasonable to expect girls to be mothers. This is the fundamental error the alt-Right makes about women. Many wrongly assume girls become women at puberty.
     
    Well, on this level, I shouldn't need to pay capital gains taxes. It's in society's interests that I pay no taxes on my dividend income.


    As I said, early marriage contributes to divorce risk, which is bad for the whole family.
     
    Ban divorce. Problem solved.

    Why?

    Things that are gross are gross for no particular reason. Disgust is not a rational response, but it is often a healthy one.

    Fifteen year old girls are not attracted to leering 30 year old men.

    Uhh…didn’t you just answer your own question here?

    No. A correlation between number of premarital sex partners and divorce risk in no way proves causation. Religiosity, for example, is correlated with lower divorce risk and fewer sex partners, and could be the causal factor behind both of these. You said sleeping around “destroys a woman’s ability to love.” That is a claim of causation that requires supporting evidence.

    Well, on this level, I shouldn’t need to pay capital gains taxes. It’s in society’s interests that I pay no taxes on my dividend income.

    That is a utilitarian calculation that I don’t have the knowledge to evaluate.

    I will say this. One could just as easily ridicule your point of view by saying that the state should be free to take your property without compensation on the grounds that the needs of society are paramount and individual interests don’t matter, even if those individuals comprise 50% of the population.

    Ban divorce. Problem solved.

    Except that the woman is still unhappy as a result of having been deprived of her youth, but I can see that means nothing to you.

    Coercion is sometimes necessary, but should always be a last resort.

    BTW if we ban divorce, does that mean we can stop obsessing over women’s sexual histories? Like you said, problem solved.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    The problem is that most women lose their attractiveness in their 30s. Whereas successful guys can started to get more dating options.

    It's been this way always, but expressed in different ways culturally.

    The gross situation, is when Igor Sechin gets some young wife who just wants a big house.

    But for a normal situation of age gap of some ten years or so, it is nothing unusual, in any time or culture in history.
    , @Thorfinnsson


    Things that are gross are gross for no particular reason. Disgust is not a rational response, but it is often a healthy one.

    Fifteen year old girls are not attracted to leering 30 year old men.
     
    How does it feel to be wrong?

    This is a bizarre contention peculiar to American society. It does not exist elsewhere, nor do American girls even behave the way weirdo age gap police contend they should. When I conduct career fairs at high schools I have to stop girls from hitting on me.


    No. A correlation between number of premarital sex partners and divorce risk in no way proves causation. Religiosity, for example, is correlated with lower divorce risk and fewer sex partners, and could be the causal factor behind both of these. You said sleeping around “destroys a woman’s ability to love.” That is a claim of causation that requires supporting evidence.
     
    Correlation does not prove causation, but it implies causation. There is no way in hell we are going to get a controlled double-blind experiment on this.

    As an example men can have affairs while still loving their wives. When women have affairs, they fall out of love with their husbands and in love with their lovers.


    That is a utilitarian calculation that I don’t have the knowledge to evaluate.

    I will say this. One could just as easily ridicule your point of view by saying that the state should be free to take your property without compensation on the grounds that the needs of society are paramount and individual interests don’t matter, even if those individuals comprise 50% of the population.
     
    Your example of ridicule has been seriously attempted by communists. You're free to evaluate the results.


    Except that the woman is still unhappy as a result of having been deprived of her youth, but I can see that means nothing to you.

    Coercion is sometimes necessary, but should always be a last resort.

    BTW if we ban divorce, does that mean we can stop obsessing over women’s sexual histories? Like you said, problem solved.
     
    What does deprived of her youth even mean? This is pure gibberish.

    Banning divorce is a legal matter.

    One can no more ban "obsessing over women's sexual histories" than one can ban women obsessing over "tall dark and handsome".
    , @Anonymous
    Is there a strange reason why you feel the desire to troll a Russian blog: this is a country which is far more "based" by Alt-Right standards, and where feminism has made such inroads that the expectations that pretty secretaries are servicing their bosses is usually true. You have to be some sort of joke.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. @Rosie

    Why?
     
    Things that are gross are gross for no particular reason. Disgust is not a rational response, but it is often a healthy one.

    Fifteen year old girls are not attracted to leering 30 year old men.


    Uhh…didn’t you just answer your own question here?
     
    No. A correlation between number of premarital sex partners and divorce risk in no way proves causation. Religiosity, for example, is correlated with lower divorce risk and fewer sex partners, and could be the causal factor behind both of these. You said sleeping around "destroys a woman's ability to love." That is a claim of causation that requires supporting evidence.

    Well, on this level, I shouldn’t need to pay capital gains taxes. It’s in society’s interests that I pay no taxes on my dividend income.
     
    That is a utilitarian calculation that I don't have the knowledge to evaluate.

    I will say this. One could just as easily ridicule your point of view by saying that the state should be free to take your property without compensation on the grounds that the needs of society are paramount and individual interests don't matter, even if those individuals comprise 50% of the population.


    Ban divorce. Problem solved.
     
    Except that the woman is still unhappy as a result of having been deprived of her youth, but I can see that means nothing to you.

    Coercion is sometimes necessary, but should always be a last resort.

    BTW if we ban divorce, does that mean we can stop obsessing over women's sexual histories? Like you said, problem solved.

    The problem is that most women lose their attractiveness in their 30s. Whereas successful guys can started to get more dating options.

    It’s been this way always, but expressed in different ways culturally.

    The gross situation, is when Igor Sechin gets some young wife who just wants a big house.

    But for a normal situation of age gap of some ten years or so, it is nothing unusual, in any time or culture in history.

    Read More
    • Replies: @notanon

    But for a normal situation of age gap of some ten years or so, it is nothing unusual, in any time or culture in history.
     
    not true (uniquely) in western Europe over the last n centuries or so and maybe earlier in some regions

    now it may not matter but given the different trajectory in Europe compared to the rest of the world maybe it was important in some way
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. @anon

    There is no eugenics to be gained by rolling back “women’s liberation” or putting some social pressure on high IQ women who are already de facto eugenicists. There might be eugenics to be gained from canceling “men’s liberation” and pressuring successful men to consider IQ proxies when selecting mates like old bourgeois society used to do.

     

    Nah. Just follow original plan or Mr. Karlin: abolish sex completely and grow newer and better Russians in artificial wombs. This is the way of the future.

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/paper-review-artificial-wombs/

    The solutions to our present demographic problems are in past and/or future.
    Both are viable and should be tested.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. OT I finally got the significance of “Lusitania” in the post title.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  135. @Talha
    We're doing our part...because we care...

    Also, on the side note - all of my kids are white - like WHITE. I was actually kind of shocked that none of them came out with very serious Pakistani looks. Well, the last guy is a bit tanned and has thicker eyebrows, but that's about it.

    With my sister-in-law, who married a fairly swarthy Egyptian (with almost afro-style hair), both her daughters are very white and one of them got the light green eyes and blonde (though frizzy) hair. The other one is dark-haired and brown-eyed but got very straight hair - even though my sister in-law actually has curly hair also.

    European genes are fairly strong in expressing themselves when they want to - I have certainly been surprised thus far - we'll see what happens when they try to have another.

    I was talking this over with a brother recently and the whole concept of "dysgenic" is really up for grabs - since what it really means is:
    "tending to promote survival of or reproduction by less well-adapted individuals (such as the weak or diseased) especially at the expense of well-adapted individuals (such as the strong or healthy)"
    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dysgenic

    If High-IQ leads to maladaptation (as men like Dutton have mentioned*) then it is dysgenic once the dust clears. It's not about what one likes - selection doesn't care for feelz - it's about what survives and propagates.We might like less hairy bodies, but if looking like a bear is advantageous, it will flourish...until it isn't.

    We were talking about how it might be a great thing to have a 5-10% Sub-Saharan admixture (I don't know if I do or not - thinking about doing a test) to keep an "edge" with regards to instinct.

    Peace.

    *He's actually got a book coming out soon:
    http://books.imprint.co.uk/book/?gcoi=71157100317440

    Also, on the side note – all of my kids are white – like WHITE.

    Good for them and you. There’s no denying that white privilege is the bee’s knees. However, just be forewarned that when that white skin gets 60-70 years old, it is going to look sad up against brown or black skin.

    “tending to promote survival of or reproduction by less well-adapted individuals (such as the weak or diseased) especially at the expense of well-adapted individuals (such as the strong or healthy)”

    The average IQ may be falling, but it is at the bottom of page three on the list of things that I worry about. Although, I can see well enough that shifting the curve to the left will reduce the right side tail, which would not be a good thing.

    Also, the politics of many of those most interested in “dysgenics” doesn’t appeal to me.

    In any case, the main problems that we have are high IQ people making very bad decisions. So I don’t see how worrying about a 1-2 point decline in the average can correct that situation.

    We were talking about how it might be a great thing to have a 5-10% Sub-Saharan admixture (I don’t know if I do or not – thinking about doing a test) to keep an “edge” with regards to instinct.

    This is off the chart so I’m not going to comment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    when that white skin gets 60-70 years old, it is going to look sad up against brown or black skin
     
    My wife is super-afraid of this; age was not kind to my mother-in-law. While one of the Chinese brothers I knew in UCLA - his mother seemed perpetually stuck at like 40. God apportions His favors among mankind as He wills.

    The average IQ may be falling, but it is at the bottom of page three on the list of things that I worry about.
     
    Agreed, but this is sky-is-falling-armaggedon-kaliyuga for plenty of others around here.

    Also, the politics of many of those most interested in “dysgenics” doesn’t appeal to me.
     
    Agreed.
    In

    any case, the main problems that we have are high IQ people making very bad decisions.
     
    More evidence that High-IQ is dysgenic. Just sayin'...

    This is off the chart so I’m not going to comment.
     
    I'm a baller! :)

    Peace.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. @Rosie

    Why?
     
    Things that are gross are gross for no particular reason. Disgust is not a rational response, but it is often a healthy one.

    Fifteen year old girls are not attracted to leering 30 year old men.


    Uhh…didn’t you just answer your own question here?
     
    No. A correlation between number of premarital sex partners and divorce risk in no way proves causation. Religiosity, for example, is correlated with lower divorce risk and fewer sex partners, and could be the causal factor behind both of these. You said sleeping around "destroys a woman's ability to love." That is a claim of causation that requires supporting evidence.

    Well, on this level, I shouldn’t need to pay capital gains taxes. It’s in society’s interests that I pay no taxes on my dividend income.
     
    That is a utilitarian calculation that I don't have the knowledge to evaluate.

    I will say this. One could just as easily ridicule your point of view by saying that the state should be free to take your property without compensation on the grounds that the needs of society are paramount and individual interests don't matter, even if those individuals comprise 50% of the population.


    Ban divorce. Problem solved.
     
    Except that the woman is still unhappy as a result of having been deprived of her youth, but I can see that means nothing to you.

    Coercion is sometimes necessary, but should always be a last resort.

    BTW if we ban divorce, does that mean we can stop obsessing over women's sexual histories? Like you said, problem solved.

    Things that are gross are gross for no particular reason. Disgust is not a rational response, but it is often a healthy one.

    Fifteen year old girls are not attracted to leering 30 year old men.

    How does it feel to be wrong?

    This is a bizarre contention peculiar to American society. It does not exist elsewhere, nor do American girls even behave the way weirdo age gap police contend they should. When I conduct career fairs at high schools I have to stop girls from hitting on me.

    No. A correlation between number of premarital sex partners and divorce risk in no way proves causation. Religiosity, for example, is correlated with lower divorce risk and fewer sex partners, and could be the causal factor behind both of these. You said sleeping around “destroys a woman’s ability to love.” That is a claim of causation that requires supporting evidence.

    Correlation does not prove causation, but it implies causation. There is no way in hell we are going to get a controlled double-blind experiment on this.

    As an example men can have affairs while still loving their wives. When women have affairs, they fall out of love with their husbands and in love with their lovers.

    That is a utilitarian calculation that I don’t have the knowledge to evaluate.

    I will say this. One could just as easily ridicule your point of view by saying that the state should be free to take your property without compensation on the grounds that the needs of society are paramount and individual interests don’t matter, even if those individuals comprise 50% of the population.

    Your example of ridicule has been seriously attempted by communists. You’re free to evaluate the results.

    Except that the woman is still unhappy as a result of having been deprived of her youth, but I can see that means nothing to you.

    Coercion is sometimes necessary, but should always be a last resort.

    BTW if we ban divorce, does that mean we can stop obsessing over women’s sexual histories? Like you said, problem solved.

    What does deprived of her youth even mean? This is pure gibberish.

    Banning divorce is a legal matter.

    One can no more ban “obsessing over women’s sexual histories” than one can ban women obsessing over “tall dark and handsome”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosie

    How does it feel to be wrong?
     
    You're about ready to find out.

    Manosphere types say women act like children. The ironies never cease.

    This is a bizarre contention peculiar to American society. It does not exist elsewhere, nor do American girls even behave the way weirdo age gap police contend they should. When I conduct career fairs at high schools I have to stop girls from hitting on me.
     
    I'm not interested in policing anyone at all. In fact, I think it was you who said upthread that you want to force women into marriage by the age of 20 by preventing them from earning an independent living. Come to think of it, why would you need to force women out of the workplace if what they really want is to marry at 15 a man twice their age.

    There is nothing whatsoever that is bizarre about not wanting 15 year olds to marry and have children, and if other cultures don't understand that, that doesn't mean we should emulate them. Onset of puberty is but one aspect of sexual maturity. Adolescent maternal mortality is double the rate of women in their early twenties.

    http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/publications-a-z/436-adolescent-maternal-mortality-an-overlooked-crisis

    Curiously, even teen boys seem to have an instinctual knowledge that teen girls are too young to have children. They are the sole exception to the general male preference for youth. They prefer older partners, i.e. women in their twenties. I suspect that populations in which teenage boys preferred older women did a better job of ensuring that their women survived to peak fertility with their reproductive health intact.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8890497

    This would of course explain why nobody much cares when hot teachers get caught fooling around with teen boys.

    Correlation does not prove causation, but it implies causation. There is no way in hell we are going to get a controlled double-blind experiment on this.
     
    Correlation can be said to imply causation only when there are no plausible but untested alternative hypotheses, and of course you don't need a "controlled double-blind experiment." You just need a study that controls for confounding factors such as church attendance and age at first marriage.

    As an example men can have affairs while still loving their wives. When women have affairs, they fall out of love with their husbands and in love with their lovers.
     
    Surely you realize that the falling out of love is the cause, not the result, of the affair. So much of what I hear about women in these parts are just transparent attempts to justify baseless double standards.

    Your example of ridicule has been seriously attempted by communists. You’re free to evaluate the results.
     
    The point remains: Ridicule proves nothing, as I'm sure you are well aware.

    What does deprived of her youth even mean? This is pure gibberish.
     
    Youth is for study, character development, and adventure, beauty over duty.

    ब्रह्मचर्येण कन्या युवानं विन्दते पतिम् |

    A youthful Kanya (कन्या, girl) who graduates from Brahmacharya, obtains a suitable husband.
    — Atharva Veda, 11.5.18[34]

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmacharya
    , @notanon

    This is a bizarre contention peculiar to American society.
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajnal_line

    West of this line, the average age of marriage for women was 23 or more,[3] men 26, spouses were relatively close in age,
     
    that's the traditional marriage pattern in most of Western Europe (and hence their diaspora)

    and possibly going back a long way in some regions

    https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Germania_(Church_%26_Brodribb)

    The young men marry late, and their vigour is thus unimpaired. Nor are the maidens hurried into marriage; the same age and a similar stature is required; well-matched and vigorous they wed, and the offspring reproduce the strength of the parents.
     
    I agree this is unique in the world and almost everywhere else child brides are/were the norm but in western Europe the norm was relatively late and similar aged marriage.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. Anonymous[164] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    Why?
     
    Things that are gross are gross for no particular reason. Disgust is not a rational response, but it is often a healthy one.

    Fifteen year old girls are not attracted to leering 30 year old men.


    Uhh…didn’t you just answer your own question here?
     
    No. A correlation between number of premarital sex partners and divorce risk in no way proves causation. Religiosity, for example, is correlated with lower divorce risk and fewer sex partners, and could be the causal factor behind both of these. You said sleeping around "destroys a woman's ability to love." That is a claim of causation that requires supporting evidence.

    Well, on this level, I shouldn’t need to pay capital gains taxes. It’s in society’s interests that I pay no taxes on my dividend income.
     
    That is a utilitarian calculation that I don't have the knowledge to evaluate.

    I will say this. One could just as easily ridicule your point of view by saying that the state should be free to take your property without compensation on the grounds that the needs of society are paramount and individual interests don't matter, even if those individuals comprise 50% of the population.


    Ban divorce. Problem solved.
     
    Except that the woman is still unhappy as a result of having been deprived of her youth, but I can see that means nothing to you.

    Coercion is sometimes necessary, but should always be a last resort.

    BTW if we ban divorce, does that mean we can stop obsessing over women's sexual histories? Like you said, problem solved.

    Is there a strange reason why you feel the desire to troll a Russian blog: this is a country which is far more “based” by Alt-Right standards, and where feminism has made such inroads that the expectations that pretty secretaries are servicing their bosses is usually true. You have to be some sort of joke.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosie

    Is there a strange reason why you feel the desire to troll a Russian blog: this is a country which is far more “based” by Alt-Right standards, and where feminism has made such inroads that the expectations that pretty secretaries are servicing their bosses is usually true. You have to be some sort of joke.
     
    Trolling am I? No. I'm just holding you accountable. If men are going to talk about women under the alt-Right banner, prepare to defend your views. On the other hand, if you want to crawl back under the manosphere rock where no one can see you, I don't care what you say.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. @iffen
    Also, on the side note – all of my kids are white – like WHITE.

    Good for them and you. There’s no denying that white privilege is the bee’s knees. However, just be forewarned that when that white skin gets 60-70 years old, it is going to look sad up against brown or black skin.

    “tending to promote survival of or reproduction by less well-adapted individuals (such as the weak or diseased) especially at the expense of well-adapted individuals (such as the strong or healthy)”

    The average IQ may be falling, but it is at the bottom of page three on the list of things that I worry about. Although, I can see well enough that shifting the curve to the left will reduce the right side tail, which would not be a good thing.

    Also, the politics of many of those most interested in “dysgenics” doesn’t appeal to me.

    In any case, the main problems that we have are high IQ people making very bad decisions. So I don’t see how worrying about a 1-2 point decline in the average can correct that situation.

    We were talking about how it might be a great thing to have a 5-10% Sub-Saharan admixture (I don’t know if I do or not – thinking about doing a test) to keep an “edge” with regards to instinct.

    This is off the chart so I’m not going to comment.

    when that white skin gets 60-70 years old, it is going to look sad up against brown or black skin

    My wife is super-afraid of this; age was not kind to my mother-in-law. While one of the Chinese brothers I knew in UCLA – his mother seemed perpetually stuck at like 40. God apportions His favors among mankind as He wills.

    The average IQ may be falling, but it is at the bottom of page three on the list of things that I worry about.

    Agreed, but this is sky-is-falling-armaggedon-kaliyuga for plenty of others around here.

    Also, the politics of many of those most interested in “dysgenics” doesn’t appeal to me.

    Agreed.
    In

    any case, the main problems that we have are high IQ people making very bad decisions.

    More evidence that High-IQ is dysgenic. Just sayin’…

    This is off the chart so I’m not going to comment.

    I’m a baller! :)

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon

    My wife is super-afraid of this; age was not kind to my mother-in-law. While one of the Chinese brothers I knew in UCLA – his mother seemed perpetually stuck at like 40. God apportions His favors among mankind as He wills.
     
    An old woman has a unique dignity not available to the "sexually available" (to coin a phrase). I wouldn't worry if I were her.

    More evidence that High-IQ is dysgenic. Just sayin’…
     
    Well, I don't know. It's around, isn't it? And you, for one example, certainly aren't a murderous fanatic. I think it's certainly true that positions of power tend to attract vicious people, but if they were to attract vicious and stupid people I'm not sure that would be much of an improvement.
    , @Anon

    My wife is super-afraid of this; age was not kind to my mother-in-law. While one of the Chinese brothers I knew in UCLA – his mother seemed perpetually stuck at like 40. God apportions His favors among mankind as He wills.
     
    An old woman has a unique dignity not available to the "sexually available" (to coin a phrase). I wouldn't worry if I were her.

    More evidence that High-IQ is dysgenic. Just sayin’…
     
    Well, I don't know. It's around, isn't it? And you, for one example, certainly aren't a murderous fanatic. I think it's certainly true that positions of power tend to attract vicious people, but if they were to attract vicious and stupid people I'm not sure that would be much of an improvement.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. @Thorfinnsson


    Things that are gross are gross for no particular reason. Disgust is not a rational response, but it is often a healthy one.

    Fifteen year old girls are not attracted to leering 30 year old men.
     
    How does it feel to be wrong?

    This is a bizarre contention peculiar to American society. It does not exist elsewhere, nor do American girls even behave the way weirdo age gap police contend they should. When I conduct career fairs at high schools I have to stop girls from hitting on me.


    No. A correlation between number of premarital sex partners and divorce risk in no way proves causation. Religiosity, for example, is correlated with lower divorce risk and fewer sex partners, and could be the causal factor behind both of these. You said sleeping around “destroys a woman’s ability to love.” That is a claim of causation that requires supporting evidence.
     
    Correlation does not prove causation, but it implies causation. There is no way in hell we are going to get a controlled double-blind experiment on this.

    As an example men can have affairs while still loving their wives. When women have affairs, they fall out of love with their husbands and in love with their lovers.


    That is a utilitarian calculation that I don’t have the knowledge to evaluate.

    I will say this. One could just as easily ridicule your point of view by saying that the state should be free to take your property without compensation on the grounds that the needs of society are paramount and individual interests don’t matter, even if those individuals comprise 50% of the population.
     
    Your example of ridicule has been seriously attempted by communists. You're free to evaluate the results.


    Except that the woman is still unhappy as a result of having been deprived of her youth, but I can see that means nothing to you.

    Coercion is sometimes necessary, but should always be a last resort.

    BTW if we ban divorce, does that mean we can stop obsessing over women’s sexual histories? Like you said, problem solved.
     
    What does deprived of her youth even mean? This is pure gibberish.

    Banning divorce is a legal matter.

    One can no more ban "obsessing over women's sexual histories" than one can ban women obsessing over "tall dark and handsome".

    How does it feel to be wrong?

    You’re about ready to find out.

    Manosphere types say women act like children. The ironies never cease.

    This is a bizarre contention peculiar to American society. It does not exist elsewhere, nor do American girls even behave the way weirdo age gap police contend they should. When I conduct career fairs at high schools I have to stop girls from hitting on me.

    I’m not interested in policing anyone at all. In fact, I think it was you who said upthread that you want to force women into marriage by the age of 20 by preventing them from earning an independent living. Come to think of it, why would you need to force women out of the workplace if what they really want is to marry at 15 a man twice their age.

    There is nothing whatsoever that is bizarre about not wanting 15 year olds to marry and have children, and if other cultures don’t understand that, that doesn’t mean we should emulate them. Onset of puberty is but one aspect of sexual maturity. Adolescent maternal mortality is double the rate of women in their early twenties.

    http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/publications-a-z/436-adolescent-maternal-mortality-an-overlooked-crisis

    Curiously, even teen boys seem to have an instinctual knowledge that teen girls are too young to have children. They are the sole exception to the general male preference for youth. They prefer older partners, i.e. women in their twenties. I suspect that populations in which teenage boys preferred older women did a better job of ensuring that their women survived to peak fertility with their reproductive health intact.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8890497

    This would of course explain why nobody much cares when hot teachers get caught fooling around with teen boys.

    Correlation does not prove causation, but it implies causation. There is no way in hell we are going to get a controlled double-blind experiment on this.

    Correlation can be said to imply causation only when there are no plausible but untested alternative hypotheses, and of course you don’t need a “controlled double-blind experiment.” You just need a study that controls for confounding factors such as church attendance and age at first marriage.

    As an example men can have affairs while still loving their wives. When women have affairs, they fall out of love with their husbands and in love with their lovers.

    Surely you realize that the falling out of love is the cause, not the result, of the affair. So much of what I hear about women in these parts are just transparent attempts to justify baseless double standards.

    Your example of ridicule has been seriously attempted by communists. You’re free to evaluate the results.

    The point remains: Ridicule proves nothing, as I’m sure you are well aware.

    What does deprived of her youth even mean? This is pure gibberish.

    Youth is for study, character development, and adventure, beauty over duty.

    ब्रह्मचर्येण कन्या युवानं विन्दते पतिम् |

    A youthful Kanya (कन्या, girl) who graduates from Brahmacharya, obtains a suitable husband.
    — Atharva Veda, 11.5.18[34]

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmacharya

    Read More
    • Replies: @Swedish Family

    Correlation can be said to imply causation only when there are no plausible but untested alternative hypotheses, and of course you don’t need a “controlled double-blind experiment.” You just need a study that controls for confounding factors such as church attendance and age at first marriage.
     
    Very loosely speaking, perhaps, but the only take-it-to-the-bank correct answer is that absence of correlation implies absence of causation (i.e. if some political scientist argues that this or that social policy leads to some outcome, the absence of correlation between the claimed cause and effect would strongly suggest that this is not so).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. @Anonymous
    Is there a strange reason why you feel the desire to troll a Russian blog: this is a country which is far more "based" by Alt-Right standards, and where feminism has made such inroads that the expectations that pretty secretaries are servicing their bosses is usually true. You have to be some sort of joke.

    Is there a strange reason why you feel the desire to troll a Russian blog: this is a country which is far more “based” by Alt-Right standards, and where feminism has made such inroads that the expectations that pretty secretaries are servicing their bosses is usually true. You have to be some sort of joke.

    Trolling am I? No. I’m just holding you accountable. If men are going to talk about women under the alt-Right banner, prepare to defend your views. On the other hand, if you want to crawl back under the manosphere rock where no one can see you, I don’t care what you say.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The world is bigger than the US, chickie. Get lost and live out the rest of your days in homosexuality and shrew paradise land. No wonder your men aren't making babies with you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. Anonymous[103] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    Is there a strange reason why you feel the desire to troll a Russian blog: this is a country which is far more “based” by Alt-Right standards, and where feminism has made such inroads that the expectations that pretty secretaries are servicing their bosses is usually true. You have to be some sort of joke.
     
    Trolling am I? No. I'm just holding you accountable. If men are going to talk about women under the alt-Right banner, prepare to defend your views. On the other hand, if you want to crawl back under the manosphere rock where no one can see you, I don't care what you say.

    The world is bigger than the US, chickie. Get lost and live out the rest of your days in homosexuality and shrew paradise land. No wonder your men aren’t making babies with you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. @Thorfinnsson


    Things that are gross are gross for no particular reason. Disgust is not a rational response, but it is often a healthy one.

    Fifteen year old girls are not attracted to leering 30 year old men.
     
    How does it feel to be wrong?

    This is a bizarre contention peculiar to American society. It does not exist elsewhere, nor do American girls even behave the way weirdo age gap police contend they should. When I conduct career fairs at high schools I have to stop girls from hitting on me.


    No. A correlation between number of premarital sex partners and divorce risk in no way proves causation. Religiosity, for example, is correlated with lower divorce risk and fewer sex partners, and could be the causal factor behind both of these. You said sleeping around “destroys a woman’s ability to love.” That is a claim of causation that requires supporting evidence.
     
    Correlation does not prove causation, but it implies causation. There is no way in hell we are going to get a controlled double-blind experiment on this.

    As an example men can have affairs while still loving their wives. When women have affairs, they fall out of love with their husbands and in love with their lovers.


    That is a utilitarian calculation that I don’t have the knowledge to evaluate.

    I will say this. One could just as easily ridicule your point of view by saying that the state should be free to take your property without compensation on the grounds that the needs of society are paramount and individual interests don’t matter, even if those individuals comprise 50% of the population.
     
    Your example of ridicule has been seriously attempted by communists. You're free to evaluate the results.


    Except that the woman is still unhappy as a result of having been deprived of her youth, but I can see that means nothing to you.

    Coercion is sometimes necessary, but should always be a last resort.

    BTW if we ban divorce, does that mean we can stop obsessing over women’s sexual histories? Like you said, problem solved.
     
    What does deprived of her youth even mean? This is pure gibberish.

    Banning divorce is a legal matter.

    One can no more ban "obsessing over women's sexual histories" than one can ban women obsessing over "tall dark and handsome".

    This is a bizarre contention peculiar to American society.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajnal_line

    West of this line, the average age of marriage for women was 23 or more,[3] men 26, spouses were relatively close in age,

    that’s the traditional marriage pattern in most of Western Europe (and hence their diaspora)

    and possibly going back a long way in some regions

    https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Germania_(Church_%26_Brodribb)

    The young men marry late, and their vigour is thus unimpaired. Nor are the maidens hurried into marriage; the same age and a similar stature is required; well-matched and vigorous they wed, and the offspring reproduce the strength of the parents.

    I agree this is unique in the world and almost everywhere else child brides are/were the norm but in western Europe the norm was relatively late and similar aged marriage.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Toronto Russian

    I agree this is unique in the world and almost everywhere else child brides are/were the norm but in western Europe the norm was relatively late and similar aged marriage.
     
    Russian peasants in early 20th century thought equal age (16-25 for the bride, 18-27 for the groom) was the best for marriage. Girls absolutely hated when parents married them off to guys 6-8 years older. The reason was such a husband would die earlier, and a widow's life was very hard. Guys didn't care if the girl was 2-6 years older.
    Source - a 1906 ethnography book, translated to English as "Village Life in Late Tsarist Russia". http://flibusta.is/b/397391/read
    , @Toronto Russian

    I agree this is unique in the world and almost everywhere else child brides are/were the norm but in western Europe the norm was relatively late and similar aged marriage.
     
    Russian peasants in early 20th century thought equal age (16-25 for the bride, 18-27 for the groom) was the best for marriage. Girls absolutely hated when parents married them off to a guy 6-8 years older. The reason they gave was he would die earlier, and a widow's life in a village was very hard. Guys didn't care if a girl was 2-6 years older. Source: a 1906 book Life of Ivan, translated to English as Village Life in Late Tsarist Russia. You can read it for free if you subscribe at https://muse.jhu.edu/book/41918.

    The family tree of my Balkan relatives includes two early 20th century couples with older wives - married at 20 and 22, and 18 and 19, all of peasant origin. I was told it was usual there. Probably the same pattern that was mentioned in the Ivan book - parents tried to get their sons married early to acquire an extra worker (daughter-in-law) for the household, but didn't hurry to give away their daughters.

    Edit: sorry for the double post, the first one didn't show up at first and I thought it was lost.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. @Dmitry
    The problem is that most women lose their attractiveness in their 30s. Whereas successful guys can started to get more dating options.

    It's been this way always, but expressed in different ways culturally.

    The gross situation, is when Igor Sechin gets some young wife who just wants a big house.

    But for a normal situation of age gap of some ten years or so, it is nothing unusual, in any time or culture in history.

    But for a normal situation of age gap of some ten years or so, it is nothing unusual, in any time or culture in history.

    not true (uniquely) in western Europe over the last n centuries or so and maybe earlier in some regions

    now it may not matter but given the different trajectory in Europe compared to the rest of the world maybe it was important in some way

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. @Anatoly Karlin

    London
     
    :D

    https://twitter.com/MayorofLondon/status/982906526334668800

    Sadiq Khan, the gift that keeps on giving.

    Only when they outlaw acid will the britbong rise.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. @Yevardian
    I think it's been established at this point Trump neither has any political inclinations of his own, or any control over his administration. I mean, he's appointed Michael Bolton. He was crying about the Iran detente before he got elected.

    If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck...

    I mean, he’s appointed Michael Bolton.

    Admittedly, that is pretty bad.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. @Rosie
    Women prefer more complex music around the time of ovulation.

    https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/gory-details/could-menstrual-cycle-have-shaped-evolution-music

    Musical ability may signal "divergent thinking" ability.

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0278262608002303

    What evidence is there for this theory that women's sexuality is dysgenic?

    What evidence is there for this theory that women’s sexuality is dysgenic?

    The dysgenic part is when intelligent women spend their years up to, say, 35 on their high-powered management career, then have a single artisanal child. In the meantime, their less accomplished sisters have had 2 or 3, perhaps more.

    By the way, I think building a family with an intelligent young woman (pre-university if possible) is not a bad idea at all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. @notanon

    This is a bizarre contention peculiar to American society.
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajnal_line

    West of this line, the average age of marriage for women was 23 or more,[3] men 26, spouses were relatively close in age,
     
    that's the traditional marriage pattern in most of Western Europe (and hence their diaspora)

    and possibly going back a long way in some regions

    https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Germania_(Church_%26_Brodribb)

    The young men marry late, and their vigour is thus unimpaired. Nor are the maidens hurried into marriage; the same age and a similar stature is required; well-matched and vigorous they wed, and the offspring reproduce the strength of the parents.
     
    I agree this is unique in the world and almost everywhere else child brides are/were the norm but in western Europe the norm was relatively late and similar aged marriage.

    I agree this is unique in the world and almost everywhere else child brides are/were the norm but in western Europe the norm was relatively late and similar aged marriage.

    Russian peasants in early 20th century thought equal age (16-25 for the bride, 18-27 for the groom) was the best for marriage. Girls absolutely hated when parents married them off to guys 6-8 years older. The reason was such a husband would die earlier, and a widow’s life was very hard. Guys didn’t care if the girl was 2-6 years older.
    Source – a 1906 ethnography book, translated to English as “Village Life in Late Tsarist Russia”. http://flibusta.is/b/397391/read

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. @Rosie

    How does it feel to be wrong?
     
    You're about ready to find out.

    Manosphere types say women act like children. The ironies never cease.

    This is a bizarre contention peculiar to American society. It does not exist elsewhere, nor do American girls even behave the way weirdo age gap police contend they should. When I conduct career fairs at high schools I have to stop girls from hitting on me.
     
    I'm not interested in policing anyone at all. In fact, I think it was you who said upthread that you want to force women into marriage by the age of 20 by preventing them from earning an independent living. Come to think of it, why would you need to force women out of the workplace if what they really want is to marry at 15 a man twice their age.

    There is nothing whatsoever that is bizarre about not wanting 15 year olds to marry and have children, and if other cultures don't understand that, that doesn't mean we should emulate them. Onset of puberty is but one aspect of sexual maturity. Adolescent maternal mortality is double the rate of women in their early twenties.

    http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/publications-a-z/436-adolescent-maternal-mortality-an-overlooked-crisis

    Curiously, even teen boys seem to have an instinctual knowledge that teen girls are too young to have children. They are the sole exception to the general male preference for youth. They prefer older partners, i.e. women in their twenties. I suspect that populations in which teenage boys preferred older women did a better job of ensuring that their women survived to peak fertility with their reproductive health intact.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8890497

    This would of course explain why nobody much cares when hot teachers get caught fooling around with teen boys.

    Correlation does not prove causation, but it implies causation. There is no way in hell we are going to get a controlled double-blind experiment on this.
     
    Correlation can be said to imply causation only when there are no plausible but untested alternative hypotheses, and of course you don't need a "controlled double-blind experiment." You just need a study that controls for confounding factors such as church attendance and age at first marriage.

    As an example men can have affairs while still loving their wives. When women have affairs, they fall out of love with their husbands and in love with their lovers.
     
    Surely you realize that the falling out of love is the cause, not the result, of the affair. So much of what I hear about women in these parts are just transparent attempts to justify baseless double standards.

    Your example of ridicule has been seriously attempted by communists. You’re free to evaluate the results.
     
    The point remains: Ridicule proves nothing, as I'm sure you are well aware.

    What does deprived of her youth even mean? This is pure gibberish.
     
    Youth is for study, character development, and adventure, beauty over duty.

    ब्रह्मचर्येण कन्या युवानं विन्दते पतिम् |

    A youthful Kanya (कन्या, girl) who graduates from Brahmacharya, obtains a suitable husband.
    — Atharva Veda, 11.5.18[34]

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmacharya

    Correlation can be said to imply causation only when there are no plausible but untested alternative hypotheses, and of course you don’t need a “controlled double-blind experiment.” You just need a study that controls for confounding factors such as church attendance and age at first marriage.

    Very loosely speaking, perhaps, but the only take-it-to-the-bank correct answer is that absence of correlation implies absence of causation (i.e. if some political scientist argues that this or that social policy leads to some outcome, the absence of correlation between the claimed cause and effect would strongly suggest that this is not so).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosie

    Very loosely speaking, perhaps, but the only take-it-to-the-bank correct answer is that absence of correlation implies absence of causation (i.e. if some political scientist argues that this or that social policy leads to some outcome, the absence of correlation between the claimed cause and effect would strongly suggest that this is not so).
     
    This might sort of matter if guys weren't using girls' sexual experience as an excuse not to get married and have kids. I can tell you with 100% take-it-to-the-bank certainty that if White men write off every single eligible woman as "damaged goods" for not being virgins, our extinction is inevitable.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. @notanon

    This is a bizarre contention peculiar to American society.
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajnal_line

    West of this line, the average age of marriage for women was 23 or more,[3] men 26, spouses were relatively close in age,
     
    that's the traditional marriage pattern in most of Western Europe (and hence their diaspora)

    and possibly going back a long way in some regions

    https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Germania_(Church_%26_Brodribb)

    The young men marry late, and their vigour is thus unimpaired. Nor are the maidens hurried into marriage; the same age and a similar stature is required; well-matched and vigorous they wed, and the offspring reproduce the strength of the parents.
     
    I agree this is unique in the world and almost everywhere else child brides are/were the norm but in western Europe the norm was relatively late and similar aged marriage.

    I agree this is unique in the world and almost everywhere else child brides are/were the norm but in western Europe the norm was relatively late and similar aged marriage.

    Russian peasants in early 20th century thought equal age (16-25 for the bride, 18-27 for the groom) was the best for marriage. Girls absolutely hated when parents married them off to a guy 6-8 years older. The reason they gave was he would die earlier, and a widow’s life in a village was very hard. Guys didn’t care if a girl was 2-6 years older. Source: a 1906 book Life of Ivan, translated to English as Village Life in Late Tsarist Russia. You can read it for free if you subscribe at https://muse.jhu.edu/book/41918.

    The family tree of my Balkan relatives includes two early 20th century couples with older wives – married at 20 and 22, and 18 and 19, all of peasant origin. I was told it was usual there. Probably the same pattern that was mentioned in the Ivan book – parents tried to get their sons married early to acquire an extra worker (daughter-in-law) for the household, but didn’t hurry to give away their daughters.

    Edit: sorry for the double post, the first one didn’t show up at first and I thought it was lost.

    Read More
    • Replies: @notanon
    interesting, ty
    , @Daniel Chieh
    IIRC major age gaps were always the domain of the elite. The lives of the elite and the non-elite were vastly different in a way that we only are beginning to glimpse again. Insofar as dysgenics usually focuses on the smart fraction, though, the elite are important in that sense.

    Peasant mores were entirely different and much more practical; the ability to focus on rituals, purity, and a variety of other virtues was basically the ancestral world's version of "virtue signaling." You couldn't do it unless you had money and time to burn.

    The cult of Victorian fragility for women, for example, was never going to make major inroads in a culture where women had to work to survive. Someone has to take care of the fields, and even if men were stronger and better at it, they're not doing it if they've wandered off drinking(an unfortunately frequent occurence in the past).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. @Swedish Family

    Correlation can be said to imply causation only when there are no plausible but untested alternative hypotheses, and of course you don’t need a “controlled double-blind experiment.” You just need a study that controls for confounding factors such as church attendance and age at first marriage.
     
    Very loosely speaking, perhaps, but the only take-it-to-the-bank correct answer is that absence of correlation implies absence of causation (i.e. if some political scientist argues that this or that social policy leads to some outcome, the absence of correlation between the claimed cause and effect would strongly suggest that this is not so).

    Very loosely speaking, perhaps, but the only take-it-to-the-bank correct answer is that absence of correlation implies absence of causation (i.e. if some political scientist argues that this or that social policy leads to some outcome, the absence of correlation between the claimed cause and effect would strongly suggest that this is not so).

    This might sort of matter if guys weren’t using girls’ sexual experience as an excuse not to get married and have kids. I can tell you with 100% take-it-to-the-bank certainty that if White men write off every single eligible woman as “damaged goods” for not being virgins, our extinction is inevitable.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    guys weren’t using girls’ sexual experience
     
    Yeah, it’s fairly hypocritical. The guys want loose and easy women to screw around with but want the ones that haven’t screwed around to wait until they get married to them.

    I’ve noticed that many men do not really want patriarchy - they want to LARP at it.

    A serious patriarchy would mean the end to the fun and games because fathers who care and - importantly - have the law on their side would not let some goofball who is not husband material mess around with his daughter.

    our extinction is inevitable
     
    Yup, gotta get this train back on track.

    Peace.
    , @Anonymous
    No, with artificial wombs, women are quite unnecessary. Haven't you been reading at all?

    https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/25/15421734/artificial-womb-fetus-biobag-uterus-lamb-sheep-birth-premie-preterm-infant

    Its very promising, and it will allow for much more cleaner development of fetus in the future since the environment can be completely controlled. Women are a relic of a more primitive age of low technology and random genetic recombination.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. @Rosie

    Very loosely speaking, perhaps, but the only take-it-to-the-bank correct answer is that absence of correlation implies absence of causation (i.e. if some political scientist argues that this or that social policy leads to some outcome, the absence of correlation between the claimed cause and effect would strongly suggest that this is not so).
     
    This might sort of matter if guys weren't using girls' sexual experience as an excuse not to get married and have kids. I can tell you with 100% take-it-to-the-bank certainty that if White men write off every single eligible woman as "damaged goods" for not being virgins, our extinction is inevitable.

    guys weren’t using girls’ sexual experience

    Yeah, it’s fairly hypocritical. The guys want loose and easy women to screw around with but want the ones that haven’t screwed around to wait until they get married to them.

    I’ve noticed that many men do not really want patriarchy – they want to LARP at it.

    A serious patriarchy would mean the end to the fun and games because fathers who care and – importantly – have the law on their side would not let some goofball who is not husband material mess around with his daughter.

    our extinction is inevitable

    Yup, gotta get this train back on track.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Agree: Rosie
    • Replies: @Talha
    You want to try out a real patriarchal society, go down to one of the places where if you try to sneak around with a girl without talking to her father, you’ll get an impromptu meeting with her brother and a few of his cousins who’ll beat the snot out of you. And then when you call the police, they’ll laugh at you for being a fool...and if they’re nice, they’ll help you find your teeth.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. @Talha

    guys weren’t using girls’ sexual experience
     
    Yeah, it’s fairly hypocritical. The guys want loose and easy women to screw around with but want the ones that haven’t screwed around to wait until they get married to them.

    I’ve noticed that many men do not really want patriarchy - they want to LARP at it.

    A serious patriarchy would mean the end to the fun and games because fathers who care and - importantly - have the law on their side would not let some goofball who is not husband material mess around with his daughter.

    our extinction is inevitable
     
    Yup, gotta get this train back on track.

    Peace.

    You want to try out a real patriarchal society, go down to one of the places where if you try to sneak around with a girl without talking to her father, you’ll get an impromptu meeting with her brother and a few of his cousins who’ll beat the snot out of you. And then when you call the police, they’ll laugh at you for being a fool…and if they’re nice, they’ll help you find your teeth.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. @Randal

    do you want Assad to stay on or not?

    You have two choices:

    1. Trump prevents the US from toppling Assad

    2. Pence takes over and the US removes Assad, possibly starting WWIII in the process
     
    It appears to me you've just pulled this out of your backside.

    The reason Assad is still there is precisely that the US can't remove him without an unacceptable risk of "starting WW3". He isn't still there because Obama or Trump like him being there, and he would almost certainly still be there if Clinton had been elected, or even if the likes of Pence or McCain were in charge in Washington.

    Just being a fanatic on a topic doesn't make the impossible possible, no matter how much they desperately want it to be so. Once Russia intervened directly in Syria, there was no realistic possibility for the US to overthrow Assad without most likely going to war with Russia. That's precisely why the US regime and the various lobbies were so incandescently angry about it. The chances that Russia would sit by and let the US overthrow Assad, or let the US destroy its expeditionary force there in order to do so are not zero, but they are probably pretty close to it.

    So the only benefit of Trump over Pence or Clinton, in relation to Syria, is that he's arguably less likely to start WW3 over Syria, not that Assad remains. Asserting "Pence takes over and removes Assad" suggests complete ignorance of the realities involved.

    the only benefit of Trump over Pence or Clinton, in relation to Syria, is that he’s arguably less likely to start WW3 over Syria

    But is he? I personally don’t think Clinton would have followed through her campaign promise of a no-fly zone. And she would probably be more risk-averse than Trump. She would also have less pressure on her due to no Russiagate. And Putin could always send $50,000,000 to the Clinton Foundation.

    Pence is more difficult to predict. He might very well be worse than Trump. But he’s only there because Trump was elected.

    I think we need to own up to the fact that we might very well have made things worse by supporting Trump over Clinton.

    Read More
    • Agree: Sean
    • Replies: @Mitleser

    I personally don’t think Clinton would have followed through her campaign promise of a no-fly zone.
     
    Why wouldn't she?
    She would get the necessary support for it much sooner than the Trump administration for what they are doing now.
    The escalation would be in 2016, not 2018.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. @Polish Perspective

    Strong catch up growth across Eastern Europe.
     
    Hungary is the negative outlier, though. This is the entire V4, indexed to 2000.

    https://i.imgur.com/dY2RfI9.png

    (Click to enlarge)

    Contrary to delusional claims about a supposed 'economic miracle' in Poland, the performance of my country has been above-average but far from spectacular. The real outperformer, though rarely noticed or metioned, is in fact Slovakia.

    The Slovaks began as about 20% richer than Poland in 1992 (the earliest year we have independent data from them) and has since grown slightly faster and maintained that. Czech performance has been so-so, though they started at a very high level. Nevertheless, during the 1990s they grew almost nothing and during the 16 years from 2000 to 2016, their growth performance was not great by any stretch of the imagination. One cannot just excuse that on high initial income.

    They are neighbors with Slovakia and the post-2008 divergence between Slovak and Czech economic performance is very notable, and in some ways humiliating for Czechs.

    However, the real negative outlier, as previously mentioned, is really Hungary. While it began as richer than Poland, it was still significantly poorer than Czechia during the early 1990s.

    To drive home the point, absolute per capita levels in constant currency:

    https://i.imgur.com/dgWdXm4.png

    (Click to enlarge)

    We have to appreciate that Orban inherited a country on the brink of bankruptcym in 2010. Reiner may whine (justifiably) about corruption, but we have to understand what an epic mess his predecessors left behind. Voting for Fidesz, even aside issues of immigration, makes sense in this light. This is not even a partisan point, even the Hungarian socialists themselves admitted as much:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Őszöd_speech

    Yes, however bad Orbán is, he cannot even come close to how bad the horrible socialists and liberals were 2002-2010. Hungary is a negative outlier because of the leftist government 2002-2010.

    And I’m only talking about economic performance, not LGBTQWERTY rights or immigration or whatever, where the Hungarian left is mostly like the western one.

    Of course, the leftist government was also extremely corrupt.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. @reiner Tor

    the only benefit of Trump over Pence or Clinton, in relation to Syria, is that he’s arguably less likely to start WW3 over Syria
     
    But is he? I personally don’t think Clinton would have followed through her campaign promise of a no-fly zone. And she would probably be more risk-averse than Trump. She would also have less pressure on her due to no Russiagate. And Putin could always send $50,000,000 to the Clinton Foundation.

    Pence is more difficult to predict. He might very well be worse than Trump. But he’s only there because Trump was elected.

    I think we need to own up to the fact that we might very well have made things worse by supporting Trump over Clinton.

    I personally don’t think Clinton would have followed through her campaign promise of a no-fly zone.

    Why wouldn’t she?
    She would get the necessary support for it much sooner than the Trump administration for what they are doing now.
    The escalation would be in 2016, not 2018.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Clinton wouldn’t have been president in 2016, only January 2017. The no-fly zone proposal was part of the Aleppo hysteria, but Aleppo fell in November 2016. After that, just as some of Trump with his “day one” promises (like DACA) she’d have vacillated. Going to war against Russia is not for the faint hearted.

    You assume she wanted war with Russia, but I don’t think so. (She even rejected the proposed modernization of the nuclear forces in the debates.) She merely wanted to look tough. Psychopathic as she is, she doesn’t want to die. She’d have attacked Syria in 2013 without the Russians there. We now know that Trump would have done likewise. But in 2017? After the Aleppo hysteria stopped, there would have been no immediate pressure on her.

    Also, should she have chosen to stay out of this, a significant portion of the MSM would’ve been understanding. I mean, she would’ve been the first woman president.

    Don’t treat her going to war against Russia as fact. She seemed more likely to do that in 2016, but in retrospect I’m far from sure.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. @Mitleser

    I personally don’t think Clinton would have followed through her campaign promise of a no-fly zone.
     
    Why wouldn't she?
    She would get the necessary support for it much sooner than the Trump administration for what they are doing now.
    The escalation would be in 2016, not 2018.

    Clinton wouldn’t have been president in 2016, only January 2017. The no-fly zone proposal was part of the Aleppo hysteria, but Aleppo fell in November 2016. After that, just as some of Trump with his “day one” promises (like DACA) she’d have vacillated. Going to war against Russia is not for the faint hearted.

    You assume she wanted war with Russia, but I don’t think so. (She even rejected the proposed modernization of the nuclear forces in the debates.) She merely wanted to look tough. Psychopathic as she is, she doesn’t want to die. She’d have attacked Syria in 2013 without the Russians there. We now know that Trump would have done likewise. But in 2017? After the Aleppo hysteria stopped, there would have been no immediate pressure on her.

    Also, should she have chosen to stay out of this, a significant portion of the MSM would’ve been understanding. I mean, she would’ve been the first woman president.

    Don’t treat her going to war against Russia as fact. She seemed more likely to do that in 2016, but in retrospect I’m far from sure.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. @Toronto Russian

    I agree this is unique in the world and almost everywhere else child brides are/were the norm but in western Europe the norm was relatively late and similar aged marriage.
     
    Russian peasants in early 20th century thought equal age (16-25 for the bride, 18-27 for the groom) was the best for marriage. Girls absolutely hated when parents married them off to a guy 6-8 years older. The reason they gave was he would die earlier, and a widow's life in a village was very hard. Guys didn't care if a girl was 2-6 years older. Source: a 1906 book Life of Ivan, translated to English as Village Life in Late Tsarist Russia. You can read it for free if you subscribe at https://muse.jhu.edu/book/41918.

    The family tree of my Balkan relatives includes two early 20th century couples with older wives - married at 20 and 22, and 18 and 19, all of peasant origin. I was told it was usual there. Probably the same pattern that was mentioned in the Ivan book - parents tried to get their sons married early to acquire an extra worker (daughter-in-law) for the household, but didn't hurry to give away their daughters.

    Edit: sorry for the double post, the first one didn't show up at first and I thought it was lost.

    interesting, ty

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. @Toronto Russian

    I agree this is unique in the world and almost everywhere else child brides are/were the norm but in western Europe the norm was relatively late and similar aged marriage.
     
    Russian peasants in early 20th century thought equal age (16-25 for the bride, 18-27 for the groom) was the best for marriage. Girls absolutely hated when parents married them off to a guy 6-8 years older. The reason they gave was he would die earlier, and a widow's life in a village was very hard. Guys didn't care if a girl was 2-6 years older. Source: a 1906 book Life of Ivan, translated to English as Village Life in Late Tsarist Russia. You can read it for free if you subscribe at https://muse.jhu.edu/book/41918.

    The family tree of my Balkan relatives includes two early 20th century couples with older wives - married at 20 and 22, and 18 and 19, all of peasant origin. I was told it was usual there. Probably the same pattern that was mentioned in the Ivan book - parents tried to get their sons married early to acquire an extra worker (daughter-in-law) for the household, but didn't hurry to give away their daughters.

    Edit: sorry for the double post, the first one didn't show up at first and I thought it was lost.

    IIRC major age gaps were always the domain of the elite. The lives of the elite and the non-elite were vastly different in a way that we only are beginning to glimpse again. Insofar as dysgenics usually focuses on the smart fraction, though, the elite are important in that sense.

    Peasant mores were entirely different and much more practical; the ability to focus on rituals, purity, and a variety of other virtues was basically the ancestral world’s version of “virtue signaling.” You couldn’t do it unless you had money and time to burn.

    The cult of Victorian fragility for women, for example, was never going to make major inroads in a culture where women had to work to survive. Someone has to take care of the fields, and even if men were stronger and better at it, they’re not doing it if they’ve wandered off drinking(an unfortunately frequent occurence in the past).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. Anonymous[164] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    Very loosely speaking, perhaps, but the only take-it-to-the-bank correct answer is that absence of correlation implies absence of causation (i.e. if some political scientist argues that this or that social policy leads to some outcome, the absence of correlation between the claimed cause and effect would strongly suggest that this is not so).
     
    This might sort of matter if guys weren't using girls' sexual experience as an excuse not to get married and have kids. I can tell you with 100% take-it-to-the-bank certainty that if White men write off every single eligible woman as "damaged goods" for not being virgins, our extinction is inevitable.

    No, with artificial wombs, women are quite unnecessary. Haven’t you been reading at all?

    https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/25/15421734/artificial-womb-fetus-biobag-uterus-lamb-sheep-birth-premie-preterm-infant

    Its very promising, and it will allow for much more cleaner development of fetus in the future since the environment can be completely controlled. Women are a relic of a more primitive age of low technology and random genetic recombination.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosie

    No, with artificial wombs, women are quite unnecessary. Haven’t you been reading at all?
     
    You'd better get busy, then. You've got lots of work to do.

    Are you planning on screwing robots, men, or little boys?

    This is where your sick hatred of women leads.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B7eMUwkKiFY
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. Anon[291] • Disclaimer says: • Website
    @Talha

    when that white skin gets 60-70 years old, it is going to look sad up against brown or black skin
     
    My wife is super-afraid of this; age was not kind to my mother-in-law. While one of the Chinese brothers I knew in UCLA - his mother seemed perpetually stuck at like 40. God apportions His favors among mankind as He wills.

    The average IQ may be falling, but it is at the bottom of page three on the list of things that I worry about.
     
    Agreed, but this is sky-is-falling-armaggedon-kaliyuga for plenty of others around here.

    Also, the politics of many of those most interested in “dysgenics” doesn’t appeal to me.
     
    Agreed.
    In

    any case, the main problems that we have are high IQ people making very bad decisions.
     
    More evidence that High-IQ is dysgenic. Just sayin'...

    This is off the chart so I’m not going to comment.
     
    I'm a baller! :)

    Peace.

    My wife is super-afraid of this; age was not kind to my mother-in-law. While one of the Chinese brothers I knew in UCLA – his mother seemed perpetually stuck at like 40. God apportions His favors among mankind as He wills.

    An old woman has a unique dignity not available to the “sexually available” (to coin a phrase). I wouldn’t worry if I were her.

    More evidence that High-IQ is dysgenic. Just sayin’…

    Well, I don’t know. It’s around, isn’t it? And you, for one example, certainly aren’t a murderous fanatic. I think it’s certainly true that positions of power tend to attract vicious people, but if they were to attract vicious and stupid people I’m not sure that would be much of an improvement.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    An old woman has a unique dignity not available to the “sexually available”
     
    Agreed - mother and grandmother are honorific titles - she will be the center of our little growing clan as my mother is for her 8 granchildren.

    "Mother is the name for God in the lips and hearts of little children."
    - William Thackeray

    I wouldn’t worry if I were her.
     
    I tell her the same, but she has that natural female vanity. And we love them for it; that's why they dress up for us!

    I’m not sure that would be much of an improvement.
     
    I was just arguing for the law of averages in the organic sphere. You can have too much of a good thing. Of course some disagree and some of the High-IQ partisans will be waiting in the dark to cheer one of these on...
    https://i0.wp.com/thechickensocial.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/rotn-poster.jpg

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. Anon[291] • Disclaimer says:
    @Talha

    when that white skin gets 60-70 years old, it is going to look sad up against brown or black skin
     
    My wife is super-afraid of this; age was not kind to my mother-in-law. While one of the Chinese brothers I knew in UCLA - his mother seemed perpetually stuck at like 40. God apportions His favors among mankind as He wills.

    The average IQ may be falling, but it is at the bottom of page three on the list of things that I worry about.
     
    Agreed, but this is sky-is-falling-armaggedon-kaliyuga for plenty of others around here.

    Also, the politics of many of those most interested in “dysgenics” doesn’t appeal to me.
     
    Agreed.
    In

    any case, the main problems that we have are high IQ people making very bad decisions.
     
    More evidence that High-IQ is dysgenic. Just sayin'...

    This is off the chart so I’m not going to comment.
     
    I'm a baller! :)

    Peace.

    My wife is super-afraid of this; age was not kind to my mother-in-law. While one of the Chinese brothers I knew in UCLA – his mother seemed perpetually stuck at like 40. God apportions His favors among mankind as He wills.

    An old woman has a unique dignity not available to the “sexually available” (to coin a phrase). I wouldn’t worry if I were her.

    More evidence that High-IQ is dysgenic. Just sayin’…

    Well, I don’t know. It’s around, isn’t it? And you, for one example, certainly aren’t a murderous fanatic. I think it’s certainly true that positions of power tend to attract vicious people, but if they were to attract vicious and stupid people I’m not sure that would be much of an improvement.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    D--ned double post. At least I managed to avoid posting the first one as Ron Unz ...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. @Anon

    My wife is super-afraid of this; age was not kind to my mother-in-law. While one of the Chinese brothers I knew in UCLA – his mother seemed perpetually stuck at like 40. God apportions His favors among mankind as He wills.
     
    An old woman has a unique dignity not available to the "sexually available" (to coin a phrase). I wouldn't worry if I were her.

    More evidence that High-IQ is dysgenic. Just sayin’…
     
    Well, I don't know. It's around, isn't it? And you, for one example, certainly aren't a murderous fanatic. I think it's certainly true that positions of power tend to attract vicious people, but if they were to attract vicious and stupid people I'm not sure that would be much of an improvement.

    D–ned double post. At least I managed to avoid posting the first one as Ron Unz …

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. @Anonymous
    No, with artificial wombs, women are quite unnecessary. Haven't you been reading at all?

    https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/25/15421734/artificial-womb-fetus-biobag-uterus-lamb-sheep-birth-premie-preterm-infant

    Its very promising, and it will allow for much more cleaner development of fetus in the future since the environment can be completely controlled. Women are a relic of a more primitive age of low technology and random genetic recombination.

    No, with artificial wombs, women are quite unnecessary. Haven’t you been reading at all?

    You’d better get busy, then. You’ve got lots of work to do.

    Are you planning on screwing robots, men, or little boys?

    This is where your sick hatred of women leads.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    It's okay to be obsolete, some horses still exist for entertainment purposes, etc. I am sure some women can too, bred for temperament and so on.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. Anonymous[114] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    No, with artificial wombs, women are quite unnecessary. Haven’t you been reading at all?
     
    You'd better get busy, then. You've got lots of work to do.

    Are you planning on screwing robots, men, or little boys?

    This is where your sick hatred of women leads.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B7eMUwkKiFY

    It’s okay to be obsolete, some horses still exist for entertainment purposes, etc. I am sure some women can too, bred for temperament and so on.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosie

    It’s okay to be obsolete, some horses still exist for entertainment purposes, etc. I am sure some women can too, bred for temperament and so on.
     
    I'm certain this will never happen. The only question is whether psychopaths like you will be driven out of the alt-Right, or destroy the alt-Right. There isn't a third option.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. @Anonymous
    It's okay to be obsolete, some horses still exist for entertainment purposes, etc. I am sure some women can too, bred for temperament and so on.

    It’s okay to be obsolete, some horses still exist for entertainment purposes, etc. I am sure some women can too, bred for temperament and so on.

    I’m certain this will never happen. The only question is whether psychopaths like you will be driven out of the alt-Right, or destroy the alt-Right. There isn’t a third option.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    You seem scientifically illiterate about the state of current research - besides the Verge page, there is also excellent work being done on hereditary behavior and personality genetics(much covered by Unz Jayman).

    There is almost a new advance monthly... its really quite exciting! Eugenically, did you not note that the infant lambs were healthier since the wombs are completely controlled? The biological womb is far more chaotic.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. Anonymous[114] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    It’s okay to be obsolete, some horses still exist for entertainment purposes, etc. I am sure some women can too, bred for temperament and so on.
     
    I'm certain this will never happen. The only question is whether psychopaths like you will be driven out of the alt-Right, or destroy the alt-Right. There isn't a third option.

    You seem scientifically illiterate about the state of current research – besides the Verge page, there is also excellent work being done on hereditary behavior and personality genetics(much covered by Unz Jayman).

    There is almost a new advance monthly… its really quite exciting! Eugenically, did you not note that the infant lambs were healthier since the wombs are completely controlled? The biological womb is far more chaotic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosie

    There is almost a new advance monthly… its really quite exciting!
     
    I don't doubt that it's possible. I only doubt that MGTOW psychopaths like you represent normal men, who actually would have moral compunctions about turning women into farm animals. I know. That must blow your mind.

    In the general population, only 1-2% of the male population are psychopaths. It's easy to think it must be at least ten times that when you frequent the MGTOW cesspit on the internets.

    , @Rosie

    Eugenically, did you not note that the infant lambs were healthier since the wombs are completely controlled?
     
    And expensive formula is better for babies than mom's almost-free breast milk.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. @Anonymous
    You seem scientifically illiterate about the state of current research - besides the Verge page, there is also excellent work being done on hereditary behavior and personality genetics(much covered by Unz Jayman).

    There is almost a new advance monthly... its really quite exciting! Eugenically, did you not note that the infant lambs were healthier since the wombs are completely controlled? The biological womb is far more chaotic.

    There is almost a new advance monthly… its really quite exciting!

    I don’t doubt that it’s possible. I only doubt that MGTOW psychopaths like you represent normal men, who actually would have moral compunctions about turning women into farm animals. I know. That must blow your mind.

    In the general population, only 1-2% of the male population are psychopaths. It’s easy to think it must be at least ten times that when you frequent the MGTOW cesspit on the internets.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    You seems to be reacting to this very emotionally, its simply an observation on trends and possibilities. The Alt-Right is an HBD movement, and therefore it seems that it should naturally embrace hereditary and other abilities for eugenic movement, don't you think? You seem supportive of the dysgenic model, which is definitely fatal(in a very real way) by using outdated methods. As society advances,the position and existence of sexes needs to be negotiated and renegotiated.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. @Anonymous
    You seem scientifically illiterate about the state of current research - besides the Verge page, there is also excellent work being done on hereditary behavior and personality genetics(much covered by Unz Jayman).

    There is almost a new advance monthly... its really quite exciting! Eugenically, did you not note that the infant lambs were healthier since the wombs are completely controlled? The biological womb is far more chaotic.

    Eugenically, did you not note that the infant lambs were healthier since the wombs are completely controlled?

    And expensive formula is better for babies than mom’s almost-free breast milk.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Cost drops with scale, so the more it is done, the cheaper it is overall. Its the basis of all modern medicine.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. @Anon

    My wife is super-afraid of this; age was not kind to my mother-in-law. While one of the Chinese brothers I knew in UCLA – his mother seemed perpetually stuck at like 40. God apportions His favors among mankind as He wills.
     
    An old woman has a unique dignity not available to the "sexually available" (to coin a phrase). I wouldn't worry if I were her.

    More evidence that High-IQ is dysgenic. Just sayin’…
     
    Well, I don't know. It's around, isn't it? And you, for one example, certainly aren't a murderous fanatic. I think it's certainly true that positions of power tend to attract vicious people, but if they were to attract vicious and stupid people I'm not sure that would be much of an improvement.

    An old woman has a unique dignity not available to the “sexually available”

    Agreed – mother and grandmother are honorific titles – she will be the center of our little growing clan as my mother is for her 8 granchildren.

    “Mother is the name for God in the lips and hearts of little children.”
    - William Thackeray

    I wouldn’t worry if I were her.

    I tell her the same, but she has that natural female vanity. And we love them for it; that’s why they dress up for us!

    I’m not sure that would be much of an improvement.

    I was just arguing for the law of averages in the organic sphere. You can have too much of a good thing. Of course some disagree and some of the High-IQ partisans will be waiting in the dark to cheer one of these on…

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. Anonymous[164] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    There is almost a new advance monthly… its really quite exciting!
     
    I don't doubt that it's possible. I only doubt that MGTOW psychopaths like you represent normal men, who actually would have moral compunctions about turning women into farm animals. I know. That must blow your mind.

    In the general population, only 1-2% of the male population are psychopaths. It's easy to think it must be at least ten times that when you frequent the MGTOW cesspit on the internets.

    You seems to be reacting to this very emotionally, its simply an observation on trends and possibilities. The Alt-Right is an HBD movement, and therefore it seems that it should naturally embrace hereditary and other abilities for eugenic movement, don’t you think? You seem supportive of the dysgenic model, which is definitely fatal(in a very real way) by using outdated methods. As society advances,the position and existence of sexes needs to be negotiated and renegotiated.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    You seems to be reacting to this very emotionally
     
    Women do that sometimes - they aren't men - you have to give leeway for that.

    You seem supportive of the dysgenic model
     
    The one that breeds for High-IQ?

    ,the position and existence of sexes needs to be negotiated and renegotiated.
     
    The movement that gives women a proper space that accommodates them to fulfill their natural biological imperative will win the day. Women are more spiritual than men across the board. It is the reason why most of the converts I've come across are female and why the stats show that 3/4 of the converts into Islam are female:
    "estimated that 5,000 British people convert to Islam each year, three-quarters of them women"
    https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/female-converts-to-islam-considered-in-new-study/2004157.article

    All of this sci-fi eugenics stuff, trying to segway into the great Singularity is the fan-boy dream of a sausage-fest movement. Mark my words; the more you go this way, the more you will drive women out - normal women, the ones who have babies. You will dig your own graves - or maybe you'll just retire into statis chambers waiting for someone to awaken you once the Singularity has been constituted.

    You have a woman here (not many females around UNZ - that should be first clue) trying to give you her honest two cents and many of you won't hear it. And some of you are trying to brow-beat her into accepting a position that I wouldn't give the time of day. Hell, I hate feminism - I'm even for polygamy for those men that can actually reasonably care for multiple women in a good way, but I can totally see the sense in what she is saying. Probably because I've been around normal, healthy females.

    The lack of self-reflection by many men here on this scale is astounding.

    Peace.

    , @Rosie
    The existence of women does not need to be "renegotiated." This is patently obvious to anyone who is not a deranged lunatic.

    You remind me of someone, but I can't remember whom.

    Hmmm. Oh yeah.

    "The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race."

    -Sally Miller Gearhart

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. @Anonymous
    You seems to be reacting to this very emotionally, its simply an observation on trends and possibilities. The Alt-Right is an HBD movement, and therefore it seems that it should naturally embrace hereditary and other abilities for eugenic movement, don't you think? You seem supportive of the dysgenic model, which is definitely fatal(in a very real way) by using outdated methods. As society advances,the position and existence of sexes needs to be negotiated and renegotiated.

    You seems to be reacting to this very emotionally

    Women do that sometimes – they aren’t men – you have to give leeway for that.

    You seem supportive of the dysgenic model

    The one that breeds for High-IQ?

    ,the position and existence of sexes needs to be negotiated and renegotiated.

    The movement that gives women a proper space that accommodates them to fulfill their natural biological imperative will win the day. Women are more spiritual than men across the board. It is the reason why most of the converts I’ve come across are female and why the stats show that 3/4 of the converts into Islam are female:
    “estimated that 5,000 British people convert to Islam each year, three-quarters of them women”

    https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/female-converts-to-islam-considered-in-new-study/2004157.article

    All of this sci-fi eugenics stuff, trying to segway into the great Singularity is the fan-boy dream of a sausage-fest movement. Mark my words; the more you go this way, the more you will drive women out – normal women, the ones who have babies. You will dig your own graves – or maybe you’ll just retire into statis chambers waiting for someone to awaken you once the Singularity has been constituted.

    You have a woman here (not many females around UNZ – that should be first clue) trying to give you her honest two cents and many of you won’t hear it. And some of you are trying to brow-beat her into accepting a position that I wouldn’t give the time of day. Hell, I hate feminism – I’m even for polygamy for those men that can actually reasonably care for multiple women in a good way, but I can totally see the sense in what she is saying. Probably because I’ve been around normal, healthy females.

    The lack of self-reflection by many men here on this scale is astounding.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Yes, a Paki like you is exactly what the Alt-Right needs to save the white race.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. Anonymous[164] • Disclaimer says:
    @Talha

    You seems to be reacting to this very emotionally
     
    Women do that sometimes - they aren't men - you have to give leeway for that.

    You seem supportive of the dysgenic model
     
    The one that breeds for High-IQ?

    ,the position and existence of sexes needs to be negotiated and renegotiated.
     
    The movement that gives women a proper space that accommodates them to fulfill their natural biological imperative will win the day. Women are more spiritual than men across the board. It is the reason why most of the converts I've come across are female and why the stats show that 3/4 of the converts into Islam are female:
    "estimated that 5,000 British people convert to Islam each year, three-quarters of them women"
    https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/female-converts-to-islam-considered-in-new-study/2004157.article

    All of this sci-fi eugenics stuff, trying to segway into the great Singularity is the fan-boy dream of a sausage-fest movement. Mark my words; the more you go this way, the more you will drive women out - normal women, the ones who have babies. You will dig your own graves - or maybe you'll just retire into statis chambers waiting for someone to awaken you once the Singularity has been constituted.

    You have a woman here (not many females around UNZ - that should be first clue) trying to give you her honest two cents and many of you won't hear it. And some of you are trying to brow-beat her into accepting a position that I wouldn't give the time of day. Hell, I hate feminism - I'm even for polygamy for those men that can actually reasonably care for multiple women in a good way, but I can totally see the sense in what she is saying. Probably because I've been around normal, healthy females.

    The lack of self-reflection by many men here on this scale is astounding.

    Peace.

    Yes, a Paki like you is exactly what the Alt-Right needs to save the white race.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosie

    Yes, a Paki like you is exactly what the Alt-Right needs to save the white race.
     
    At least he's not going out of his way to destroy the movement like some.
    , @Talha
    Yeah, yeah - keep laughing - we know how to have babies - you might want to take a few pointers.

    This completely doesn't answer why you are not taking the concerns of a White lady, who is red-pilled enough to be at UNZ and trying to seriously engage men and tell them the faults in their thinking from a White female's perspective, seriously.

    You guys should have a pad an paper out and be taking notes - she is doing YOU a favor by disabusing you of your assumptions about women - White women, but you are completely oblivious to it. Do you think she knows more women and how they think or you do?

    Do what you will, just don't whine about it if people like me out-breed you because you were too busy thinking about how cool it would be to introduce axlotl tanks into the human species.

    I kid you not; did any of you ever read Tortoise and the Hare?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. @Anonymous
    You seems to be reacting to this very emotionally, its simply an observation on trends and possibilities. The Alt-Right is an HBD movement, and therefore it seems that it should naturally embrace hereditary and other abilities for eugenic movement, don't you think? You seem supportive of the dysgenic model, which is definitely fatal(in a very real way) by using outdated methods. As society advances,the position and existence of sexes needs to be negotiated and renegotiated.

    The existence of women does not need to be “renegotiated.” This is patently obvious to anyone who is not a deranged lunatic.

    You remind me of someone, but I can’t remember whom.

    Hmmm. Oh yeah.

    “The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.”

    -Sally Miller Gearhart

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    That's not a bad idea either, as the technology advances we can run experiments by seeing the results of female-only city states(or female majority city states) versus male-only city states, then see what their accomplishments will be in art, science, expansion and warfare. Once the biological imperative is reduced, it'll help us learn a lot about any potential advantages from isolation and stability versus dynamicism, etc.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. @Anonymous
    Yes, a Paki like you is exactly what the Alt-Right needs to save the white race.

    Yes, a Paki like you is exactly what the Alt-Right needs to save the white race.

    At least he’s not going out of his way to destroy the movement like some.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Its very revealing to see the loyalties of women laid bare so easily, isn't it?

    Fortunately, such things will be of only secondary importance soon!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. @Rosie

    Yes, a Paki like you is exactly what the Alt-Right needs to save the white race.
     
    At least he's not going out of his way to destroy the movement like some.

    Its very revealing to see the loyalties of women laid bare so easily, isn’t it?

    Fortunately, such things will be of only secondary importance soon!

    Read More
    • LOL: Talha
    • Replies: @Rosie

    Its very revealing to see the loyalties of women laid bare so easily, isn’t it?
     
    I think Talha is a better person than you, therefore I'm a race traitor and don't care about the well-being and future of my own half a dozen White children.

    You suffer from what we call confirmation bias.

    Here this might help, and don't feel bad. Everyone has to start somewhere.

    Logic For Dummies https://www.amazon.com/dp/0471799416/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_AU9ZAbM75T1F1

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. @Anonymous
    Yes, a Paki like you is exactly what the Alt-Right needs to save the white race.

    Yeah, yeah – keep laughing – we know how to have babies – you might want to take a few pointers.

    This completely doesn’t answer why you are not taking the concerns of a White lady, who is red-pilled enough to be at UNZ and trying to seriously engage men and tell them the faults in their thinking from a White female’s perspective, seriously.

    You guys should have a pad an paper out and be taking notes – she is doing YOU a favor by disabusing you of your assumptions about women – White women, but you are completely oblivious to it. Do you think she knows more women and how they think or you do?

    Do what you will, just don’t whine about it if people like me out-breed you because you were too busy thinking about how cool it would be to introduce axlotl tanks into the human species.

    I kid you not; did any of you ever read Tortoise and the Hare?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    I don't know; I, for one, will be quite interested to see how the WN Clone Republic turns out. Somewhere far away from here, of course.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. Anonymous[204] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie
    The existence of women does not need to be "renegotiated." This is patently obvious to anyone who is not a deranged lunatic.

    You remind me of someone, but I can't remember whom.

    Hmmm. Oh yeah.

    "The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race."

    -Sally Miller Gearhart

    That’s not a bad idea either, as the technology advances we can run experiments by seeing the results of female-only city states(or female majority city states) versus male-only city states, then see what their accomplishments will be in art, science, expansion and warfare. Once the biological imperative is reduced, it’ll help us learn a lot about any potential advantages from isolation and stability versus dynamicism, etc.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. @Anonymous
    Its very revealing to see the loyalties of women laid bare so easily, isn't it?

    Fortunately, such things will be of only secondary importance soon!

    Its very revealing to see the loyalties of women laid bare so easily, isn’t it?

    I think Talha is a better person than you, therefore I’m a race traitor and don’t care about the well-being and future of my own half a dozen White children.

    You suffer from what we call confirmation bias.

    Here this might help, and don’t feel bad. Everyone has to start somewhere.

    Logic For Dummies https://www.amazon.com/dp/0471799416/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_AU9ZAbM75T1F1

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    You're actually very logically inconsistent. Your postulates are inconsistent with the axioms of either advancing or maximizing the white race(eugenics, mechanization) and you've demonstrated significant scientific innumeracy. Its all really sad :(

    Its okay! I expected obsolete thinking from someone to be obsolete someday.
    , @Talha

    my own half a dozen White children.
     
    Now THAT is how it's done. Wow!

    Damn - you guys should really, really be taking notes! This lady is talking from experience.

    Lady, much respect to you - may your children never disappoint you, may they always be the coolness of your eyes, may they fulfill the immense rights you have upon them! May your generations flourish for ages and ages.

    A person came to Messenger of God (pbuh) and asked, "Who among people is most deserving of my good companionship?"
    He said, "Your mother".
    He again asked, ''Who next?"
    He said, "Your mother".
    He again asked, ''Who next?"
    He said, "Your mother".
    He again asked, ''Who next?"
    Then he said, "Your father."
    -reported in Bukhari & Muslim

    Peace.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. @Rosie

    Its very revealing to see the loyalties of women laid bare so easily, isn’t it?
     
    I think Talha is a better person than you, therefore I'm a race traitor and don't care about the well-being and future of my own half a dozen White children.

    You suffer from what we call confirmation bias.

    Here this might help, and don't feel bad. Everyone has to start somewhere.

    Logic For Dummies https://www.amazon.com/dp/0471799416/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_AU9ZAbM75T1F1

    You’re actually very logically inconsistent. Your postulates are inconsistent with the axioms of either advancing or maximizing the white race(eugenics, mechanization) and you’ve demonstrated significant scientific innumeracy. Its all really sad :(

    Its okay! I expected obsolete thinking from someone to be obsolete someday.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. @Rosie

    Its very revealing to see the loyalties of women laid bare so easily, isn’t it?
     
    I think Talha is a better person than you, therefore I'm a race traitor and don't care about the well-being and future of my own half a dozen White children.

    You suffer from what we call confirmation bias.

    Here this might help, and don't feel bad. Everyone has to start somewhere.

    Logic For Dummies https://www.amazon.com/dp/0471799416/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_AU9ZAbM75T1F1

    my own half a dozen White children.

    Now THAT is how it’s done. Wow!

    Damn – you guys should really, really be taking notes! This lady is talking from experience.

    Lady, much respect to you – may your children never disappoint you, may they always be the coolness of your eyes, may they fulfill the immense rights you have upon them! May your generations flourish for ages and ages.

    A person came to Messenger of God (pbuh) and asked, “Who among people is most deserving of my good companionship?”
    He said, “Your mother”.
    He again asked, ”Who next?”
    He said, “Your mother”.
    He again asked, ”Who next?”
    He said, “Your mother”.
    He again asked, ”Who next?”
    Then he said, “Your father.”
    -reported in Bukhari & Muslim

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. @Rosie

    Eugenically, did you not note that the infant lambs were healthier since the wombs are completely controlled?
     
    And expensive formula is better for babies than mom's almost-free breast milk.

    Cost drops with scale, so the more it is done, the cheaper it is overall. Its the basis of all modern medicine.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. Where did Rosie and the anonymous commenter come from?

    Rosie keeps talking about feminism. She talks about nothing else. It’s totally boring, and it’s not the focus of this blog. Don’t obsess over women’s (or men’s) rights. It doesn’t matter much. If you have nothing else to talk about, go to a blog specializing in the topic. There are many.

    The anonymous commenter is a total sperg, or troll, or both. His dystopian ideas are amusing, though. But quickly get boring. Same offtopic shit, and unlike Rosie, his ideas expressed here are horrible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Yeah but everyone has their pet projects they go off topic with. Mr. Karlin can pull the rug on it whenever he likes.

    I mean, my eyes glaze over whenever you guys start going into deep-dive mode into WW2 and all the Slavic blah, blah, blah - bores the hell out of me (as I'm sure my postings on Islamic jurisprudence and Imam so-and-so do for others) but so what. Just ignore it - it's an open thread.

    You want to make this place an even more disproportional sausage-fest than it already is?

    Give the lady a break - she usually doesn't go super into it unless fools start talking hyper-nonsense about women.

    I'm telling you guys, she's got some good things in there that you should be paying attention to.

    Peace.
    , @Anonymous
    Where did the anonymous commenter come from?

    From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. @reiner Tor
    Where did Rosie and the anonymous commenter come from?

    Rosie keeps talking about feminism. She talks about nothing else. It’s totally boring, and it’s not the focus of this blog. Don’t obsess over women’s (or men’s) rights. It doesn’t matter much. If you have nothing else to talk about, go to a blog specializing in the topic. There are many.

    The anonymous commenter is a total sperg, or troll, or both. His dystopian ideas are amusing, though. But quickly get boring. Same offtopic shit, and unlike Rosie, his ideas expressed here are horrible.

    Yeah but everyone has their pet projects they go off topic with. Mr. Karlin can pull the rug on it whenever he likes.

    I mean, my eyes glaze over whenever you guys start going into deep-dive mode into WW2 and all the Slavic blah, blah, blah – bores the hell out of me (as I’m sure my postings on Islamic jurisprudence and Imam so-and-so do for others) but so what. Just ignore it – it’s an open thread.

    You want to make this place an even more disproportional sausage-fest than it already is?

    Give the lady a break – she usually doesn’t go super into it unless fools start talking hyper-nonsense about women.

    I’m telling you guys, she’s got some good things in there that you should be paying attention to.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    No, the Islamic jurisprudence is actually interesting. Your brand of Islam is not braindead at least. But you talk about many other topics.

    What was strange is that I first remember Rosie from the alt-right thread, and she now she has attracted some strange MGTOW creature from somewhere to have a debate.

    It’s like someone appears from nowhere talking about how important the sanctity of marriage is, and how divorce and adultery should be outlawed, and later a free love advocating hippie came and they started debating each other.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. @reiner Tor
    Where did Rosie and the anonymous commenter come from?

    Rosie keeps talking about feminism. She talks about nothing else. It’s totally boring, and it’s not the focus of this blog. Don’t obsess over women’s (or men’s) rights. It doesn’t matter much. If you have nothing else to talk about, go to a blog specializing in the topic. There are many.

    The anonymous commenter is a total sperg, or troll, or both. His dystopian ideas are amusing, though. But quickly get boring. Same offtopic shit, and unlike Rosie, his ideas expressed here are horrible.

    Where did the anonymous commenter come from?

    From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. @Talha
    Yeah but everyone has their pet projects they go off topic with. Mr. Karlin can pull the rug on it whenever he likes.

    I mean, my eyes glaze over whenever you guys start going into deep-dive mode into WW2 and all the Slavic blah, blah, blah - bores the hell out of me (as I'm sure my postings on Islamic jurisprudence and Imam so-and-so do for others) but so what. Just ignore it - it's an open thread.

    You want to make this place an even more disproportional sausage-fest than it already is?

    Give the lady a break - she usually doesn't go super into it unless fools start talking hyper-nonsense about women.

    I'm telling you guys, she's got some good things in there that you should be paying attention to.

    Peace.

    No, the Islamic jurisprudence is actually interesting. Your brand of Islam is not braindead at least. But you talk about many other topics.

    What was strange is that I first remember Rosie from the alt-right thread, and she now she has attracted some strange MGTOW creature from somewhere to have a debate.

    It’s like someone appears from nowhere talking about how important the sanctity of marriage is, and how divorce and adultery should be outlawed, and later a free love advocating hippie came and they started debating each other.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    OK - I see what you are getting at. Well, I can say for myself, I got trolled a lot by anonymous commenters - a lot. Most of them were obvious hasbara - they wear you down - let me tell ya'. It was really helpful when I started to ignore the lion's share of anonymous comments. I'll throw in once in a while, but not so much as before. Maybe she just needs to get the hang of things around here.

    Peace.
    , @Rosie

    It’s like someone appears from nowhere talking about how important the sanctity of marriage is, and how divorce and adultery should be outlawed, and later a free love advocating hippie came and they started debating each other.
     
    If I'm creating problems, I'm sorry about that. I'm not sure what to do anymore. All I know is that the fish rots from the head, and something in this movement is rotten.

    The latest from Anglin:

    "They want to be choked, slapped around, have their hair pulled. They basically want it to feel like rape.

    ***

    They don’t even make decisions, women. They are just wild animals, who function exclusively on instinct, and their instinct is to get fucked by the guy with the highest status.

    ***

    We have to start looking at these creatures as what they are: machines designed to serve us, pleasure us and reproduce our genes. Nothing more.

    And if you take that view, you are going to be successful with women.

    If the Alt-Right takes that view, then it is going to be attractive to women."

    Meanwhile, DS was supporting Ricky Vaughan, or whatever his name is, in his attacks on Paul Nehlen, supposedly over his normie-repellent optics.

    If this sounds like the ravings of a lunatic whom any rational person would ignore, consider that what now commonly appears on unz.com was once DS-tier edgy.

    Anglin is going to get someone thrown in prison for rape. I don't think it can reasonably be denied anymore that someone is purposely trying to sabotage the alt-Right, and I don't know that it's Anglin.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. @Talha
    Yeah, yeah - keep laughing - we know how to have babies - you might want to take a few pointers.

    This completely doesn't answer why you are not taking the concerns of a White lady, who is red-pilled enough to be at UNZ and trying to seriously engage men and tell them the faults in their thinking from a White female's perspective, seriously.

    You guys should have a pad an paper out and be taking notes - she is doing YOU a favor by disabusing you of your assumptions about women - White women, but you are completely oblivious to it. Do you think she knows more women and how they think or you do?

    Do what you will, just don't whine about it if people like me out-breed you because you were too busy thinking about how cool it would be to introduce axlotl tanks into the human species.

    I kid you not; did any of you ever read Tortoise and the Hare?

    I don’t know; I, for one, will be quite interested to see how the WN Clone Republic turns out. Somewhere far away from here, of course.

    Read More
    • LOL: Talha, reiner Tor
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Yes, the WN Clown Republic sounds truly exciting.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. @reiner Tor
    No, the Islamic jurisprudence is actually interesting. Your brand of Islam is not braindead at least. But you talk about many other topics.

    What was strange is that I first remember Rosie from the alt-right thread, and she now she has attracted some strange MGTOW creature from somewhere to have a debate.

    It’s like someone appears from nowhere talking about how important the sanctity of marriage is, and how divorce and adultery should be outlawed, and later a free love advocating hippie came and they started debating each other.

    OK – I see what you are getting at. Well, I can say for myself, I got trolled a lot by anonymous commenters – a lot. Most of them were obvious hasbara – they wear you down – let me tell ya’. It was really helpful when I started to ignore the lion’s share of anonymous comments. I’ll throw in once in a while, but not so much as before. Maybe she just needs to get the hang of things around here.

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. @reiner Tor
    No, the Islamic jurisprudence is actually interesting. Your brand of Islam is not braindead at least. But you talk about many other topics.

    What was strange is that I first remember Rosie from the alt-right thread, and she now she has attracted some strange MGTOW creature from somewhere to have a debate.

    It’s like someone appears from nowhere talking about how important the sanctity of marriage is, and how divorce and adultery should be outlawed, and later a free love advocating hippie came and they started debating each other.

    It’s like someone appears from nowhere talking about how important the sanctity of marriage is, and how divorce and adultery should be outlawed, and later a free love advocating hippie came and they started debating each other.

    If I’m creating problems, I’m sorry about that. I’m not sure what to do anymore. All I know is that the fish rots from the head, and something in this movement is rotten.

    The latest from Anglin:

    “They want to be choked, slapped around, have their hair pulled. They basically want it to feel like rape.

    ***

    They don’t even make decisions, women. They are just wild animals, who function exclusively on instinct, and their instinct is to get fucked by the guy with the highest status.

    ***

    We have to start looking at these creatures as what they are: machines designed to serve us, pleasure us and reproduce our genes. Nothing more.

    And if you take that view, you are going to be successful with women.

    If the Alt-Right takes that view, then it is going to be attractive to women.”

    Meanwhile, DS was supporting Ricky Vaughan, or whatever his name is, in his attacks on Paul Nehlen, supposedly over his normie-repellent optics.

    If this sounds like the ravings of a lunatic whom any rational person would ignore, consider that what now commonly appears on unz.com was once DS-tier edgy.

    Anglin is going to get someone thrown in prison for rape. I don’t think it can reasonably be denied anymore that someone is purposely trying to sabotage the alt-Right, and I don’t know that it’s Anglin.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    If those are seriously his views or even if he is publishing them for everyone to see - the man is a major liability. Either because he is a buffoon or (as you intuit) being put up to do so in order to sabotage things or push it to the extreme to provoke a reaction.

    Guy sounds like Anjem Chaudry for us actually.

    You'll know if they start giving him interviews on MSM as the public face of the movement.

    Peace.
    , @Talha

    Anglin is going to get someone thrown in prison for rape.
     
    Knowing what goes on in the prison system - that could be interpreted a couple of ways. Oy vey!!!
    , @Anonymous
    It sounds like your feelings were hurt. That's terrible!

    Nothing could be more important.
    , @reiner Tor
    You are not creating problems. I just found it strange that this whole feminism/men’s rights topic got so central in an increasing number of threads.

    A friendly advice: don’t read Anglin. I read one good and funny article by him a year ago (it was about moderate racists getting the backlash for the deeds of the few radicals, I think), but otherwise I’m unaware of any of his other writings, and your quotes didn’t make me eager to read anything else.

    Regarding the alt-right, it’s not a unified movement with membership cards, so it’s impossible to purge its ranks. The only small contribution would be to not feed trolls like Anglin by visiting his pages or mentioning him elsewhere. He won’t be the Führer of the White Republic, so just ignore him.

    Here we occasionally talk about whether it was a smart thing to give women the vote (the conclusion was I think that it was irrelevant and inevitable anyway, but might have made things slightly worse) or whether women would be worse judges than men (if I recall correctly the conclusion was that they might be slightly worse, at least for young and charming criminals, but that they probably have the same slight or even not so slight edge over man judges when it comes to young and pretty female criminals), but that’s just because we’re spergs.

    Feel free to join the rest of the conversation, too.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. @Rosie

    It’s like someone appears from nowhere talking about how important the sanctity of marriage is, and how divorce and adultery should be outlawed, and later a free love advocating hippie came and they started debating each other.
     
    If I'm creating problems, I'm sorry about that. I'm not sure what to do anymore. All I know is that the fish rots from the head, and something in this movement is rotten.

    The latest from Anglin:

    "They want to be choked, slapped around, have their hair pulled. They basically want it to feel like rape.

    ***

    They don’t even make decisions, women. They are just wild animals, who function exclusively on instinct, and their instinct is to get fucked by the guy with the highest status.

    ***

    We have to start looking at these creatures as what they are: machines designed to serve us, pleasure us and reproduce our genes. Nothing more.

    And if you take that view, you are going to be successful with women.

    If the Alt-Right takes that view, then it is going to be attractive to women."

    Meanwhile, DS was supporting Ricky Vaughan, or whatever his name is, in his attacks on Paul Nehlen, supposedly over his normie-repellent optics.

    If this sounds like the ravings of a lunatic whom any rational person would ignore, consider that what now commonly appears on unz.com was once DS-tier edgy.

    Anglin is going to get someone thrown in prison for rape. I don't think it can reasonably be denied anymore that someone is purposely trying to sabotage the alt-Right, and I don't know that it's Anglin.

    If those are seriously his views or even if he is publishing them for everyone to see – the man is a major liability. Either because he is a buffoon or (as you intuit) being put up to do so in order to sabotage things or push it to the extreme to provoke a reaction.

    Guy sounds like Anjem Chaudry for us actually.

    You’ll know if they start giving him interviews on MSM as the public face of the movement.

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. @Rosie

    It’s like someone appears from nowhere talking about how important the sanctity of marriage is, and how divorce and adultery should be outlawed, and later a free love advocating hippie came and they started debating each other.
     
    If I'm creating problems, I'm sorry about that. I'm not sure what to do anymore. All I know is that the fish rots from the head, and something in this movement is rotten.

    The latest from Anglin:

    "They want to be choked, slapped around, have their hair pulled. They basically want it to feel like rape.

    ***

    They don’t even make decisions, women. They are just wild animals, who function exclusively on instinct, and their instinct is to get fucked by the guy with the highest status.

    ***

    We have to start looking at these creatures as what they are: machines designed to serve us, pleasure us and reproduce our genes. Nothing more.

    And if you take that view, you are going to be successful with women.

    If the Alt-Right takes that view, then it is going to be attractive to women."

    Meanwhile, DS was supporting Ricky Vaughan, or whatever his name is, in his attacks on Paul Nehlen, supposedly over his normie-repellent optics.

    If this sounds like the ravings of a lunatic whom any rational person would ignore, consider that what now commonly appears on unz.com was once DS-tier edgy.

    Anglin is going to get someone thrown in prison for rape. I don't think it can reasonably be denied anymore that someone is purposely trying to sabotage the alt-Right, and I don't know that it's Anglin.

    Anglin is going to get someone thrown in prison for rape.

    Knowing what goes on in the prison system – that could be interpreted a couple of ways. Oy vey!!!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. Anonymous[220] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    It’s like someone appears from nowhere talking about how important the sanctity of marriage is, and how divorce and adultery should be outlawed, and later a free love advocating hippie came and they started debating each other.
     
    If I'm creating problems, I'm sorry about that. I'm not sure what to do anymore. All I know is that the fish rots from the head, and something in this movement is rotten.

    The latest from Anglin:

    "They want to be choked, slapped around, have their hair pulled. They basically want it to feel like rape.

    ***

    They don’t even make decisions, women. They are just wild animals, who function exclusively on instinct, and their instinct is to get fucked by the guy with the highest status.

    ***

    We have to start looking at these creatures as what they are: machines designed to serve us, pleasure us and reproduce our genes. Nothing more.

    And if you take that view, you are going to be successful with women.

    If the Alt-Right takes that view, then it is going to be attractive to women."

    Meanwhile, DS was supporting Ricky Vaughan, or whatever his name is, in his attacks on Paul Nehlen, supposedly over his normie-repellent optics.

    If this sounds like the ravings of a lunatic whom any rational person would ignore, consider that what now commonly appears on unz.com was once DS-tier edgy.

    Anglin is going to get someone thrown in prison for rape. I don't think it can reasonably be denied anymore that someone is purposely trying to sabotage the alt-Right, and I don't know that it's Anglin.

    It sounds like your feelings were hurt. That’s terrible!

    Nothing could be more important.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. @Rosie

    It’s like someone appears from nowhere talking about how important the sanctity of marriage is, and how divorce and adultery should be outlawed, and later a free love advocating hippie came and they started debating each other.
     
    If I'm creating problems, I'm sorry about that. I'm not sure what to do anymore. All I know is that the fish rots from the head, and something in this movement is rotten.

    The latest from Anglin:

    "They want to be choked, slapped around, have their hair pulled. They basically want it to feel like rape.

    ***

    They don’t even make decisions, women. They are just wild animals, who function exclusively on instinct, and their instinct is to get fucked by the guy with the highest status.

    ***

    We have to start looking at these creatures as what they are: machines designed to serve us, pleasure us and reproduce our genes. Nothing more.

    And if you take that view, you are going to be successful with women.

    If the Alt-Right takes that view, then it is going to be attractive to women."

    Meanwhile, DS was supporting Ricky Vaughan, or whatever his name is, in his attacks on Paul Nehlen, supposedly over his normie-repellent optics.

    If this sounds like the ravings of a lunatic whom any rational person would ignore, consider that what now commonly appears on unz.com was once DS-tier edgy.

    Anglin is going to get someone thrown in prison for rape. I don't think it can reasonably be denied anymore that someone is purposely trying to sabotage the alt-Right, and I don't know that it's Anglin.

    You are not creating problems. I just found it strange that this whole feminism/men’s rights topic got so central in an increasing number of threads.

    A friendly advice: don’t read Anglin. I read one good and funny article by him a year ago (it was about moderate racists getting the backlash for the deeds of the few radicals, I think), but otherwise I’m unaware of any of his other writings, and your quotes didn’t make me eager to read anything else.

    Regarding the alt-right, it’s not a unified movement with membership cards, so it’s impossible to purge its ranks. The only small contribution would be to not feed trolls like Anglin by visiting his pages or mentioning him elsewhere. He won’t be the Führer of the White Republic, so just ignore him.

    Here we occasionally talk about whether it was a smart thing to give women the vote (the conclusion was I think that it was irrelevant and inevitable anyway, but might have made things slightly worse) or whether women would be worse judges than men (if I recall correctly the conclusion was that they might be slightly worse, at least for young and charming criminals, but that they probably have the same slight or even not so slight edge over man judges when it comes to young and pretty female criminals), but that’s just because we’re spergs.

    Feel free to join the rest of the conversation, too.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. @Anon
    I don't know; I, for one, will be quite interested to see how the WN Clone Republic turns out. Somewhere far away from here, of course.

    Yes, the WN Clown Republic sounds truly exciting.

    Read More
    • LOL: Talha
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I don't think human cloning as we understand it is happening. Let me explain, please:

    1/ Eggs are harvested from women, or from a previous stock of frozen eggs. Immature eggs might be cloned, but they don't actually form the whole of the resulting stock. You can also select here based on personality to account for part of the resulting child.

    2/ Male sperm from males will then be combined with the egg via the same methods as of in-vitro fertilization. You can also edit the sperm and select based on the personality characteristics of the father. This also allows you to select the sex of the child.

    3/ Once you have successful fertilization, you transfer this into the controlled environment of the artificial womb. Unlike normal wombs which have foreign blood, potential nutritional issues, alcohol and so on, artificial wombs allow for a steady environment for maximization of fetal development.

    4/ You can also observe accurately during growth for any birth defects through biopsy or blood draw - both which is difficult or nearly impossible with normal pregnancy. This allows for fetuses with issues to be diagnosed early and remedial treatment to be planned for this, or for termination of pregnancy if the fetus is developing in a severely unhealthy way.

    5/ Upon delivery, the machine can simply be opened up and therefore no stress is applied to the child for birth. This eliminates maternal mortality and highly lowers infant mortality, as any issues would have been caught early.

    This also maximizes freedom for women, so in many ways, I think it hardly anti-feminism at all. Freed from the burden of having children, the remaining women can live their lives dedicated to their self-actualization, while the new crop of women(and men) created will be selected to live their lives happily as productive members of society.

    No cloning is happening, this still allows for recombination and randomization, which allows for unique population to develop. The white race will remain, stronger and smarter than ever, and far more numerous than before.
    , @Anonymous
    Actually, nevermind, this is exciting! There's now a path to fully creating humans without use of sperm or eggs at all!

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23831730-300-making-babies-how-to-create-human-embryos-with-no-egg-or-sperm/

    We won't need either men or women!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. Anonymous[164] • Disclaimer says:
    @reiner Tor
    Yes, the WN Clown Republic sounds truly exciting.

    I don’t think human cloning as we understand it is happening. Let me explain, please:

    1/ Eggs are harvested from women, or from a previous stock of frozen eggs. Immature eggs might be cloned, but they don’t actually form the whole of the resulting stock. You can also select here based on personality to account for part of the resulting child.

    2/ Male sperm from males will then be combined with the egg via the same methods as of in-vitro fertilization. You can also edit the sperm and select based on the personality characteristics of the father. This also allows you to select the sex of the child.

    3/ Once you have successful fertilization, you transfer this into the controlled environment of the artificial womb. Unlike normal wombs which have foreign blood, potential nutritional issues, alcohol and so on, artificial wombs allow for a steady environment for maximization of fetal development.

    4/ You can also observe accurately during growth for any birth defects through biopsy or blood draw – both which is difficult or nearly impossible with normal pregnancy. This allows for fetuses with issues to be diagnosed early and remedial treatment to be planned for this, or for termination of pregnancy if the fetus is developing in a severely unhealthy way.

    5/ Upon delivery, the machine can simply be opened up and therefore no stress is applied to the child for birth. This eliminates maternal mortality and highly lowers infant mortality, as any issues would have been caught early.

    This also maximizes freedom for women, so in many ways, I think it hardly anti-feminism at all. Freed from the burden of having children, the remaining women can live their lives dedicated to their self-actualization, while the new crop of women(and men) created will be selected to live their lives happily as productive members of society.

    No cloning is happening, this still allows for recombination and randomization, which allows for unique population to develop. The white race will remain, stronger and smarter than ever, and far more numerous than before.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    In essence, exactly what we are introduced to in the first couple of chapters of Huxley's "Brave New World".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. @Anonymous
    I don't think human cloning as we understand it is happening. Let me explain, please:

    1/ Eggs are harvested from women, or from a previous stock of frozen eggs. Immature eggs might be cloned, but they don't actually form the whole of the resulting stock. You can also select here based on personality to account for part of the resulting child.

    2/ Male sperm from males will then be combined with the egg via the same methods as of in-vitro fertilization. You can also edit the sperm and select based on the personality characteristics of the father. This also allows you to select the sex of the child.

    3/ Once you have successful fertilization, you transfer this into the controlled environment of the artificial womb. Unlike normal wombs which have foreign blood, potential nutritional issues, alcohol and so on, artificial wombs allow for a steady environment for maximization of fetal development.

    4/ You can also observe accurately during growth for any birth defects through biopsy or blood draw - both which is difficult or nearly impossible with normal pregnancy. This allows for fetuses with issues to be diagnosed early and remedial treatment to be planned for this, or for termination of pregnancy if the fetus is developing in a severely unhealthy way.

    5/ Upon delivery, the machine can simply be opened up and therefore no stress is applied to the child for birth. This eliminates maternal mortality and highly lowers infant mortality, as any issues would have been caught early.

    This also maximizes freedom for women, so in many ways, I think it hardly anti-feminism at all. Freed from the burden of having children, the remaining women can live their lives dedicated to their self-actualization, while the new crop of women(and men) created will be selected to live their lives happily as productive members of society.

    No cloning is happening, this still allows for recombination and randomization, which allows for unique population to develop. The white race will remain, stronger and smarter than ever, and far more numerous than before.

    In essence, exactly what we are introduced to in the first couple of chapters of Huxley’s “Brave New World”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    No, Brave New World assumed a number of things that we now know is scientifically impossible, such as trance learning and so on. My explanation is scientifically literate. This is the equivalent of industrialization instead of primitive hand tools.

    From a culture of people who still use primitive hand tools and feces-polluting animals, however, I wouldn't expect you to understand. You will also be obsolete.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. Anonymous[164] • Disclaimer says:
    @Talha
    In essence, exactly what we are introduced to in the first couple of chapters of Huxley's "Brave New World".

    No, Brave New World assumed a number of things that we now know is scientifically impossible, such as trance learning and so on. My explanation is scientifically literate. This is the equivalent of industrialization instead of primitive hand tools.

    From a culture of people who still use primitive hand tools and feces-polluting animals, however, I wouldn’t expect you to understand. You will also be obsolete.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    No - I remember the details - inserting alcohol into the fetus to retard intelligence and what not to get the right type of human fit for specific pre-determined work.

    So yeah - not "exactly". There was no way Huxley was going to get it right based on the era he lived in, but man - what a vision!


    You will also be obsolete.
     
    Yeah - they keep telling us this. I'm sure we'll start taking this seriously at some point.

    Anyway, you can visit us in the reservations just like in Brave New World!

    I actually support cultures that want to remain tool-using and not transition into technocracy and eventually into technopolies where they produce babies in artificial wombs.

    But hey, I support you too - I think it's great you have a vision of what you want the future to look like. I certainly don't want to get in the way of you achieving your idea of utopia.

    , @Talha
    Would it be fair to say you are an atheist, if not agnostic? Just wondering...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. Anonymous[204] • Disclaimer says:
    @reiner Tor
    Yes, the WN Clown Republic sounds truly exciting.

    Actually, nevermind, this is exciting! There’s now a path to fully creating humans without use of sperm or eggs at all!

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23831730-300-making-babies-how-to-create-human-embryos-with-no-egg-or-sperm/

    We won’t need either men or women!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. @Anonymous
    No, Brave New World assumed a number of things that we now know is scientifically impossible, such as trance learning and so on. My explanation is scientifically literate. This is the equivalent of industrialization instead of primitive hand tools.

    From a culture of people who still use primitive hand tools and feces-polluting animals, however, I wouldn't expect you to understand. You will also be obsolete.

    No – I remember the details – inserting alcohol into the fetus to retard intelligence and what not to get the right type of human fit for specific pre-determined work.

    So yeah – not “exactly”. There was no way Huxley was going to get it right based on the era he lived in, but man – what a vision!

    You will also be obsolete.

    Yeah – they keep telling us this. I’m sure we’ll start taking this seriously at some point.

    Anyway, you can visit us in the reservations just like in Brave New World!

    I actually support cultures that want to remain tool-using and not transition into technocracy and eventually into technopolies where they produce babies in artificial wombs.

    But hey, I support you too – I think it’s great you have a vision of what you want the future to look like. I certainly don’t want to get in the way of you achieving your idea of utopia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    No – I remember the details – inserting alcohol into the fetus to retard intelligence and what not to get the right type of human fit for specific pre-determined work.

     

    Actual reality of fetal alcohol syndrome - is more like inability to work, poor impulse control, lack of attention span, listening to music of Justin Bieber, etc.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. @Anonymous
    No, Brave New World assumed a number of things that we now know is scientifically impossible, such as trance learning and so on. My explanation is scientifically literate. This is the equivalent of industrialization instead of primitive hand tools.

    From a culture of people who still use primitive hand tools and feces-polluting animals, however, I wouldn't expect you to understand. You will also be obsolete.

    Would it be fair to say you are an atheist, if not agnostic? Just wondering…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  200. @Talha
    No - I remember the details - inserting alcohol into the fetus to retard intelligence and what not to get the right type of human fit for specific pre-determined work.

    So yeah - not "exactly". There was no way Huxley was going to get it right based on the era he lived in, but man - what a vision!


    You will also be obsolete.
     
    Yeah - they keep telling us this. I'm sure we'll start taking this seriously at some point.

    Anyway, you can visit us in the reservations just like in Brave New World!

    I actually support cultures that want to remain tool-using and not transition into technocracy and eventually into technopolies where they produce babies in artificial wombs.

    But hey, I support you too - I think it's great you have a vision of what you want the future to look like. I certainly don't want to get in the way of you achieving your idea of utopia.

    No – I remember the details – inserting alcohol into the fetus to retard intelligence and what not to get the right type of human fit for specific pre-determined work.

    Actual reality of fetal alcohol syndrome – is more like inability to work, poor impulse control, lack of attention span, listening to music of Justin Bieber, etc.

    Read More
    • LOL: Talha
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS