The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
Our Biorealistic Future
🔊 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

graph-iq-gdp-per-capita

There are three main reasons why the correlation between national IQ and GDP per capita is only around r=0.7, instead of r=0.9.

Oil/resource windfalls: Saudi Arabia would otherwise be about as prosperous as Yemen.

The legacy of Communism: Central planning and especially the lunacy that is Maoism are far less effective than free markets.

The legacy of Malthusianism: This is the most subtle factor, but it used to be very important. Countries like China, Japan, and to a lesser extent India used to be stuck in a high-level equilibrium trap; quite intelligent and productive, but unable to accumulate capital surpluses due to almost everyone being at the limits of subsistence.

This was not the case with relatively land-rich Latin America, where escaping from the Malthusian trap was easier. As a result, the degree of human capital there has long correlated much better with the region’s wealth. (Argentina even had a resource windfall effect around a century ago).

But all these factors will diminish in the coming decades!

Practically everyone outside Sub-Saharan Africa has more or less escaped the Malthusian trap.

Communist regimes have nearly all collapsed, leaving just a few relics like Cuba and Best Korea as monuments to failure. Moreover, over the long term, we can expect institutions everywhere to get better, as different countries adopt established best practices – occasional backsliding as with Venezuela regardless.

The impact of resource windfalls – apart from a few exceptions (e.g. Botswana – diamonds), we’re speaking about oil – will likewise decline. Technology has conquered Hubbert’s peak from the supply side, and soon enough, electric batteries are going to cut in from the demand side.

map-usa-automation-risk

Even today, it is presumably not an accident that the countries with the most developed automation in manufacturing – Germany, Switzerland, (Northern) Italy, Japan, South Korea, parts of the United States, and increasingly, China – are those where the core populations have 100-105 range average IQs.

The coming automation of more and more sectors of the economy, including services, will impact disproportionately on low IQ jobs, so the impact on economic performance of average IQs – and especially smart fractions – should if anything increase even further.

The one thing that could throw a wrench into this – sort of – is if countries were to begin randomly adopting large-scale intelligence augmentation at highly differential rates (e.g. via CRISPR + genomics of IQ). But it isn’t likely to be random. It will almost certainly be the richest and least superstitious/obscurantist countries that will adopt these technologies first, and both of those factors are already highly correlated with IQ.

 
• Category: Economics • Tags: Automation, Futurism, Human Biodiversity 
Hide 79 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. It will almost certainly be the richest and least superstitious/obscruntantist countries that will adopt these technologies first, and both of those factors are already highly correlated with IQ.

    The countries you mentioned aren’t necessarily uniform though. In Germany the churches still have a lot of influence in these matters, despite increasing secularization; e.g. their influence is one of the main reasons for fairly restrictive laws on preimplantation genetic diagnosis ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preimplantation_genetic_diagnosis#Germany ; their reasoning, bizarre and perverse imo, is that this is eugenics and somehow might lead to disabled people in general being devalued and ultimately euthanized like in Nazi Germany). Given that Christian conservatives take this stance even when it’s about the avoidance of serious disability and suffering, I don’t think they’ll be exactly favorable towards intelligence-augmentation (in any case, as they have amply demonstrated in the last few years, they’re also enthusiastically in favour of mass immigration by comparatively low-IQ people).
    So I don’t think it’s just about IQ, cultural values also matter. Might be an advantage for the Chinese or Japanese (though who knows where these developments will lead).

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    Enhancing is different from destroying. From a Christian perspective abortion is wrong, even of people who are very disabled. But adding something to enhance may be a more complex situation. Screening certain embryos and destroying them is very different from positive modification. Churches don't oppose prenatal vitamins, for example.

    The will certainly oppose research into this, which involves the destruction of embryos. But if the process of enhancement doesn't involve that, I'm not so sure.

    , @Anatoly Karlin
    I agree there's be differences in responses.

    China will embrace it, the government won't even have to prod to get people to adopt it (according to opinion polls). The US probably won't ban it outright, but majority of people are opposed to intelligence augmentation according to opinion polls. Germany will be hampered by Christian SJWs. Russia will probably ban it because it because of the growing influence of state-sponsored obscurantism. Possibly the most welcoming climate for this in Europe will be in Denmark (liberal but less shiblib than the other Scandis) and Czechia (highly atheist, individualist).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /akarlin/our-biorealistic-future/#comment-2037543
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. ilkarnal says:

    I’m very bearish on the prospects of any Asian country forging ahead of the West in a meaningful way. They have proved quite capable of grabbing Western ideas and running with them, and absolutely pathetic when it comes to coming up with their own.

    The legacy of Communism

    USSR was communist. Also a powerhouse innovator, with lots of firsts. Grew less impressive later on and post-collapse, but that reflects a general trend towards passivity that infects the whole world.

    The legacy of Malthusianism

    Meaning they were very recently poor. Well, the West was very recently poor when it went and shot ahead of the whole world, powered by incredible innovations. Also, Japan has been very rich for a long time, never Communist, and still never managed to forge ahead.

    I think this line of thinking is nonsense. It explains why the Soviets couldn’t put the first person in space because they were cucked by Communism, and why the West couldn’t invent new things in the 1800s because it was cucked by poverty – in other words, it explains why things that happened couldn’t have happened. Not a useful path to walk.

    It will almost certainly be the richest and least superstitious/obscruntantist countries that will adopt these technologies first

    You presume too much. No-one is taking even the most basic steps to halt a rapid dysgenic spiral. There is no reason to assume this will change. It seems like there is a lot of hype in the air. Genetic modification has been around for several decades. It is very unlikely that we will have turnkey designer babies in the next few decades. The long term prospects for modification of humans are great, but they are not fundamentally different from livestock or crops, and will see their benefits reaped on the timescale of human generations, as benefits from new wheat strains are reaped on the timescale of their maturation speed. They will not result, right away, in anything incomparably and spectacularly superior.

    Elites are slothful and spectacularly ignorant. Where they look ‘based’ it is almost always just shallow superstition. Even more dismaying, those who are most intelligent and informed seem to have their heads rocketed higher and higher into the clouds, believing general AI, designer babies, and other sci fi shit will spring out into the real world shortly and make our mundane concerns irrelevant. Well, I don’t think so. I think our future is almost certain to be VERY mundane. The East will keep being a dwindling pack of stone faced imitators, the West will gradually Brazilify. If it is shaken up, it will be by war, not by technological developments, and war will startle observers with its resemblance to older conflicts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @songbird
    The Soviet space record is impressive in many ways, but a lot of their intellectual and fiscal resources were funnelled into very narrow fields. They also had a lot of failures (as in their lunar program) because they could only manage about a tenth the budget of NASA, and so couldn't do the very thorough testing of individual nuts and bolts. Meanwhile, the US missed some landmark firsts merely because of political concerns the USSR didn't have. The idea of using a militarily developed rocket to launch the first US satellite was rejected, so the the USSR won that round.

    I wouldn't say it is true that nobody is taking any steps against dysgenics. China seems to have tightened up their immigration policies considerably. Japan never even had the problem. Of course, that's not everything - it is not internal differential fertility - but it still is a great deal healthier than much of Europe and America
    , @Anonymous
    The USSR looked impressive because of tech transfers from the West:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_C._Sutton

    In a few words: there is no such thing as Soviet technology. Almost all — perhaps 90–95 percent — came directly or indirectly from the United States and its allies. In effect the United States and the NATO countries have built the Soviet Union. Its industrial and its military capabilities. This massive construction job has taken 50 years. Since the Revolution in 1917. It has been carried out through trade and the sale of plants, equipment and technical assistance.[4]
     
    , @Hieronymus of Canada

    They have proved quite capable of grabbing Western ideas and running with them, and absolutely pathetic when it comes to coming up with their own.
     
    I disagree, for the following reasons:

    1 - over the long term, China (and perhaps all of East Asia) have shown as much creativity as another center of human civilization.

    2 - Creativity is overrated somewhat. It's impressive coming up with ideas, but to implement it in terms of economic well-being and geopolitical power, all you need is to take the idea and implement well or on a big enough scale (hopeful both!).
    , @Daniel Chieh

    They have proved quite capable of grabbing Western ideas and running with them, and absolutely pathetic when it comes to coming up with their own.
     
    You're assuming that there's something magical about "creativity" and it is something that can't be isolated, studied and re-developed for, either in education methodology or the logic fed into digital systems to serve as proxies. In fact, there are some institutions in China that already focus on that.

    The paper below shows one example.

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/49722340_Effects_of_a_Learn_to_Think_intervention_program_on_primary_school_students

    , @lauris71

    No-one is taking even the most basic steps to halt a rapid dysgenic spiral.
     
    Agree 100%. The IQ-enchancing technologies and knowledge have been around thousands of years. There is nothing magical about CRISPR than cannot be (at the population level) achieved by applying basic selection to human breeding. But if anything, we have recently seen the opposition to eugenics growing stronger - and specifically in high-IQ West.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. songbird says:

    IMO, competitive threat makes large scale adoption inevitable.

    Can you imagine an ethnically homogeneous, 105 ave. IQ , 1.4 billion pop., completely developed China superpower going loggerheads with a multicultural, affirmative action, fractious, maybe 95 ave. IQ and dropping West? Perhaps. But what if the Chinese had an 180 ave. IQ?

    I don’t mean to scream “Yellow Peril”, but I think it is obvious that Asians would be more open to eugenics. I think it is also obvious that the global power dynamic is on track to change quite dramatically, even without considering eugenics, just dysgenics. In the West, the military and even the aerospace industry are developing considerable affirmative-action baggage. When the West faced the USSR, that same baggage was comparatively much smaller.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. Mr. XYZ says:

    Good post, Anatoly!

    However, I am not quite sure about this part:

    “The one thing that could throw a wrench into this – sort of – is if countries were to begin randomly adopting large-scale intelligence augmentation at highly differential rates (e.g. via CRISPR + genomics of IQ). But it isn’t likely to be random. It will almost certainly be the richest and least superstitious/obscruntantist countries that will adopt these technologies first, and both of those factors are already highly correlated with IQ.”

    Indeed, you are making it sound like high-IQ countries always have good ideas–which we know isn’t true due to the fact that many high-IQ countries are importing large numbers of low IQ people. Indeed, I wonder how long it will take many high-IQ liberals to slip out of their IQ denialism–after all, some conservatives are still global warming denialists in spite of the overwhelming evidence in favor of global warming and it being man-made.

    Plus, this is not to mention pro-lifers’ opposition to things such as IVF. Indeed, I don’t know whether pro-lifers would be comfortable modifying embryos for either intelligence or various other traits.

    Also, I don’t think that it’s much of a stretch for many low-IQ people to conclude that their low IQ is holding them back–especially once scientific knowledge and research in this field progresses even further. After all, even a low IQ person would probably be able to figure out that he or she–as well as his or her children–could live a much better life with a much higher IQ.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. Mr. XYZ says:

    : Yeah, East Asians appear to underperform in regards to both economic growth and human achievement (measured in their amount of Nobel Prizes per capita, et cetera)–especially relative to their IQ.

    Indeed, I don’t know why this is–a relative lack of curiosity, perhaps?

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    It might be conformism, and perhaps creativity.
    , @Anatoly Karlin
    Noticed this and speculated about it myself.

    James Thompson had a post describing an article by Kenya Kura, Jan te Nijenhuis, Edward Dutton which found that East Asians are indeed less curious: http://www.unz.com/jthompson/asians-bright-but-not-curious/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. AP says:
    @German_reader

    It will almost certainly be the richest and least superstitious/obscruntantist countries that will adopt these technologies first, and both of those factors are already highly correlated with IQ.
     
    The countries you mentioned aren't necessarily uniform though. In Germany the churches still have a lot of influence in these matters, despite increasing secularization; e.g. their influence is one of the main reasons for fairly restrictive laws on preimplantation genetic diagnosis ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preimplantation_genetic_diagnosis#Germany ; their reasoning, bizarre and perverse imo, is that this is eugenics and somehow might lead to disabled people in general being devalued and ultimately euthanized like in Nazi Germany). Given that Christian conservatives take this stance even when it's about the avoidance of serious disability and suffering, I don't think they'll be exactly favorable towards intelligence-augmentation (in any case, as they have amply demonstrated in the last few years, they're also enthusiastically in favour of mass immigration by comparatively low-IQ people).
    So I don't think it's just about IQ, cultural values also matter. Might be an advantage for the Chinese or Japanese (though who knows where these developments will lead).

    Enhancing is different from destroying. From a Christian perspective abortion is wrong, even of people who are very disabled. But adding something to enhance may be a more complex situation. Screening certain embryos and destroying them is very different from positive modification. Churches don’t oppose prenatal vitamins, for example.

    The will certainly oppose research into this, which involves the destruction of embryos. But if the process of enhancement doesn’t involve that, I’m not so sure.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. AP says:
    @Mr. XYZ
    @ilkarnal: Yeah, East Asians appear to underperform in regards to both economic growth and human achievement (measured in their amount of Nobel Prizes per capita, et cetera)--especially relative to their IQ.

    Indeed, I don't know why this is--a relative lack of curiosity, perhaps?

    It might be conformism, and perhaps creativity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. songbird says:
    @ilkarnal
    I'm very bearish on the prospects of any Asian country forging ahead of the West in a meaningful way. They have proved quite capable of grabbing Western ideas and running with them, and absolutely pathetic when it comes to coming up with their own.

    The legacy of Communism
     
    USSR was communist. Also a powerhouse innovator, with lots of firsts. Grew less impressive later on and post-collapse, but that reflects a general trend towards passivity that infects the whole world.

    The legacy of Malthusianism
     
    Meaning they were very recently poor. Well, the West was very recently poor when it went and shot ahead of the whole world, powered by incredible innovations. Also, Japan has been very rich for a long time, never Communist, and still never managed to forge ahead.

    I think this line of thinking is nonsense. It explains why the Soviets couldn't put the first person in space because they were cucked by Communism, and why the West couldn't invent new things in the 1800s because it was cucked by poverty - in other words, it explains why things that happened couldn't have happened. Not a useful path to walk.

    It will almost certainly be the richest and least superstitious/obscruntantist countries that will adopt these technologies first
     
    You presume too much. No-one is taking even the most basic steps to halt a rapid dysgenic spiral. There is no reason to assume this will change. It seems like there is a lot of hype in the air. Genetic modification has been around for several decades. It is very unlikely that we will have turnkey designer babies in the next few decades. The long term prospects for modification of humans are great, but they are not fundamentally different from livestock or crops, and will see their benefits reaped on the timescale of human generations, as benefits from new wheat strains are reaped on the timescale of their maturation speed. They will not result, right away, in anything incomparably and spectacularly superior.

    Elites are slothful and spectacularly ignorant. Where they look 'based' it is almost always just shallow superstition. Even more dismaying, those who are most intelligent and informed seem to have their heads rocketed higher and higher into the clouds, believing general AI, designer babies, and other sci fi shit will spring out into the real world shortly and make our mundane concerns irrelevant. Well, I don't think so. I think our future is almost certain to be VERY mundane. The East will keep being a dwindling pack of stone faced imitators, the West will gradually Brazilify. If it is shaken up, it will be by war, not by technological developments, and war will startle observers with its resemblance to older conflicts.

    The Soviet space record is impressive in many ways, but a lot of their intellectual and fiscal resources were funnelled into very narrow fields. They also had a lot of failures (as in their lunar program) because they could only manage about a tenth the budget of NASA, and so couldn’t do the very thorough testing of individual nuts and bolts. Meanwhile, the US missed some landmark firsts merely because of political concerns the USSR didn’t have. The idea of using a militarily developed rocket to launch the first US satellite was rejected, so the the USSR won that round.

    I wouldn’t say it is true that nobody is taking any steps against dysgenics. China seems to have tightened up their immigration policies considerably. Japan never even had the problem. Of course, that’s not everything – it is not internal differential fertility – but it still is a great deal healthier than much of Europe and America

    Read More
    • Replies: @ilkarnal
    East Asian countries have a big, big fertility problem. The fertility-driven dysgenics has no floor to it, while the race mixing won't result in arbitrarily low IQ people, even though the decline it drives is faster.

    it still is a great deal healthier than much of Europe and America
     
    A bit healthier, maybe. Still extremely extremely ill. As in, if we follow their example we are doomed. They are god-fucking-awful. Let's get that clear. Take away 'white guilt,' take away leftism, there is no indication that you aren't still utterly doomed if you do anything short of ban birth control for high IQ women.

    The Soviet space record is impressive in many ways, but a lot of their intellectual and fiscal resources were funnelled into very narrow fields.
     
    Throw in as many caveats as you like, they were still pushing the boundaries in a big way. They aren't anymore. They weren't, before they were Communist.

    They also had a lot of failures
     
    Both sides had a lot of failures.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @ilkarnal
    I'm very bearish on the prospects of any Asian country forging ahead of the West in a meaningful way. They have proved quite capable of grabbing Western ideas and running with them, and absolutely pathetic when it comes to coming up with their own.

    The legacy of Communism
     
    USSR was communist. Also a powerhouse innovator, with lots of firsts. Grew less impressive later on and post-collapse, but that reflects a general trend towards passivity that infects the whole world.

    The legacy of Malthusianism
     
    Meaning they were very recently poor. Well, the West was very recently poor when it went and shot ahead of the whole world, powered by incredible innovations. Also, Japan has been very rich for a long time, never Communist, and still never managed to forge ahead.

    I think this line of thinking is nonsense. It explains why the Soviets couldn't put the first person in space because they were cucked by Communism, and why the West couldn't invent new things in the 1800s because it was cucked by poverty - in other words, it explains why things that happened couldn't have happened. Not a useful path to walk.

    It will almost certainly be the richest and least superstitious/obscruntantist countries that will adopt these technologies first
     
    You presume too much. No-one is taking even the most basic steps to halt a rapid dysgenic spiral. There is no reason to assume this will change. It seems like there is a lot of hype in the air. Genetic modification has been around for several decades. It is very unlikely that we will have turnkey designer babies in the next few decades. The long term prospects for modification of humans are great, but they are not fundamentally different from livestock or crops, and will see their benefits reaped on the timescale of human generations, as benefits from new wheat strains are reaped on the timescale of their maturation speed. They will not result, right away, in anything incomparably and spectacularly superior.

    Elites are slothful and spectacularly ignorant. Where they look 'based' it is almost always just shallow superstition. Even more dismaying, those who are most intelligent and informed seem to have their heads rocketed higher and higher into the clouds, believing general AI, designer babies, and other sci fi shit will spring out into the real world shortly and make our mundane concerns irrelevant. Well, I don't think so. I think our future is almost certain to be VERY mundane. The East will keep being a dwindling pack of stone faced imitators, the West will gradually Brazilify. If it is shaken up, it will be by war, not by technological developments, and war will startle observers with its resemblance to older conflicts.

    The USSR looked impressive because of tech transfers from the West:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_C._Sutton

    In a few words: there is no such thing as Soviet technology. Almost all — perhaps 90–95 percent — came directly or indirectly from the United States and its allies. In effect the United States and the NATO countries have built the Soviet Union. Its industrial and its military capabilities. This massive construction job has taken 50 years. Since the Revolution in 1917. It has been carried out through trade and the sale of plants, equipment and technical assistance.[4]

    Read More
    • Replies: @ilkarnal
    Nonsense. You can't explain away Soviet technical achievements that ADVANCED the state of the art. Everyone copied and bought, if they could, better technology from Western countries, including other Western countries. The West gets tech transfers from other parts of the West. Somehow the Soviets put their asses into gear and did shit, made genuine advances. Were the best in the world in a whole range of stuff. They were real scary rivals. Nothing like that happened with Japan, ever. Nothing like that is happening with China or any other southeast or east Asian country.

    Damn fool ignorance, that's the problem. You get a sense a lot of people might as well have been born yesterday.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. @ilkarnal
    I'm very bearish on the prospects of any Asian country forging ahead of the West in a meaningful way. They have proved quite capable of grabbing Western ideas and running with them, and absolutely pathetic when it comes to coming up with their own.

    The legacy of Communism
     
    USSR was communist. Also a powerhouse innovator, with lots of firsts. Grew less impressive later on and post-collapse, but that reflects a general trend towards passivity that infects the whole world.

    The legacy of Malthusianism
     
    Meaning they were very recently poor. Well, the West was very recently poor when it went and shot ahead of the whole world, powered by incredible innovations. Also, Japan has been very rich for a long time, never Communist, and still never managed to forge ahead.

    I think this line of thinking is nonsense. It explains why the Soviets couldn't put the first person in space because they were cucked by Communism, and why the West couldn't invent new things in the 1800s because it was cucked by poverty - in other words, it explains why things that happened couldn't have happened. Not a useful path to walk.

    It will almost certainly be the richest and least superstitious/obscruntantist countries that will adopt these technologies first
     
    You presume too much. No-one is taking even the most basic steps to halt a rapid dysgenic spiral. There is no reason to assume this will change. It seems like there is a lot of hype in the air. Genetic modification has been around for several decades. It is very unlikely that we will have turnkey designer babies in the next few decades. The long term prospects for modification of humans are great, but they are not fundamentally different from livestock or crops, and will see their benefits reaped on the timescale of human generations, as benefits from new wheat strains are reaped on the timescale of their maturation speed. They will not result, right away, in anything incomparably and spectacularly superior.

    Elites are slothful and spectacularly ignorant. Where they look 'based' it is almost always just shallow superstition. Even more dismaying, those who are most intelligent and informed seem to have their heads rocketed higher and higher into the clouds, believing general AI, designer babies, and other sci fi shit will spring out into the real world shortly and make our mundane concerns irrelevant. Well, I don't think so. I think our future is almost certain to be VERY mundane. The East will keep being a dwindling pack of stone faced imitators, the West will gradually Brazilify. If it is shaken up, it will be by war, not by technological developments, and war will startle observers with its resemblance to older conflicts.

    They have proved quite capable of grabbing Western ideas and running with them, and absolutely pathetic when it comes to coming up with their own.

    I disagree, for the following reasons:

    1 – over the long term, China (and perhaps all of East Asia) have shown as much creativity as another center of human civilization.

    2 – Creativity is overrated somewhat. It’s impressive coming up with ideas, but to implement it in terms of economic well-being and geopolitical power, all you need is to take the idea and implement well or on a big enough scale (hopeful both!).

    Read More
    • Replies: @ilkarnal

    over the long term, China (and perhaps all of East Asia) have shown as much creativity as another center of human civilization.
     
    Not at all. The modern West is unparalleled. Nothing comes even remotely close.

    Also, over the long term, populations change. Maybe some capacity for creativity has been driven out, while in the West clearly that capacity skyrocketed.

    Creativity is overrated somewhat.
     
    Creativity is your word. I don't give a fuck what it is, it's what underlies being able to make genuine technological advancements. All of that. Box it. The West has more. The East is comparatively pathetic. They can only copy, only follow. For whatever reason. Could be just low 'creativity' - I doubt it. But I don't care what it is, I care that it is and that it has been stable at this point across a wide timespan and a wide range of conditions.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. ilkarnal says:
    @songbird
    The Soviet space record is impressive in many ways, but a lot of their intellectual and fiscal resources were funnelled into very narrow fields. They also had a lot of failures (as in their lunar program) because they could only manage about a tenth the budget of NASA, and so couldn't do the very thorough testing of individual nuts and bolts. Meanwhile, the US missed some landmark firsts merely because of political concerns the USSR didn't have. The idea of using a militarily developed rocket to launch the first US satellite was rejected, so the the USSR won that round.

    I wouldn't say it is true that nobody is taking any steps against dysgenics. China seems to have tightened up their immigration policies considerably. Japan never even had the problem. Of course, that's not everything - it is not internal differential fertility - but it still is a great deal healthier than much of Europe and America

    East Asian countries have a big, big fertility problem. The fertility-driven dysgenics has no floor to it, while the race mixing won’t result in arbitrarily low IQ people, even though the decline it drives is faster.

    it still is a great deal healthier than much of Europe and America

    A bit healthier, maybe. Still extremely extremely ill. As in, if we follow their example we are doomed. They are god-fucking-awful. Let’s get that clear. Take away ‘white guilt,’ take away leftism, there is no indication that you aren’t still utterly doomed if you do anything short of ban birth control for high IQ women.

    The Soviet space record is impressive in many ways, but a lot of their intellectual and fiscal resources were funnelled into very narrow fields.

    Throw in as many caveats as you like, they were still pushing the boundaries in a big way. They aren’t anymore. They weren’t, before they were Communist.

    They also had a lot of failures

    Both sides had a lot of failures.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. ilkarnal says:
    @Hieronymus of Canada

    They have proved quite capable of grabbing Western ideas and running with them, and absolutely pathetic when it comes to coming up with their own.
     
    I disagree, for the following reasons:

    1 - over the long term, China (and perhaps all of East Asia) have shown as much creativity as another center of human civilization.

    2 - Creativity is overrated somewhat. It's impressive coming up with ideas, but to implement it in terms of economic well-being and geopolitical power, all you need is to take the idea and implement well or on a big enough scale (hopeful both!).

    over the long term, China (and perhaps all of East Asia) have shown as much creativity as another center of human civilization.

    Not at all. The modern West is unparalleled. Nothing comes even remotely close.

    Also, over the long term, populations change. Maybe some capacity for creativity has been driven out, while in the West clearly that capacity skyrocketed.

    Creativity is overrated somewhat.

    Creativity is your word. I don’t give a fuck what it is, it’s what underlies being able to make genuine technological advancements. All of that. Box it. The West has more. The East is comparatively pathetic. They can only copy, only follow. For whatever reason. Could be just low ‘creativity’ – I doubt it. But I don’t care what it is, I care that it is and that it has been stable at this point across a wide timespan and a wide range of conditions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh

    Creativity is your word. I don’t give a fuck what it is, it’s what underlies being able to make genuine technological advancements. All of that. Box it. The West has more. The East is comparatively pathetic. They can only copy, only follow.
     
    This is so patently ridiculous by anyone who has spent time in East Asia as to not worth much response. Just a simple duckduckgo search brings this up:

    https://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2010/12/07/7-technologies-where-china-has-us-beat

    There are also examples in Bloomberg, MIT Technology Review, and Forbes off the top of my head.

    But at any rate, you can only develop advances if you're working on something; if, for example, the US doesn't have manufacturing plants and investment for manufacturing, the US isn't likely to find the next advance for manufacturing. Its the reason why Friedrich List supported native industrial development even at a comparative disadvantage, because of the body of knowledge and experience that can be gained(or be vacant).

    At any rate, I think you'll see the results in a generation or two. And the conditions have very much changed, and continue to change.

    , @Hieronymus of Canada
    By 'long term' I mean on the millennium-sized scale. So while I agree that Europe after approx. 1500 has made enormous technological strides that outstripped anything outside of the continent, it does not mean that the other parts of the world aren't able to make any technological advances whatsoever. China has produced a variety of inventions in the past, such as printing, gunpowder, etc. as well as the present inventions like the e-cigarette, Non-invasive prenatal diagnostic testing for Down's Syndrome and the passenger drone (I got these from the Wikipedia page).

    While biological factors is not insignificant in the inventiveness of a region (you need smart people get the ideas, after), you also require social and economic institutions that allows for these ideas to be produces in a timely manner (although this also depends biological factors as well). What I am suggesting is that these are just as important to a society's inventiveness as much the base 'creativity' of its people.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. ilkarnal says:
    @Anonymous
    The USSR looked impressive because of tech transfers from the West:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_C._Sutton

    In a few words: there is no such thing as Soviet technology. Almost all — perhaps 90–95 percent — came directly or indirectly from the United States and its allies. In effect the United States and the NATO countries have built the Soviet Union. Its industrial and its military capabilities. This massive construction job has taken 50 years. Since the Revolution in 1917. It has been carried out through trade and the sale of plants, equipment and technical assistance.[4]
     

    Nonsense. You can’t explain away Soviet technical achievements that ADVANCED the state of the art. Everyone copied and bought, if they could, better technology from Western countries, including other Western countries. The West gets tech transfers from other parts of the West. Somehow the Soviets put their asses into gear and did shit, made genuine advances. Were the best in the world in a whole range of stuff. They were real scary rivals. Nothing like that happened with Japan, ever. Nothing like that is happening with China or any other southeast or east Asian country.

    Damn fool ignorance, that’s the problem. You get a sense a lot of people might as well have been born yesterday.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    If Sutton is right, then obviously you can explain away Soviet achievements.

    Even today, Russia depends on Western technology for energy extraction, one of its primary industries:

    http://www.futuresmag.com/2014/07/30/us-denies-russia-fracking-technology

    The United States is telling Russia to frack-off by denying Russia fracking technology and access to U.S. deep water oil-production equipment for use in the Arctic and other deep waters the Russians want to explore. Oil companies BP PLC and Total that have major deals with Russia are getting prepared to take a hit. Russian oil production expansion really depends on Western technology so it seems that Russian oil production will not live up to its potential anytime soon.
     
    This predates the Soviet era. Tsarist Russia would import Western technicians and technology wholesale to establish industry in Russia.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @ilkarnal
    Nonsense. You can't explain away Soviet technical achievements that ADVANCED the state of the art. Everyone copied and bought, if they could, better technology from Western countries, including other Western countries. The West gets tech transfers from other parts of the West. Somehow the Soviets put their asses into gear and did shit, made genuine advances. Were the best in the world in a whole range of stuff. They were real scary rivals. Nothing like that happened with Japan, ever. Nothing like that is happening with China or any other southeast or east Asian country.

    Damn fool ignorance, that's the problem. You get a sense a lot of people might as well have been born yesterday.

    If Sutton is right, then obviously you can explain away Soviet achievements.

    Even today, Russia depends on Western technology for energy extraction, one of its primary industries:

    http://www.futuresmag.com/2014/07/30/us-denies-russia-fracking-technology

    The United States is telling Russia to frack-off by denying Russia fracking technology and access to U.S. deep water oil-production equipment for use in the Arctic and other deep waters the Russians want to explore. Oil companies BP PLC and Total that have major deals with Russia are getting prepared to take a hit. Russian oil production expansion really depends on Western technology so it seems that Russian oil production will not live up to its potential anytime soon.

    This predates the Soviet era. Tsarist Russia would import Western technicians and technology wholesale to establish industry in Russia.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. @ilkarnal
    I'm very bearish on the prospects of any Asian country forging ahead of the West in a meaningful way. They have proved quite capable of grabbing Western ideas and running with them, and absolutely pathetic when it comes to coming up with their own.

    The legacy of Communism
     
    USSR was communist. Also a powerhouse innovator, with lots of firsts. Grew less impressive later on and post-collapse, but that reflects a general trend towards passivity that infects the whole world.

    The legacy of Malthusianism
     
    Meaning they were very recently poor. Well, the West was very recently poor when it went and shot ahead of the whole world, powered by incredible innovations. Also, Japan has been very rich for a long time, never Communist, and still never managed to forge ahead.

    I think this line of thinking is nonsense. It explains why the Soviets couldn't put the first person in space because they were cucked by Communism, and why the West couldn't invent new things in the 1800s because it was cucked by poverty - in other words, it explains why things that happened couldn't have happened. Not a useful path to walk.

    It will almost certainly be the richest and least superstitious/obscruntantist countries that will adopt these technologies first
     
    You presume too much. No-one is taking even the most basic steps to halt a rapid dysgenic spiral. There is no reason to assume this will change. It seems like there is a lot of hype in the air. Genetic modification has been around for several decades. It is very unlikely that we will have turnkey designer babies in the next few decades. The long term prospects for modification of humans are great, but they are not fundamentally different from livestock or crops, and will see their benefits reaped on the timescale of human generations, as benefits from new wheat strains are reaped on the timescale of their maturation speed. They will not result, right away, in anything incomparably and spectacularly superior.

    Elites are slothful and spectacularly ignorant. Where they look 'based' it is almost always just shallow superstition. Even more dismaying, those who are most intelligent and informed seem to have their heads rocketed higher and higher into the clouds, believing general AI, designer babies, and other sci fi shit will spring out into the real world shortly and make our mundane concerns irrelevant. Well, I don't think so. I think our future is almost certain to be VERY mundane. The East will keep being a dwindling pack of stone faced imitators, the West will gradually Brazilify. If it is shaken up, it will be by war, not by technological developments, and war will startle observers with its resemblance to older conflicts.

    They have proved quite capable of grabbing Western ideas and running with them, and absolutely pathetic when it comes to coming up with their own.

    You’re assuming that there’s something magical about “creativity” and it is something that can’t be isolated, studied and re-developed for, either in education methodology or the logic fed into digital systems to serve as proxies. In fact, there are some institutions in China that already focus on that.

    The paper below shows one example.

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/49722340_Effects_of_a_Learn_to_Think_intervention_program_on_primary_school_students

    Read More
    • Replies: @ussr andy
    TRIZ, too.

    TRIZ (/ˈtriːz/; Russian: теория решения изобретательских задач, teoriya resheniya izobretatelskikh zadach, literally: "theory of the resolution of invention-related tasks") (...) was developed by the Soviet inventor and science-fiction author Genrich Altshuller (1926-1998) and his colleagues, beginning in 1946. (...)

    Following Altshuller's insight (...) to produce a theory which defines generalisable patterns in the nature of inventive solutions and the distinguishing characteristics of the problems that these inventions have overcome.

    (...) one of the objectives which has been pursued by leading practitioners of TRIZ has been the development of an algorithmic approach to the invention of new systems (...)

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

     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. @ilkarnal

    over the long term, China (and perhaps all of East Asia) have shown as much creativity as another center of human civilization.
     
    Not at all. The modern West is unparalleled. Nothing comes even remotely close.

    Also, over the long term, populations change. Maybe some capacity for creativity has been driven out, while in the West clearly that capacity skyrocketed.

    Creativity is overrated somewhat.
     
    Creativity is your word. I don't give a fuck what it is, it's what underlies being able to make genuine technological advancements. All of that. Box it. The West has more. The East is comparatively pathetic. They can only copy, only follow. For whatever reason. Could be just low 'creativity' - I doubt it. But I don't care what it is, I care that it is and that it has been stable at this point across a wide timespan and a wide range of conditions.

    Creativity is your word. I don’t give a fuck what it is, it’s what underlies being able to make genuine technological advancements. All of that. Box it. The West has more. The East is comparatively pathetic. They can only copy, only follow.

    This is so patently ridiculous by anyone who has spent time in East Asia as to not worth much response. Just a simple duckduckgo search brings this up:

    https://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2010/12/07/7-technologies-where-china-has-us-beat

    There are also examples in Bloomberg, MIT Technology Review, and Forbes off the top of my head.

    But at any rate, you can only develop advances if you’re working on something; if, for example, the US doesn’t have manufacturing plants and investment for manufacturing, the US isn’t likely to find the next advance for manufacturing. Its the reason why Friedrich List supported native industrial development even at a comparative disadvantage, because of the body of knowledge and experience that can be gained(or be vacant).

    At any rate, I think you’ll see the results in a generation or two. And the conditions have very much changed, and continue to change.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomm

    This is so patently ridiculous by anyone who has spent time in East Asia as to not worth much response.
     
    My friend, you will never educate these wiggers.

    Always remember that white variance is extremely high. There is never a reason to talk about 'median' whites due to their high variance.

    The top 80% of whites really are the best people in the world.

    The bottom 20% are the worst. They are even lower than blacks. It is really two races that have nothing in common other than white skin. The women become fat, tattooed feminists, and the men become white trashionalists.

    If these white trashionalists and feminists were given land and told the create their own country, it would be worse than Rwanda.
    , @Ilkarnal
    That article you linked is emblematic. Scaling up is not making anything revolutionary. The West invents automobiles - maybe Japan builds them fastest and best for a while. Do you understand how fundamentally pathetic it is to point to the latter 'achievement' as anything comparing to the former?

    The East Asians are a shrinking bunch of stone-faced imitators. Not much of a yellow peril. They have proved unable to go anywhere they are not led.

    As for them coming up with some magical fix - lol. They aren't even coming up with a fix for the very very very basic fertility problem, unhandicaped by Westerners' anti-racism and liberalism. They are clueless, Western thinkers project savvy on to them.

    None of this is to say they are not smart. You see a lot of bright, clear intellects from that background. But what is indicated by the IQ avg is that you should have a larger proportion of earth-shattering geniuses coming from there, and while that prediction comes true for Jews it does not in this population. I don't claim to know why.

    But I also reject absolutely the idea that this is terribly surprising. IQ is great but has shown big cracks, like intertemporal invalidity and this East Asian overprediction and only moderate if any g-loading improvement over other measures. And then it wouldn't even be that surprising if some populations just overperformed or underperformed in test-like environments generally.

    You can compare this to IQ denialist bullshit if you want, but remember - the East Asian-White difference is quite small compared to the Black-White difference, and factors like this have a much easier time closing a smaller gap. Also Blacks do nicely align with the predictions associated with their lower IQ, just like Jews nicely align with predictions associated with their higher IQ. When the predictions match results, trying to undermine the test is motivated reasoning. When they diverge sharply, it is only good sense.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. @ilkarnal

    over the long term, China (and perhaps all of East Asia) have shown as much creativity as another center of human civilization.
     
    Not at all. The modern West is unparalleled. Nothing comes even remotely close.

    Also, over the long term, populations change. Maybe some capacity for creativity has been driven out, while in the West clearly that capacity skyrocketed.

    Creativity is overrated somewhat.
     
    Creativity is your word. I don't give a fuck what it is, it's what underlies being able to make genuine technological advancements. All of that. Box it. The West has more. The East is comparatively pathetic. They can only copy, only follow. For whatever reason. Could be just low 'creativity' - I doubt it. But I don't care what it is, I care that it is and that it has been stable at this point across a wide timespan and a wide range of conditions.

    By ‘long term’ I mean on the millennium-sized scale. So while I agree that Europe after approx. 1500 has made enormous technological strides that outstripped anything outside of the continent, it does not mean that the other parts of the world aren’t able to make any technological advances whatsoever. China has produced a variety of inventions in the past, such as printing, gunpowder, etc. as well as the present inventions like the e-cigarette, Non-invasive prenatal diagnostic testing for Down’s Syndrome and the passenger drone (I got these from the Wikipedia page).

    While biological factors is not insignificant in the inventiveness of a region (you need smart people get the ideas, after), you also require social and economic institutions that allows for these ideas to be produces in a timely manner (although this also depends biological factors as well). What I am suggesting is that these are just as important to a society’s inventiveness as much the base ‘creativity’ of its people.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Throwing a wrench into your future is the idocracy meme.

    So many Americans and people in the West hardly value intelligence. While iq will increasingly become more important, the majority of people will be perfectly happy living like proles getting drunk and getting knocked up by random people.

    The smart people will be forced to pay for all of this through living wages and higher taxes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Go away, forever
    What a nonsense comment. Everyone pays taxes. And the rich would never have gotten rich if it weren't for public services which is built by and paid for by everyone. Your rant is pure ignorance and complete idiocy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. lauris71 says:
    @ilkarnal
    I'm very bearish on the prospects of any Asian country forging ahead of the West in a meaningful way. They have proved quite capable of grabbing Western ideas and running with them, and absolutely pathetic when it comes to coming up with their own.

    The legacy of Communism
     
    USSR was communist. Also a powerhouse innovator, with lots of firsts. Grew less impressive later on and post-collapse, but that reflects a general trend towards passivity that infects the whole world.

    The legacy of Malthusianism
     
    Meaning they were very recently poor. Well, the West was very recently poor when it went and shot ahead of the whole world, powered by incredible innovations. Also, Japan has been very rich for a long time, never Communist, and still never managed to forge ahead.

    I think this line of thinking is nonsense. It explains why the Soviets couldn't put the first person in space because they were cucked by Communism, and why the West couldn't invent new things in the 1800s because it was cucked by poverty - in other words, it explains why things that happened couldn't have happened. Not a useful path to walk.

    It will almost certainly be the richest and least superstitious/obscruntantist countries that will adopt these technologies first
     
    You presume too much. No-one is taking even the most basic steps to halt a rapid dysgenic spiral. There is no reason to assume this will change. It seems like there is a lot of hype in the air. Genetic modification has been around for several decades. It is very unlikely that we will have turnkey designer babies in the next few decades. The long term prospects for modification of humans are great, but they are not fundamentally different from livestock or crops, and will see their benefits reaped on the timescale of human generations, as benefits from new wheat strains are reaped on the timescale of their maturation speed. They will not result, right away, in anything incomparably and spectacularly superior.

    Elites are slothful and spectacularly ignorant. Where they look 'based' it is almost always just shallow superstition. Even more dismaying, those who are most intelligent and informed seem to have their heads rocketed higher and higher into the clouds, believing general AI, designer babies, and other sci fi shit will spring out into the real world shortly and make our mundane concerns irrelevant. Well, I don't think so. I think our future is almost certain to be VERY mundane. The East will keep being a dwindling pack of stone faced imitators, the West will gradually Brazilify. If it is shaken up, it will be by war, not by technological developments, and war will startle observers with its resemblance to older conflicts.

    No-one is taking even the most basic steps to halt a rapid dysgenic spiral.

    Agree 100%. The IQ-enchancing technologies and knowledge have been around thousands of years. There is nothing magical about CRISPR than cannot be (at the population level) achieved by applying basic selection to human breeding. But if anything, we have recently seen the opposition to eugenics growing stronger – and specifically in high-IQ West.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. melanf says:

    The main question is to what extent the average IQ of a population is hereditary and what extent – the result of certain cultural models. “Confucian” countries of the far East show great similarity (in IQ and other options), despite the fact that the origin of the peoples of the region are quite different. This is a serious argument in favor of a major influence of the cultural factor.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Good point. Could even be language. That their form of language necessitates that the early development of the brain forms a certain way. Wonder if there have been studies on this.

    Peace.

    , @Anatoly Karlin
    Confucianism only core to China and Korea (long part of Chinese Empire), in Japan it was merely one of many borrowings from China.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Thomm says:

    Anatoly Karlin’s obsession with IQ, even to the extent of splitting hairs between Spanish and German provinces, is beyond bizarre.

    For example, for all of Mr. Karlin’s ‘analysis’, he cannot account for economic growth.

    If a country had an economy that grew 5% over the previous year in Real GDP, then did that country’s IQ rise 5% in a year?

    Well? Why did the economy grow, when IQ is the same? Well?

    This questions is completely a ‘whoosh’ over Karlin’s head. He just does not grasp it, because it destroys his models.

    Since 2010, China’s GDP grew 87% and India’s grew 78%. Did the IQ of each country rise substantially? Over the same period, the US grew only 22% and the EU only 8%.

    Similarly, China was poorer than Sub-Saharan Africa until 1979. China’s political goals, and even its system, changed. But did the IQ of the country change? No, it did not.

    This is even before getting into the fact that while men and women have the same average IQs, men are vastly more productive than women, and account for about 100% of all inventions. This invalidates the notion that IQ correlates to economic productivity. But I will let that slide, since the GDP growth topic alone is something Karlin will just never be able to grasp.

    Read More
    • Replies: @neutral
    China produced things like literature, philosophers, technical inventions, Sub Saharan Africa produced none of these things. There is a clear difference in what the two can do, and you obviously did not read the article. Nobody is surprised if North Korea produces Hydrogen bombs and missiles regardless how bad their government is, the same cannot be said about even a big state like Nigeria, their low average IQ simply means they will be an inferior state not capable of producing anything of note.
    , @Anatoly Karlin
    It is good to argue with oneself. Carry on.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Thomm says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    Creativity is your word. I don’t give a fuck what it is, it’s what underlies being able to make genuine technological advancements. All of that. Box it. The West has more. The East is comparatively pathetic. They can only copy, only follow.
     
    This is so patently ridiculous by anyone who has spent time in East Asia as to not worth much response. Just a simple duckduckgo search brings this up:

    https://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2010/12/07/7-technologies-where-china-has-us-beat

    There are also examples in Bloomberg, MIT Technology Review, and Forbes off the top of my head.

    But at any rate, you can only develop advances if you're working on something; if, for example, the US doesn't have manufacturing plants and investment for manufacturing, the US isn't likely to find the next advance for manufacturing. Its the reason why Friedrich List supported native industrial development even at a comparative disadvantage, because of the body of knowledge and experience that can be gained(or be vacant).

    At any rate, I think you'll see the results in a generation or two. And the conditions have very much changed, and continue to change.

    This is so patently ridiculous by anyone who has spent time in East Asia as to not worth much response.

    My friend, you will never educate these wiggers.

    Always remember that white variance is extremely high. There is never a reason to talk about ‘median’ whites due to their high variance.

    The top 80% of whites really are the best people in the world.

    The bottom 20% are the worst. They are even lower than blacks. It is really two races that have nothing in common other than white skin. The women become fat, tattooed feminists, and the men become white trashionalists.

    If these white trashionalists and feminists were given land and told the create their own country, it would be worse than Rwanda.

    Read More
    • Replies: @GoBackToDesert
    Another Jew spotted. The recent Lieberman thread over at iSteve is crawling with them. Hasbara central is getting desperate.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. @Anonymous
    Throwing a wrench into your future is the idocracy meme.

    So many Americans and people in the West hardly value intelligence. While iq will increasingly become more important, the majority of people will be perfectly happy living like proles getting drunk and getting knocked up by random people.

    The smart people will be forced to pay for all of this through living wages and higher taxes.

    What a nonsense comment. Everyone pays taxes. And the rich would never have gotten rich if it weren’t for public services which is built by and paid for by everyone. Your rant is pure ignorance and complete idiocy.

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

    This is so patently ridiculous by anyone who has spent time in East Asia as to not worth much response.
     
    My friend, you will never educate these wiggers.

    Always remember that white variance is extremely high. There is never a reason to talk about 'median' whites due to their high variance.

    The top 80% of whites really are the best people in the world.

    The bottom 20% are the worst. They are even lower than blacks. It is really two races that have nothing in common other than white skin. The women become fat, tattooed feminists, and the men become white trashionalists.

    If these white trashionalists and feminists were given land and told the create their own country, it would be worse than Rwanda.

    Another Jew spotted. The recent Lieberman thread over at iSteve is crawling with them. Hasbara central is getting desperate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomm
    1) I am not Jewish.
    2) Jews are white.

    Any more brilliant insights?

    WNs have Negro IQs.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. Disagree on the attacks on East Asians. Innovation of China alone is enough to refute the claim that East Asians are “not creative”. It’s bogus. Furthermore, if you look at the cutting edge innovation today, it’s hard to say that, say, Germany is a more innovative country than South Korea.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  27. The chart looks like bullshit. GDP (PPP) per capita in Russia is reported as ~ $26K, in China ~$15K and in the US ~ $57K.

    Central planning and especially the lunacy that is Maoism are far less effective than free markets.

    Of course, central planning is pretty much everywhere these days, that’s the nature of modern (neoliberal) capitalism. If it wasn’t, the West would’ve collapsed long time ago. “Free markets” is a fantasy.

    As for Maoism, some ‘lunacy’ it was: transferring one of the poorest and most backwards countries in the world into the strongest. Just ask any (high IQ!) Chinese person.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    The chart looks like bullshit. GDP (PPP) per capita in Russia is reported as ~ $26K, in China ~$15K and in the US ~ $57K.
     
    Seems to be true: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

    As for Maoism, some ‘lunacy’ it was: transferring one of the poorest and most backwards countries in the world into the strongest.
     
    Fortunately, this is one of those rare cases in history where have a near perfect control group:


    Meanwhile, as a counterexample, take the Chinese communist government with its urbanization and tertiary education levels skyrocketing. Or Vietnam, for that matter, too. Or even Cuba.
     
    Okay, let’s take China.

    China: About 25%-30% (2013)

    Taiwan: 60% (2010)

    Taiwan reached China's figures around 1990.

    So, even by your criteria, China has been far slower at increasing tertiary enrolment than the fragment of China that escaped Maoist idiocy. (Also 4x richer, freer, no mass repressions and famines in the 1950s-70s, etc).
     
    Fun anecdote: You had fewer chances of getting fired in Maoist China than dying on your job. Even the USSR never reached near that level of insanity.
    , @Hieronymus of Canada

    As for Maoism, some ‘lunacy’ it was: transferring one of the poorest and most backwards countries in the world into the strongest. Just ask any (high IQ!) Chinese person.
     
    Well. they were probably educated in the PRC, which has a vested interest in promoting the good side of Maoism.

    My impression is about Maoism, at best, it provided the background (e.g. a mostly unified state) for creating a powerful 'developmentalist' state in the Japanese/South Korean/Taiwanese mold (with Chinese characteristics!) once Mao was gone. Before that, Maoism mostly meandered from crazy scheme to crazy scheme with little to show for it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. neutral says:

    Mao did things like having farmers stop farming and instead produce mini steel furnaces because he thought that was the fastest way to become a superpower, this is also not the only crazy thing he believed in. I am not pro democracy and not pro the neoliberal/cuckservative world order, however one does not have to be that to see that Mao was not the sanest.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mao Cheng Ji

    Mao did things like having farmers stop farming and instead produce mini steel furnaces because he thought that was the fastest way to become a superpower, this is also not the only crazy thing he believed in.
     
    Similar 'crazy things' happened in every industrial country at some point. In the US, for example, it took a super-bloody war to stop people from farming cotton and send them to manufacture steel and other industrial stuff.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. neutral says:
    @Thomm
    Anatoly Karlin's obsession with IQ, even to the extent of splitting hairs between Spanish and German provinces, is beyond bizarre.

    For example, for all of Mr. Karlin's 'analysis', he cannot account for economic growth.

    If a country had an economy that grew 5% over the previous year in Real GDP, then did that country's IQ rise 5% in a year?

    Well? Why did the economy grow, when IQ is the same? Well?

    This questions is completely a 'whoosh' over Karlin's head. He just does not grasp it, because it destroys his models.

    Since 2010, China's GDP grew 87% and India's grew 78%. Did the IQ of each country rise substantially? Over the same period, the US grew only 22% and the EU only 8%.

    Similarly, China was poorer than Sub-Saharan Africa until 1979. China's political goals, and even its system, changed. But did the IQ of the country change? No, it did not.

    This is even before getting into the fact that while men and women have the same average IQs, men are vastly more productive than women, and account for about 100% of all inventions. This invalidates the notion that IQ correlates to economic productivity. But I will let that slide, since the GDP growth topic alone is something Karlin will just never be able to grasp.

    China produced things like literature, philosophers, technical inventions, Sub Saharan Africa produced none of these things. There is a clear difference in what the two can do, and you obviously did not read the article. Nobody is surprised if North Korea produces Hydrogen bombs and missiles regardless how bad their government is, the same cannot be said about even a big state like Nigeria, their low average IQ simply means they will be an inferior state not capable of producing anything of note.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. @neutral
    Mao did things like having farmers stop farming and instead produce mini steel furnaces because he thought that was the fastest way to become a superpower, this is also not the only crazy thing he believed in. I am not pro democracy and not pro the neoliberal/cuckservative world order, however one does not have to be that to see that Mao was not the sanest.

    Mao did things like having farmers stop farming and instead produce mini steel furnaces because he thought that was the fastest way to become a superpower, this is also not the only crazy thing he believed in.

    Similar ‘crazy things’ happened in every industrial country at some point. In the US, for example, it took a super-bloody war to stop people from farming cotton and send them to manufacture steel and other industrial stuff.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    “legacy of Malthusianism”

    Do you simply mean below average arable land per capita?

    “coming automation of more and more sectors of the economy”

    Since average US increases in productivity have declined every decade since good tabulation starting in the 1950′s, is automation really going to start accelerating and replacing jobs at a faster pace than in the past or will replacement of existing jobs by automation actually slow down?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  32. JL says:

    Our “biorealistic” future:

    https://arxiv.org/pdf/1709.01149.pdf

    Read More
    • LOL: Anatoly Karlin
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  33. @German_reader

    It will almost certainly be the richest and least superstitious/obscruntantist countries that will adopt these technologies first, and both of those factors are already highly correlated with IQ.
     
    The countries you mentioned aren't necessarily uniform though. In Germany the churches still have a lot of influence in these matters, despite increasing secularization; e.g. their influence is one of the main reasons for fairly restrictive laws on preimplantation genetic diagnosis ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preimplantation_genetic_diagnosis#Germany ; their reasoning, bizarre and perverse imo, is that this is eugenics and somehow might lead to disabled people in general being devalued and ultimately euthanized like in Nazi Germany). Given that Christian conservatives take this stance even when it's about the avoidance of serious disability and suffering, I don't think they'll be exactly favorable towards intelligence-augmentation (in any case, as they have amply demonstrated in the last few years, they're also enthusiastically in favour of mass immigration by comparatively low-IQ people).
    So I don't think it's just about IQ, cultural values also matter. Might be an advantage for the Chinese or Japanese (though who knows where these developments will lead).

    I agree there’s be differences in responses.

    China will embrace it, the government won’t even have to prod to get people to adopt it (according to opinion polls). The US probably won’t ban it outright, but majority of people are opposed to intelligence augmentation according to opinion polls. Germany will be hampered by Christian SJWs. Russia will probably ban it because it because of the growing influence of state-sponsored obscurantism. Possibly the most welcoming climate for this in Europe will be in Denmark (liberal but less shiblib than the other Scandis) and Czechia (highly atheist, individualist).

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    Sounds plausible. What are you referring to with "growing influence of state-sponsored obscurantism" in Russia? The nexus between the Russian state and the Orthodox church (and other religions) or some more general trends?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Talha says:
    @melanf
    The main question is to what extent the average IQ of a population is hereditary and what extent - the result of certain cultural models. "Confucian" countries of the far East show great similarity (in IQ and other options), despite the fact that the origin of the peoples of the region are quite different. This is a serious argument in favor of a major influence of the cultural factor.

    Good point. Could even be language. That their form of language necessitates that the early development of the brain forms a certain way. Wonder if there have been studies on this.

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. @Mr. XYZ
    @ilkarnal: Yeah, East Asians appear to underperform in regards to both economic growth and human achievement (measured in their amount of Nobel Prizes per capita, et cetera)--especially relative to their IQ.

    Indeed, I don't know why this is--a relative lack of curiosity, perhaps?

    Noticed this and speculated about it myself.

    James Thompson had a post describing an article by Kenya Kura, Jan te Nijenhuis, Edward Dutton which found that East Asians are indeed less curious: http://www.unz.com/jthompson/asians-bright-but-not-curious/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @Anatoly Karlin
    I agree there's be differences in responses.

    China will embrace it, the government won't even have to prod to get people to adopt it (according to opinion polls). The US probably won't ban it outright, but majority of people are opposed to intelligence augmentation according to opinion polls. Germany will be hampered by Christian SJWs. Russia will probably ban it because it because of the growing influence of state-sponsored obscurantism. Possibly the most welcoming climate for this in Europe will be in Denmark (liberal but less shiblib than the other Scandis) and Czechia (highly atheist, individualist).

    Sounds plausible. What are you referring to with “growing influence of state-sponsored obscurantism” in Russia? The nexus between the Russian state and the Orthodox church (and other religions) or some more general trends?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. ussr andy says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    They have proved quite capable of grabbing Western ideas and running with them, and absolutely pathetic when it comes to coming up with their own.
     
    You're assuming that there's something magical about "creativity" and it is something that can't be isolated, studied and re-developed for, either in education methodology or the logic fed into digital systems to serve as proxies. In fact, there are some institutions in China that already focus on that.

    The paper below shows one example.

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/49722340_Effects_of_a_Learn_to_Think_intervention_program_on_primary_school_students

    TRIZ, too.

    TRIZ (/ˈtriːz/; Russian: теория решения изобретательских задач, teoriya resheniya izobretatelskikh zadach, literally: “theory of the resolution of invention-related tasks”) (…) was developed by the Soviet inventor and science-fiction author Genrich Altshuller (1926-1998) and his colleagues, beginning in 1946. (…)

    Following Altshuller’s insight (…) to produce a theory which defines generalisable patterns in the nature of inventive solutions and the distinguishing characteristics of the problems that these inventions have overcome.

    (…) one of the objectives which has been pursued by leading practitioners of TRIZ has been the development of an algorithmic approach to the invention of new systems (…)

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

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Interesting, its the first time I've heard of it and it definitely seemed like it actually demonstrated practical application. Thanks for the reference.
    , @5371
    Lots of famous and intelligent people - Zwicky and Polya come to mind - have attempted to find an automatic way for anyone to replicate their creativity. None has ever succeeded, and none ever will.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @melanf
    The main question is to what extent the average IQ of a population is hereditary and what extent - the result of certain cultural models. "Confucian" countries of the far East show great similarity (in IQ and other options), despite the fact that the origin of the peoples of the region are quite different. This is a serious argument in favor of a major influence of the cultural factor.

    Confucianism only core to China and Korea (long part of Chinese Empire), in Japan it was merely one of many borrowings from China.

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf

    Confucianism only core to China and Korea (long part of Chinese Empire), in Japan it was merely one of many borrowings from China.
     
    The Japanese are also "core" Confucians. In particular, Confucianism was the official ideology of the Tokugawa Shogunate. Cultural characteristics of Japanese people (work ethic, the cult of learning, hierarchy) is typically Confucian. Perhaps in addition to Confucianism played the role of the intensive rice-growing, but the representatives of the four rice-Confucian cultures (China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam) show a striking cultural similarities.
    Even Koreans in Russia (100 years living in isolation from Korea, whose native language is Russian, and the native religion - Christianity), has culture is still Confucian.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. @Thomm
    Anatoly Karlin's obsession with IQ, even to the extent of splitting hairs between Spanish and German provinces, is beyond bizarre.

    For example, for all of Mr. Karlin's 'analysis', he cannot account for economic growth.

    If a country had an economy that grew 5% over the previous year in Real GDP, then did that country's IQ rise 5% in a year?

    Well? Why did the economy grow, when IQ is the same? Well?

    This questions is completely a 'whoosh' over Karlin's head. He just does not grasp it, because it destroys his models.

    Since 2010, China's GDP grew 87% and India's grew 78%. Did the IQ of each country rise substantially? Over the same period, the US grew only 22% and the EU only 8%.

    Similarly, China was poorer than Sub-Saharan Africa until 1979. China's political goals, and even its system, changed. But did the IQ of the country change? No, it did not.

    This is even before getting into the fact that while men and women have the same average IQs, men are vastly more productive than women, and account for about 100% of all inventions. This invalidates the notion that IQ correlates to economic productivity. But I will let that slide, since the GDP growth topic alone is something Karlin will just never be able to grasp.

    It is good to argue with oneself. Carry on.

    Read More
    • Agree: Daniel Chieh
    • Replies: @Thomm
    Translation : Anatoly Karlin has no argument. This is what I predicted in my comment above.

    Karlin just has no grasp of the concept of GDP growth, and if a country with a 100 IQ had the GDP per capita 20 years ago that a country with an 85 IQ has today, then the latter country is just 20 years behind, which undermines the hare-brained premise of most of Karlin's articles.

    Hence, Karlin is far below the level of knowledge where he can discuss this subject. He proved it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. @Mao Cheng Ji
    The chart looks like bullshit. GDP (PPP) per capita in Russia is reported as ~ $26K, in China ~$15K and in the US ~ $57K.

    Central planning and especially the lunacy that is Maoism are far less effective than free markets.
     
    Of course, central planning is pretty much everywhere these days, that's the nature of modern (neoliberal) capitalism. If it wasn't, the West would've collapsed long time ago. "Free markets" is a fantasy.

    As for Maoism, some 'lunacy' it was: transferring one of the poorest and most backwards countries in the world into the strongest. Just ask any (high IQ!) Chinese person.

    The chart looks like bullshit. GDP (PPP) per capita in Russia is reported as ~ $26K, in China ~$15K and in the US ~ $57K.

    Seems to be true: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

    As for Maoism, some ‘lunacy’ it was: transferring one of the poorest and most backwards countries in the world into the strongest.

    Fortunately, this is one of those rare cases in history where have a near perfect control group:

    Meanwhile, as a counterexample, take the Chinese communist government with its urbanization and tertiary education levels skyrocketing. Or Vietnam, for that matter, too. Or even Cuba.

    Okay, let’s take China.

    China: About 25%-30% (2013)

    Taiwan: 60% (2010)

    Taiwan reached China’s figures around 1990.

    So, even by your criteria, China has been far slower at increasing tertiary enrolment than the fragment of China that escaped Maoist idiocy. (Also 4x richer, freer, no mass repressions and famines in the 1950s-70s, etc).

    Fun anecdote: You had fewer chances of getting fired in Maoist China than dying on your job. Even the USSR never reached near that level of insanity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mao Cheng Ji
    No mass repressions? You have gotta be kidding: 40 years under the martial law.

    Also, how is this a "near perfect control group"? A small nation of 20 million people, and a recipient, in the context of the cold war, of significant financial and military American aid -- vs. China?

    I suppose India would be the most obvious country to draw a comparison with...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. @Anatoly Karlin

    The chart looks like bullshit. GDP (PPP) per capita in Russia is reported as ~ $26K, in China ~$15K and in the US ~ $57K.
     
    Seems to be true: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

    As for Maoism, some ‘lunacy’ it was: transferring one of the poorest and most backwards countries in the world into the strongest.
     
    Fortunately, this is one of those rare cases in history where have a near perfect control group:


    Meanwhile, as a counterexample, take the Chinese communist government with its urbanization and tertiary education levels skyrocketing. Or Vietnam, for that matter, too. Or even Cuba.
     
    Okay, let’s take China.

    China: About 25%-30% (2013)

    Taiwan: 60% (2010)

    Taiwan reached China's figures around 1990.

    So, even by your criteria, China has been far slower at increasing tertiary enrolment than the fragment of China that escaped Maoist idiocy. (Also 4x richer, freer, no mass repressions and famines in the 1950s-70s, etc).
     
    Fun anecdote: You had fewer chances of getting fired in Maoist China than dying on your job. Even the USSR never reached near that level of insanity.

    No mass repressions? You have gotta be kidding: 40 years under the martial law.

    Also, how is this a “near perfect control group”? A small nation of 20 million people, and a recipient, in the context of the cold war, of significant financial and military American aid — vs. China?

    I suppose India would be the most obvious country to draw a comparison with…

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    A small nation of 20 million people, and a recipient, in the context of the cold war, of significant financial and military American aid — vs. China?
     
    The people's republic got massive Soviet aid until the early 1960s though (iirc one of the biggest aid programmes in all of history). Also significant American support once China and the US had concluded a quasi-alliance against the Soviet Union. That would have to figure in any comparison as well.
    , @Anatoly Karlin

    No mass repressions? You have gotta be kidding: 40 years under the martial law.
     
    Sure. Apart from one brutal crushing of a rebellion in 1947, I am not aware of any mass repressions in Taiwan. Police state? Sure. Though that's what China had since Mao anyway.

    A small nation of 20 million people, and a recipient, in the context of the cold war, of significant financial and military American aid — vs. China?
     
    Twenty million is by no means small.

    I suppose India would be the most obvious country to draw a comparison with…
     
    No, because India has an average IQ in the low 80s. (Although their socialist Licence Raj didn't help much either).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @ussr andy
    TRIZ, too.

    TRIZ (/ˈtriːz/; Russian: теория решения изобретательских задач, teoriya resheniya izobretatelskikh zadach, literally: "theory of the resolution of invention-related tasks") (...) was developed by the Soviet inventor and science-fiction author Genrich Altshuller (1926-1998) and his colleagues, beginning in 1946. (...)

    Following Altshuller's insight (...) to produce a theory which defines generalisable patterns in the nature of inventive solutions and the distinguishing characteristics of the problems that these inventions have overcome.

    (...) one of the objectives which has been pursued by leading practitioners of TRIZ has been the development of an algorithmic approach to the invention of new systems (...)

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

     

    Interesting, its the first time I’ve heard of it and it definitely seemed like it actually demonstrated practical application. Thanks for the reference.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Jon0815 says:

    : Yeah, East Asians appear to underperform in regards to both economic growth and human achievement (measured in their amount of Nobel Prizes per capita, et cetera)–especially relative to their IQ.

    Indeed, I don’t know why this is–a relative lack of curiosity, perhaps?

    I’ve wondered if East Asian IQ might cluster around the mean more than European IQ, so that per capita there are both fewer idiots and fewer geniuses. Is there any data supporting this?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    Good theory, but no.
    * http://infoproc.blogspot.ru/2008/06/asian-white-iq-variance-from-pisa.html
    * http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/sft2.htm
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. @Mao Cheng Ji
    No mass repressions? You have gotta be kidding: 40 years under the martial law.

    Also, how is this a "near perfect control group"? A small nation of 20 million people, and a recipient, in the context of the cold war, of significant financial and military American aid -- vs. China?

    I suppose India would be the most obvious country to draw a comparison with...

    A small nation of 20 million people, and a recipient, in the context of the cold war, of significant financial and military American aid — vs. China?

    The people’s republic got massive Soviet aid until the early 1960s though (iirc one of the biggest aid programmes in all of history). Also significant American support once China and the US had concluded a quasi-alliance against the Soviet Union. That would have to figure in any comparison as well.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mao Cheng Ji

    The people’s republic got massive Soviet aid until the early 1960s though (iirc one of the biggest aid programmes in all of history).
     
    Since we're analyzing everything on the 'per capita' basis here, how 'massive' could that Soviet aid be? Especially in the immediate post war years? In the early 60s, even in Moscow they were still rationing wheat flour, as I remember.

    Also significant American support once China and the US had concluded a quasi-alliance against the Soviet Union.
     
    Is that a fact? What kind of support?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. @Jon0815

    : Yeah, East Asians appear to underperform in regards to both economic growth and human achievement (measured in their amount of Nobel Prizes per capita, et cetera)–especially relative to their IQ.

    Indeed, I don’t know why this is–a relative lack of curiosity, perhaps?
     
    I've wondered if East Asian IQ might cluster around the mean more than European IQ, so that per capita there are both fewer idiots and fewer geniuses. Is there any data supporting this?
    Read More
    • Replies: @Jon0815
    That's interesting, thanks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. @Mao Cheng Ji
    No mass repressions? You have gotta be kidding: 40 years under the martial law.

    Also, how is this a "near perfect control group"? A small nation of 20 million people, and a recipient, in the context of the cold war, of significant financial and military American aid -- vs. China?

    I suppose India would be the most obvious country to draw a comparison with...

    No mass repressions? You have gotta be kidding: 40 years under the martial law.

    Sure. Apart from one brutal crushing of a rebellion in 1947, I am not aware of any mass repressions in Taiwan. Police state? Sure. Though that’s what China had since Mao anyway.

    A small nation of 20 million people, and a recipient, in the context of the cold war, of significant financial and military American aid — vs. China?

    Twenty million is by no means small.

    I suppose India would be the most obvious country to draw a comparison with…

    No, because India has an average IQ in the low 80s. (Although their socialist Licence Raj didn’t help much either).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. JayMan says: • Website

    There are three main reasons why the correlation between national IQ and GDP per capita is only around r=0.7, instead of r=0.9.

    Oil/resource windfalls: Saudi Arabia would otherwise be about as prosperous as Yemen.

    The legacy of Communism: Central planning and especially the lunacy that is Maoism are far less effective than free markets.

    Or clannishness:

    Clannishness – the Series: Zigzag Lightning in the Brain

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  48. Ilkarnal says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    Creativity is your word. I don’t give a fuck what it is, it’s what underlies being able to make genuine technological advancements. All of that. Box it. The West has more. The East is comparatively pathetic. They can only copy, only follow.
     
    This is so patently ridiculous by anyone who has spent time in East Asia as to not worth much response. Just a simple duckduckgo search brings this up:

    https://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2010/12/07/7-technologies-where-china-has-us-beat

    There are also examples in Bloomberg, MIT Technology Review, and Forbes off the top of my head.

    But at any rate, you can only develop advances if you're working on something; if, for example, the US doesn't have manufacturing plants and investment for manufacturing, the US isn't likely to find the next advance for manufacturing. Its the reason why Friedrich List supported native industrial development even at a comparative disadvantage, because of the body of knowledge and experience that can be gained(or be vacant).

    At any rate, I think you'll see the results in a generation or two. And the conditions have very much changed, and continue to change.

    That article you linked is emblematic. Scaling up is not making anything revolutionary. The West invents automobiles – maybe Japan builds them fastest and best for a while. Do you understand how fundamentally pathetic it is to point to the latter ‘achievement’ as anything comparing to the former?

    The East Asians are a shrinking bunch of stone-faced imitators. Not much of a yellow peril. They have proved unable to go anywhere they are not led.

    As for them coming up with some magical fix – lol. They aren’t even coming up with a fix for the very very very basic fertility problem, unhandicaped by Westerners’ anti-racism and liberalism. They are clueless, Western thinkers project savvy on to them.

    None of this is to say they are not smart. You see a lot of bright, clear intellects from that background. But what is indicated by the IQ avg is that you should have a larger proportion of earth-shattering geniuses coming from there, and while that prediction comes true for Jews it does not in this population. I don’t claim to know why.

    But I also reject absolutely the idea that this is terribly surprising. IQ is great but has shown big cracks, like intertemporal invalidity and this East Asian overprediction and only moderate if any g-loading improvement over other measures. And then it wouldn’t even be that surprising if some populations just overperformed or underperformed in test-like environments generally.

    You can compare this to IQ denialist bullshit if you want, but remember – the East Asian-White difference is quite small compared to the Black-White difference, and factors like this have a much easier time closing a smaller gap. Also Blacks do nicely align with the predictions associated with their lower IQ, just like Jews nicely align with predictions associated with their higher IQ. When the predictions match results, trying to undermine the test is motivated reasoning. When they diverge sharply, it is only good sense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    very very very basic fertility problem, unhandicaped by Westerners’ anti-racism and liberalism
     

    They have proved unable to go anywhere they are not led.
     
    Sweet - so once the West has solved their own fertility problem - East Asia will be right behind them! And possibly improve on the numbers like they did with automobiles!

    Peace.

    , @Daniel Chieh

    They aren’t even coming up with a fix for the very very very basic fertility problem, unhandicaped by Westerners’ anti-racism and liberalism
     
    That's pretty funny because that's exactly what China managed in 2016 and increased the number of births. What the government wants, they get. At any rate, population density being as high as it is, rapidly increasing the population isn't really at the top list of priorities.

    Context changes, as does better understanding of process and methodology. The idea that innovation is something mystical that cannot be put into method or process seems to be a tall order, given that increasing datasets has allowed us to procedurize almost everything else. Indeed, I'll argue that understanding that would be a necessary condition for improving outcomes from artificial intelligence.

    But I do wish you good luck in your beliefs. Ignorance is bliss, I hear.

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

    A small nation of 20 million people, and a recipient, in the context of the cold war, of significant financial and military American aid — vs. China?
     
    The people's republic got massive Soviet aid until the early 1960s though (iirc one of the biggest aid programmes in all of history). Also significant American support once China and the US had concluded a quasi-alliance against the Soviet Union. That would have to figure in any comparison as well.

    The people’s republic got massive Soviet aid until the early 1960s though (iirc one of the biggest aid programmes in all of history).

    Since we’re analyzing everything on the ‘per capita’ basis here, how ‘massive’ could that Soviet aid be? Especially in the immediate post war years? In the early 60s, even in Moscow they were still rationing wheat flour, as I remember.

    Also significant American support once China and the US had concluded a quasi-alliance against the Soviet Union.

    Is that a fact? What kind of support?

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    Is that a fact? What kind of support?
     
    Primarily technology transfer and US financial investment I'd suppose (which had a political dimension because the US wanted China as a counter-weight to the Soviet Union). I'll admit though that I'm not that knowledgeable about the details, maybe someone else can provide them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    If East Asians and white gentiles are compared what is the disparity in creativity/curiosity/entrepreneurship? Among the Forbes 40 under 40 richest entrepreneurs, if the athletes and pop starts are removed, about half of the list are Jewish. How many Nobel prize winners in the US are non-foreigner and gentile? It seems in the US at least white gentiles are stagnant in creative-ish traits given large numbers and lack of out output.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  51. Talha says:
    @Ilkarnal
    That article you linked is emblematic. Scaling up is not making anything revolutionary. The West invents automobiles - maybe Japan builds them fastest and best for a while. Do you understand how fundamentally pathetic it is to point to the latter 'achievement' as anything comparing to the former?

    The East Asians are a shrinking bunch of stone-faced imitators. Not much of a yellow peril. They have proved unable to go anywhere they are not led.

    As for them coming up with some magical fix - lol. They aren't even coming up with a fix for the very very very basic fertility problem, unhandicaped by Westerners' anti-racism and liberalism. They are clueless, Western thinkers project savvy on to them.

    None of this is to say they are not smart. You see a lot of bright, clear intellects from that background. But what is indicated by the IQ avg is that you should have a larger proportion of earth-shattering geniuses coming from there, and while that prediction comes true for Jews it does not in this population. I don't claim to know why.

    But I also reject absolutely the idea that this is terribly surprising. IQ is great but has shown big cracks, like intertemporal invalidity and this East Asian overprediction and only moderate if any g-loading improvement over other measures. And then it wouldn't even be that surprising if some populations just overperformed or underperformed in test-like environments generally.

    You can compare this to IQ denialist bullshit if you want, but remember - the East Asian-White difference is quite small compared to the Black-White difference, and factors like this have a much easier time closing a smaller gap. Also Blacks do nicely align with the predictions associated with their lower IQ, just like Jews nicely align with predictions associated with their higher IQ. When the predictions match results, trying to undermine the test is motivated reasoning. When they diverge sharply, it is only good sense.

    very very very basic fertility problem, unhandicaped by Westerners’ anti-racism and liberalism

    They have proved unable to go anywhere they are not led.

    Sweet – so once the West has solved their own fertility problem – East Asia will be right behind them! And possibly improve on the numbers like they did with automobiles!

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ilkarnal
    I genuinely hope so.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. @Ilkarnal
    That article you linked is emblematic. Scaling up is not making anything revolutionary. The West invents automobiles - maybe Japan builds them fastest and best for a while. Do you understand how fundamentally pathetic it is to point to the latter 'achievement' as anything comparing to the former?

    The East Asians are a shrinking bunch of stone-faced imitators. Not much of a yellow peril. They have proved unable to go anywhere they are not led.

    As for them coming up with some magical fix - lol. They aren't even coming up with a fix for the very very very basic fertility problem, unhandicaped by Westerners' anti-racism and liberalism. They are clueless, Western thinkers project savvy on to them.

    None of this is to say they are not smart. You see a lot of bright, clear intellects from that background. But what is indicated by the IQ avg is that you should have a larger proportion of earth-shattering geniuses coming from there, and while that prediction comes true for Jews it does not in this population. I don't claim to know why.

    But I also reject absolutely the idea that this is terribly surprising. IQ is great but has shown big cracks, like intertemporal invalidity and this East Asian overprediction and only moderate if any g-loading improvement over other measures. And then it wouldn't even be that surprising if some populations just overperformed or underperformed in test-like environments generally.

    You can compare this to IQ denialist bullshit if you want, but remember - the East Asian-White difference is quite small compared to the Black-White difference, and factors like this have a much easier time closing a smaller gap. Also Blacks do nicely align with the predictions associated with their lower IQ, just like Jews nicely align with predictions associated with their higher IQ. When the predictions match results, trying to undermine the test is motivated reasoning. When they diverge sharply, it is only good sense.

    They aren’t even coming up with a fix for the very very very basic fertility problem, unhandicaped by Westerners’ anti-racism and liberalism

    That’s pretty funny because that’s exactly what China managed in 2016 and increased the number of births. What the government wants, they get. At any rate, population density being as high as it is, rapidly increasing the population isn’t really at the top list of priorities.

    Context changes, as does better understanding of process and methodology. The idea that innovation is something mystical that cannot be put into method or process seems to be a tall order, given that increasing datasets has allowed us to procedurize almost everything else. Indeed, I’ll argue that understanding that would be a necessary condition for improving outcomes from artificial intelligence.

    But I do wish you good luck in your beliefs. Ignorance is bliss, I hear.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Thomm says:
    @GoBackToDesert
    Another Jew spotted. The recent Lieberman thread over at iSteve is crawling with them. Hasbara central is getting desperate.

    1) I am not Jewish.
    2) Jews are white.

    Any more brilliant insights?

    WNs have Negro IQs.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. @Mao Cheng Ji

    The people’s republic got massive Soviet aid until the early 1960s though (iirc one of the biggest aid programmes in all of history).
     
    Since we're analyzing everything on the 'per capita' basis here, how 'massive' could that Soviet aid be? Especially in the immediate post war years? In the early 60s, even in Moscow they were still rationing wheat flour, as I remember.

    Also significant American support once China and the US had concluded a quasi-alliance against the Soviet Union.
     
    Is that a fact? What kind of support?

    Is that a fact? What kind of support?

    Primarily technology transfer and US financial investment I’d suppose (which had a political dimension because the US wanted China as a counter-weight to the Soviet Union). I’ll admit though that I’m not that knowledgeable about the details, maybe someone else can provide them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    From 1951-1965 the USA gave 1.4 billion dollars worth of aid to Taiwan.

    http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNAAK054.pdf

    That's $10.8 billion in 2017 dollars, or an average of $770 million per year.* Or, based on Taiwan's 1965 population, about $60 per resident, per year. According to wiki, US economic aid ceased in 1965.

    In 1980 Taiwan had a per capita GDP of $2,367. In China the per capita GDP was more than ten times less: $195.

    There was also a Maoist state in Europe: Albania. It did much worse than any of its non-Maoist neighbors.

    *In context, that's 1/4 as much as Israel (which has about 36% of Taiwan's population) gets per year.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. Jon0815 says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    Good theory, but no.
    * http://infoproc.blogspot.ru/2008/06/asian-white-iq-variance-from-pisa.html
    * http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/sft2.htm

    That’s interesting, thanks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. melanf says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    Confucianism only core to China and Korea (long part of Chinese Empire), in Japan it was merely one of many borrowings from China.

    Confucianism only core to China and Korea (long part of Chinese Empire), in Japan it was merely one of many borrowings from China.

    The Japanese are also “core” Confucians. In particular, Confucianism was the official ideology of the Tokugawa Shogunate. Cultural characteristics of Japanese people (work ethic, the cult of learning, hierarchy) is typically Confucian. Perhaps in addition to Confucianism played the role of the intensive rice-growing, but the representatives of the four rice-Confucian cultures (China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam) show a striking cultural similarities.
    Even Koreans in Russia (100 years living in isolation from Korea, whose native language is Russian, and the native religion – Christianity), has culture is still Confucian.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Welcome , CRISPR !

    The generation whose parents do not take advantage of CRISPR for fitness and cognition will compete with those whose parents did. “Why didn’t you help us when you could?’ will be the question they ask.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  58. AP says:
    @German_reader

    Is that a fact? What kind of support?
     
    Primarily technology transfer and US financial investment I'd suppose (which had a political dimension because the US wanted China as a counter-weight to the Soviet Union). I'll admit though that I'm not that knowledgeable about the details, maybe someone else can provide them.

    From 1951-1965 the USA gave 1.4 billion dollars worth of aid to Taiwan.

    http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNAAK054.pdf

    That’s $10.8 billion in 2017 dollars, or an average of $770 million per year.* Or, based on Taiwan’s 1965 population, about $60 per resident, per year. According to wiki, US economic aid ceased in 1965.

    In 1980 Taiwan had a per capita GDP of $2,367. In China the per capita GDP was more than ten times less: $195.

    There was also a Maoist state in Europe: Albania. It did much worse than any of its non-Maoist neighbors.

    *In context, that’s 1/4 as much as Israel (which has about 36% of Taiwan’s population) gets per year.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Here: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2642405?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

    The US aid to Taiwan amounted to 43% of all investment (during just the 1950s) and 90% of all foreign investment; and that’s not counting the military aid. Planned economic development, launched in 1953, consisted of three four-year plans. So much for free markets.

    Anyway, I don’t think there is any doubt that Taiwan was a US protectorate for several decades, which, together with the huge difference of scale, makes any comparison with China completely unsuitable.

    I find it surprising that stating that the post-war China is, overall, a great success story could somehow be controversial.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    I find it surprising that stating that the post-war China is, overall, a great success story
     
    It's been a success story for the last 40 years, after three decades of catastrophes and wasted potential.
    , @DB Cooper
    "I find it surprising that stating that the post-war China is, overall, a great success story could somehow be controversial."

    Post war China consist of two periods, Maoist China and post Mao China. Post Mao China is a success story because Deng scrapped many of the Mao's insanities that wrecked the country for decades.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. @Mao Cheng Ji
    Here: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2642405?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

    The US aid to Taiwan amounted to 43% of all investment (during just the 1950s) and 90% of all foreign investment; and that's not counting the military aid. Planned economic development, launched in 1953, consisted of three four-year plans. So much for free markets.

    Anyway, I don't think there is any doubt that Taiwan was a US protectorate for several decades, which, together with the huge difference of scale, makes any comparison with China completely unsuitable.

    I find it surprising that stating that the post-war China is, overall, a great success story could somehow be controversial.

    I find it surprising that stating that the post-war China is, overall, a great success story

    It’s been a success story for the last 40 years, after three decades of catastrophes and wasted potential.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mao Cheng Ji
    That's not what my Chinese friends tell me, including, incidentally, those educated in the US. Maoism brought China from total misery into a strong consolidated state and a world power. You can't really separate the last 40 years from the previous 30: all the reforms, the 5-year plans, industrialization. Obviously, the cultural revolution was an unfortunate setback, but hey, what did you expect. This has been, and still is, a journey across the uncharted territory.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. @Mao Cheng Ji
    The chart looks like bullshit. GDP (PPP) per capita in Russia is reported as ~ $26K, in China ~$15K and in the US ~ $57K.

    Central planning and especially the lunacy that is Maoism are far less effective than free markets.
     
    Of course, central planning is pretty much everywhere these days, that's the nature of modern (neoliberal) capitalism. If it wasn't, the West would've collapsed long time ago. "Free markets" is a fantasy.

    As for Maoism, some 'lunacy' it was: transferring one of the poorest and most backwards countries in the world into the strongest. Just ask any (high IQ!) Chinese person.

    As for Maoism, some ‘lunacy’ it was: transferring one of the poorest and most backwards countries in the world into the strongest. Just ask any (high IQ!) Chinese person.

    Well. they were probably educated in the PRC, which has a vested interest in promoting the good side of Maoism.

    My impression is about Maoism, at best, it provided the background (e.g. a mostly unified state) for creating a powerful ‘developmentalist’ state in the Japanese/South Korean/Taiwanese mold (with Chinese characteristics!) once Mao was gone. Before that, Maoism mostly meandered from crazy scheme to crazy scheme with little to show for it.

    Read More
    • Agree: Daniel Chieh
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. @German_reader

    I find it surprising that stating that the post-war China is, overall, a great success story
     
    It's been a success story for the last 40 years, after three decades of catastrophes and wasted potential.

    That’s not what my Chinese friends tell me, including, incidentally, those educated in the US. Maoism brought China from total misery into a strong consolidated state and a world power. You can’t really separate the last 40 years from the previous 30: all the reforms, the 5-year plans, industrialization. Obviously, the cultural revolution was an unfortunate setback, but hey, what did you expect. This has been, and still is, a journey across the uncharted territory.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Maoism broke Confucianism and was necessary for China to forge ahead; however, its hard to say that all of the stupidity that was also involved was necessary. Hindsight is 20/20, I'm sure that it could have been done better, but history is what it is.
    , @random rand
    An interesting note to keep in mind is that the Cultural Revolution was a "success" in the sense that it achieved its main purpose of Mao taking back power. I think the Machiavellian power grabbing part of the Cultural Revolution was much more important than whatever the purported ideological reason was. Needless to say, what was good for Mao personally might not be very good for the Party and the country.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. @Mao Cheng Ji
    That's not what my Chinese friends tell me, including, incidentally, those educated in the US. Maoism brought China from total misery into a strong consolidated state and a world power. You can't really separate the last 40 years from the previous 30: all the reforms, the 5-year plans, industrialization. Obviously, the cultural revolution was an unfortunate setback, but hey, what did you expect. This has been, and still is, a journey across the uncharted territory.

    Maoism broke Confucianism and was necessary for China to forge ahead; however, its hard to say that all of the stupidity that was also involved was necessary. Hindsight is 20/20, I’m sure that it could have been done better, but history is what it is.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    Didn't the Guomindang do that successfully anyway?

    And why was Confucianism so bad anyway? I am leery of overly cultural explanations, but lots of people were praising it as enabling the fast growth of the East Asian tigers in the 1990s (whereas before they had blamed Confucianism for their historical backwardness... hence my leeriness).

    It probably wasn't as great as Protestantism (primarily for fostering literacy) but better than Catholicism or Orthodoxy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. @Daniel Chieh
    Maoism broke Confucianism and was necessary for China to forge ahead; however, its hard to say that all of the stupidity that was also involved was necessary. Hindsight is 20/20, I'm sure that it could have been done better, but history is what it is.

    Didn’t the Guomindang do that successfully anyway?

    And why was Confucianism so bad anyway? I am leery of overly cultural explanations, but lots of people were praising it as enabling the fast growth of the East Asian tigers in the 1990s (whereas before they had blamed Confucianism for their historical backwardness… hence my leeriness).

    It probably wasn’t as great as Protestantism (primarily for fostering literacy) but better than Catholicism or Orthodoxy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Well, Chiang Kai-shek still had people calling him Lord Chiang for one thousand year reign, so perhaps he wasn't quite as dedicated to blow up everything as Mao Zedong was, for better or worse. Its really hard to say; the thing is, China really was a mess of ritual and stagnation and the Cultural Revolution certainly its part to permanently disrupt things such as building dragon holes, crying out to scare forth demons, and the like. KMT would have kept things relatively less brutal and if you really need to alter the true nature of a population, perhaps you really do need to put them through a brutal sieve of starvation and baby-eating. I bet that it'll select for better survivors and more practicality...in one way to put it.

    But you can't have a nutcase running things forever for obvious reasons, even if some of his insanities proved ultimately helpful.

    I think that Confucianism in certain extents was helpful - the basic notions of education, harmony, and hard work all being useful. What wasn't useful was the added load from Neoconfucianism, with its detailed caste system bashing on soldiers and praising rice eating and all that associated nonsense. Much as Christianity would disrupt Europe which was at one point holding onto Roman notions of dignity,etc, so I think the massive disruption that Mao brought seems ultimately necessary to bring us a modern China that has a genuine chance of being different, as opposed to say, a larger Japan or Korea.

    , @Not Raul
    Didn't the Novgorod Republic have a high level of literacy for its time?

    Literacy in pre-Modern China was quite low outside of the Mandarins.
    , @Hieronymus of Canada

    And why was Confucianism so bad anyway? I am leery of overly cultural explanations, but lots of people were praising it as enabling the fast growth of the East Asian tigers in the 1990s (whereas before they had blamed Confucianism for their historical backwardness… hence my leeriness).
     
    IIRC, Confucianism was a backwards looking ideology. Confucius' big goal was to find the ancient rites to revive the 'golden age' of his own fallen age - this being more than two thousand years ago. It's not right philosophy for a civilization dealing with foreigners who are light years ahead of them, as was the case with China in the 19th and early 20th centuries.
    , @random rand
    From my understanding, the thing with the Guomindang is that they were like a loose alliance of rival clans. I think the reason why the Communists were necessary was the fact that they were able to wipe clean all the tangled up alliances and corrupt power structures that made the Guomindang such a giant ungovernable mess. Of course, the problem with the Communists is that if they decided to use their rather effective command structure to do stupid shit they end up with the Great Leap Forward. But on the other hand it is completely possible the Guomindang would have made a mess out of governance as well even though they would probably have killed less people. I think it is possible to argue that if the Communists never took over then Deng would never have eventually gotten the chance to implement successful policies (or, to put it another way, there would never have been a Guomindang Deng who would have the same amount of success).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. DB Cooper says:
    @Mao Cheng Ji
    Here: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2642405?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

    The US aid to Taiwan amounted to 43% of all investment (during just the 1950s) and 90% of all foreign investment; and that's not counting the military aid. Planned economic development, launched in 1953, consisted of three four-year plans. So much for free markets.

    Anyway, I don't think there is any doubt that Taiwan was a US protectorate for several decades, which, together with the huge difference of scale, makes any comparison with China completely unsuitable.

    I find it surprising that stating that the post-war China is, overall, a great success story could somehow be controversial.

    “I find it surprising that stating that the post-war China is, overall, a great success story could somehow be controversial.”

    Post war China consist of two periods, Maoist China and post Mao China. Post Mao China is a success story because Deng scrapped many of the Mao’s insanities that wrecked the country for decades.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. @Anatoly Karlin
    Didn't the Guomindang do that successfully anyway?

    And why was Confucianism so bad anyway? I am leery of overly cultural explanations, but lots of people were praising it as enabling the fast growth of the East Asian tigers in the 1990s (whereas before they had blamed Confucianism for their historical backwardness... hence my leeriness).

    It probably wasn't as great as Protestantism (primarily for fostering literacy) but better than Catholicism or Orthodoxy.

    Well, Chiang Kai-shek still had people calling him Lord Chiang for one thousand year reign, so perhaps he wasn’t quite as dedicated to blow up everything as Mao Zedong was, for better or worse. Its really hard to say; the thing is, China really was a mess of ritual and stagnation and the Cultural Revolution certainly its part to permanently disrupt things such as building dragon holes, crying out to scare forth demons, and the like. KMT would have kept things relatively less brutal and if you really need to alter the true nature of a population, perhaps you really do need to put them through a brutal sieve of starvation and baby-eating. I bet that it’ll select for better survivors and more practicality…in one way to put it.

    But you can’t have a nutcase running things forever for obvious reasons, even if some of his insanities proved ultimately helpful.

    I think that Confucianism in certain extents was helpful – the basic notions of education, harmony, and hard work all being useful. What wasn’t useful was the added load from Neoconfucianism, with its detailed caste system bashing on soldiers and praising rice eating and all that associated nonsense. Much as Christianity would disrupt Europe which was at one point holding onto Roman notions of dignity,etc, so I think the massive disruption that Mao brought seems ultimately necessary to bring us a modern China that has a genuine chance of being different, as opposed to say, a larger Japan or Korea.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Not Raul says:

    Do you have any investment ideas based on this chart and/or other factors?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  68. Not Raul says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    Didn't the Guomindang do that successfully anyway?

    And why was Confucianism so bad anyway? I am leery of overly cultural explanations, but lots of people were praising it as enabling the fast growth of the East Asian tigers in the 1990s (whereas before they had blamed Confucianism for their historical backwardness... hence my leeriness).

    It probably wasn't as great as Protestantism (primarily for fostering literacy) but better than Catholicism or Orthodoxy.

    Didn’t the Novgorod Republic have a high level of literacy for its time?

    Literacy in pre-Modern China was quite low outside of the Mandarins.

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf

    Didn’t the Novgorod Republic have a high level of literacy for its time?
     
    It is a myth. About the level of literacy in medieval Novgorod, there is no reliable data (there are finds of medieval letters, but the percentage of literacy is impossible to calculate). Based on indirect data (overall low level of material culture) is the percentage of literacy had to be very low.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @Anatoly Karlin
    Didn't the Guomindang do that successfully anyway?

    And why was Confucianism so bad anyway? I am leery of overly cultural explanations, but lots of people were praising it as enabling the fast growth of the East Asian tigers in the 1990s (whereas before they had blamed Confucianism for their historical backwardness... hence my leeriness).

    It probably wasn't as great as Protestantism (primarily for fostering literacy) but better than Catholicism or Orthodoxy.

    And why was Confucianism so bad anyway? I am leery of overly cultural explanations, but lots of people were praising it as enabling the fast growth of the East Asian tigers in the 1990s (whereas before they had blamed Confucianism for their historical backwardness… hence my leeriness).

    IIRC, Confucianism was a backwards looking ideology. Confucius’ big goal was to find the ancient rites to revive the ‘golden age’ of his own fallen age – this being more than two thousand years ago. It’s not right philosophy for a civilization dealing with foreigners who are light years ahead of them, as was the case with China in the 19th and early 20th centuries.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. @Mao Cheng Ji
    That's not what my Chinese friends tell me, including, incidentally, those educated in the US. Maoism brought China from total misery into a strong consolidated state and a world power. You can't really separate the last 40 years from the previous 30: all the reforms, the 5-year plans, industrialization. Obviously, the cultural revolution was an unfortunate setback, but hey, what did you expect. This has been, and still is, a journey across the uncharted territory.

    An interesting note to keep in mind is that the Cultural Revolution was a “success” in the sense that it achieved its main purpose of Mao taking back power. I think the Machiavellian power grabbing part of the Cultural Revolution was much more important than whatever the purported ideological reason was. Needless to say, what was good for Mao personally might not be very good for the Party and the country.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mao Cheng Ji
    History is not about individuals; it doesn't matter whose portrait is hanging on the wall. From the dialectical materialism angle, I think it's pretty clear that it was a setback, an attempt to slow down, prevent vital reforms. But of course I could be wrong.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. @random rand
    An interesting note to keep in mind is that the Cultural Revolution was a "success" in the sense that it achieved its main purpose of Mao taking back power. I think the Machiavellian power grabbing part of the Cultural Revolution was much more important than whatever the purported ideological reason was. Needless to say, what was good for Mao personally might not be very good for the Party and the country.

    History is not about individuals; it doesn’t matter whose portrait is hanging on the wall. From the dialectical materialism angle, I think it’s pretty clear that it was a setback, an attempt to slow down, prevent vital reforms. But of course I could be wrong.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. @Anatoly Karlin
    Didn't the Guomindang do that successfully anyway?

    And why was Confucianism so bad anyway? I am leery of overly cultural explanations, but lots of people were praising it as enabling the fast growth of the East Asian tigers in the 1990s (whereas before they had blamed Confucianism for their historical backwardness... hence my leeriness).

    It probably wasn't as great as Protestantism (primarily for fostering literacy) but better than Catholicism or Orthodoxy.

    From my understanding, the thing with the Guomindang is that they were like a loose alliance of rival clans. I think the reason why the Communists were necessary was the fact that they were able to wipe clean all the tangled up alliances and corrupt power structures that made the Guomindang such a giant ungovernable mess. Of course, the problem with the Communists is that if they decided to use their rather effective command structure to do stupid shit they end up with the Great Leap Forward. But on the other hand it is completely possible the Guomindang would have made a mess out of governance as well even though they would probably have killed less people. I think it is possible to argue that if the Communists never took over then Deng would never have eventually gotten the chance to implement successful policies (or, to put it another way, there would never have been a Guomindang Deng who would have the same amount of success).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. M says:

    ilkarnal: I think this (legacy of Malthusianism) line of thinking is nonsense
    Yeah, if you really think about it, it does not make a lot of sense.

    Was South Korea, or Taiwan, say, really disadvantaged relative to Latin America due to differences in marginal low productivity for farmers? (On the other side of the ledger, there are Smithian productivity advantages from access to high amounts of human capital).

    In reality, we’re talking about the fact that Latin populations tended to adopt Enlightenment Era Western European innovations in technology, science, and education earlier than those two populations I mentioned, which were far more culturally conservative to pre-industrial norms in the 19th and early 20th century.

    (And education is particularly important – the Iberian colonies obviously had a better time of gaining a stock of Western style education in the late 19th and very early 20th than any Asian economies bar Japan, which absolutely went for broke on Westernisation).

    They did so because they were colonies of Europe, with most of their ancestral stock from Iberia.

    Less cultural distance = easier to adopt innovations; productivity rises earlier. (Not “free land”.)

    To pick further on the term of “High level equilibrium” as well, it’s also a bit of a nonsense term because it suggests technical production within most advanced regions of India and China in say, 1500 AD, was more advanced than European counterparts. But technologically this is obviously not the case if you really dig into the lit of innovations and production and make objective comparisons.

    A higher level of importing from India / China to the West is sometimes held to be the result of technological advantage. However, again if you really look at it, any importing from India/China to Europe tended to be driven by the silver excess, and better coin and ship technology, in the West, and by agricultural advantages in warm climate crops in the East (e.g. Indians can grow cotton, which you can’t in Europe, so they lead production, but there’s no advantage in tech sophistication). Technological sophistication in advanced cultural products did not lag, post Middle Ages.

    Anatoly: The legacy of Communism

    Communism is not so unique. There are all kinds of productivity lowering errors across the world in government and economic systems (corruption, for one).

    Unselected Anglos or Japanese or Ashkenazis, for example, obviously wouldn’t nearly be as productive in most countries, say Brazil or Mexico, if they were dumped there and forced to abide the government structures that exist.

    In the same way, Mexicans, or Germans, or Japanese, are hugely more productive in the US than they are in Mexico, or Germany, or Japan. (“Super Economy”).

    Communism is not the only government system mediated exception to country economic productivities as average of citizen ability.

    (Meaning it’s not the case that, so long as you’re not Communist, you can do what you like with economic and political policy and you will turn out rich.)

    Where Communism is interesting is that it’s an error in government that smart people seem to fall for. Most other errors in government and economic systems tend to happen in less smart populations, so don’t break the IQ->GDP correlation.

    Communism unusual here. It’s an error in government which doesn’t drop in probability as your population becomes smarter and better educated (if anything becomes more probable, looking at Western campuses).

    On a general note Anatoly, you’re a pretty smart guy, but you’d be way smarter on these topics if you went to the twitter for Garett Jones (https://twitter.com/GarettJones) and PseudoErasmus (https://twitter.com/pseudoerasmus) and systematically read through everything they’ve posted for about the last 2 years. You’d be a lot more informed about economic history and have a much better position to make these posts grounded in that.

    Read mainstream economic history+a healthy dose of “Deep Roots” economic literature => understand real reasons for divergences. It works!

    Read More
    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  74. 5371 says:
    @ussr andy
    TRIZ, too.

    TRIZ (/ˈtriːz/; Russian: теория решения изобретательских задач, teoriya resheniya izobretatelskikh zadach, literally: "theory of the resolution of invention-related tasks") (...) was developed by the Soviet inventor and science-fiction author Genrich Altshuller (1926-1998) and his colleagues, beginning in 1946. (...)

    Following Altshuller's insight (...) to produce a theory which defines generalisable patterns in the nature of inventive solutions and the distinguishing characteristics of the problems that these inventions have overcome.

    (...) one of the objectives which has been pursued by leading practitioners of TRIZ has been the development of an algorithmic approach to the invention of new systems (...)

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

     

    Lots of famous and intelligent people – Zwicky and Polya come to mind – have attempted to find an automatic way for anyone to replicate their creativity. None has ever succeeded, and none ever will.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ussr andy
    dunno, it's too early to tell.

    I think creativity is 99% of it just knowing one's stuff (esp. the associated math) and thinking about the problem a lot.

    It'd be interesting to know how people generally come up with things, for example, one of the most momentous (by Shannon, I think), the idea to make electric circuits perform Boolean algebra.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. melanf says:
    @Not Raul
    Didn't the Novgorod Republic have a high level of literacy for its time?

    Literacy in pre-Modern China was quite low outside of the Mandarins.

    Didn’t the Novgorod Republic have a high level of literacy for its time?

    It is a myth. About the level of literacy in medieval Novgorod, there is no reliable data (there are finds of medieval letters, but the percentage of literacy is impossible to calculate). Based on indirect data (overall low level of material culture) is the percentage of literacy had to be very low.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. ussr andy says:
    @5371
    Lots of famous and intelligent people - Zwicky and Polya come to mind - have attempted to find an automatic way for anyone to replicate their creativity. None has ever succeeded, and none ever will.

    dunno, it’s too early to tell.

    I think creativity is 99% of it just knowing one’s stuff (esp. the associated math) and thinking about the problem a lot.

    It’d be interesting to know how people generally come up with things, for example, one of the most momentous (by Shannon, I think), the idea to make electric circuits perform Boolean algebra.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Dr. B. Oakley explored a variation of this too, and found that learning appears to be accomplished in mappings of the brain very similar to what you suggested: it appears that separate nodes in the brain each hold chunks of information, and there's a "tentacle" effect in which the brain does, usually while semi-conscious, asleep, etc, in which these disparate ideas are connected to try to solve the problem.

    A lot of the ideas generated are completely useless, akin to the dream-logic we have while sleeping, but some actually produce something coherent and meaningful. Anyone who's been "struck by a muse" can probably relate to this.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. ilkarnal says:
    @Talha

    very very very basic fertility problem, unhandicaped by Westerners’ anti-racism and liberalism
     

    They have proved unable to go anywhere they are not led.
     
    Sweet - so once the West has solved their own fertility problem - East Asia will be right behind them! And possibly improve on the numbers like they did with automobiles!

    Peace.

    I genuinely hope so.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @ussr andy
    dunno, it's too early to tell.

    I think creativity is 99% of it just knowing one's stuff (esp. the associated math) and thinking about the problem a lot.

    It'd be interesting to know how people generally come up with things, for example, one of the most momentous (by Shannon, I think), the idea to make electric circuits perform Boolean algebra.

    Dr. B. Oakley explored a variation of this too, and found that learning appears to be accomplished in mappings of the brain very similar to what you suggested: it appears that separate nodes in the brain each hold chunks of information, and there’s a “tentacle” effect in which the brain does, usually while semi-conscious, asleep, etc, in which these disparate ideas are connected to try to solve the problem.

    A lot of the ideas generated are completely useless, akin to the dream-logic we have while sleeping, but some actually produce something coherent and meaningful. Anyone who’s been “struck by a muse” can probably relate to this.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Thomm says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    It is good to argue with oneself. Carry on.

    Translation : Anatoly Karlin has no argument. This is what I predicted in my comment above.

    Karlin just has no grasp of the concept of GDP growth, and if a country with a 100 IQ had the GDP per capita 20 years ago that a country with an 85 IQ has today, then the latter country is just 20 years behind, which undermines the hare-brained premise of most of Karlin’s articles.

    Hence, Karlin is far below the level of knowledge where he can discuss this subject. He proved it.

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

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS