The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Support for Eugenics, by Race
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

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

The results from a question asked for the first time in 2018 about whether respondents would want–or would want their wives–to have an abortion if it was revealed that the unborn baby would have “genetic defects” follows. The non-white samples are small, so this should be taken only as suggestive, but one group has a markedly different attitude than the others:

Is it surprising that the first CRISPR baby came out of the East? As the center of the world reorients (heh) away from the Occident and back towards the Orient, the ethical hangups about what is derisively referred to as eugenics will increasingly become a sideshow curiosity on the global stage, much like Brunei’s gayless treatment of gays is today.

On the other hand, with some Islamic exceptions, Asian fertility is the lowest in the world. When it comes to making babies, the perfect very conceivably can be the enemy of the good.

GSS variables used: HISPANIC(1)(2-50), RACECEN1(1)(2)(4-10), GENEABRT2

 
Hide 493 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. The low birthrate feeds the perfection obsession here too.

    Late marriage and careerism and feminist check-the-box one and done children are reverse engineered Harvard grads. The above-replacement vs 1.0 birthrate families do tend to differ in their aspirations toward perfection.

    I have a close friend in early childhood Ed. Seems kids are either ‘special needs’ aka no father in the home or ‘very advanced’ aka insufferable double income outsourcers insisting that their genius spawn maintain the pre-ordained trajectory.

    It will be interesting to see the science driving eugenics collide with all these last-egg IVF kids that seem to also be mysteriously aligned with the ‘spike’ in spergy-spectrum special needs.

    What will the messaging be when the perfect designer baby and the you can have it all last egg baby are at opposite ends of the science?

    Also, would ‘genetic defect’ also include not my DNA? Now that would be interesting.

    • Replies: @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    TFR For 2018 by Selected Asian regions

    South Korea - 0.97
    Hong Kong - < 1.1
    Taiwan - < 1.1
    Japan - 1.4
    China - Official is 1.6, but probably lower (some estimates are 1.2)
    Thailand - 1.38

    Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Myanmar, India (many provinces are below), Bangladesh are now floating right around replacement, and will soon plunge below.

    The population pyramids of some of these East Asian countries are absolutely horrific. Something will have to be done, because I don't see the countries surviving with such a sudden demographic contraction. Asians I know have no interest in having children. No East Asians are interested in family, and South Asians by the 2nd generation are engrossed in the rap/thug culture, also in no place to start a family.

    Anyways, the neo-liberal order is actually doing quite a good job at ethnically cleansing the world of Asians. White fertility seems to stick somewhere around 1.6, while Asians seems to be around 1?? or lower. Just keep the Muslims and Africans out of Europe and we're good to go.
    , @gate666
    low birth rate caused by one child policy?
    , @Audacious Epigone
    "genetic defect" is a phrase that is to some extent in the eye of the beholder. When full genome sequencing of embryos a la Razib Khan becomes commonplace, the definition will presumably expand.
  2. Has anyone actually read the abortion law Ronald Reagan signed in California? It was hardly “prochoice”, leaving the final decision in the hands of hospital committees already trusted with it.

    Reagan’s primary influence on the bill? He managed to have “fetal deformity” removed as a justification.

  3. I would abort my baby if it had down syndrome or other mental handicaps. I don’t want to spend my life looking after a drooling retard, and I don’t think it’s ethical to even bring a child into this world who cannot be self sufficient.

    Abortion because “I was sleeping around and an accident happened” is not acceptable. But abortion due to genetic defects is.

    I’m assuming the 29% who wouldn’t are Filipinos, Korean Evangelicals and Muslim South-East Asians.

    British Columbia, Toronto, and Brampton (Chinese/Brown) have the highest abortion rates in Canada. About 1/3 (or as of 10 years ago more) of pregnancies are terminated. In the White rural areas, it’s more like 1/10. So it doesn’t seem like abortion, for any reason, presents any moral dilemma for the majority of Asians.

    It’s not hard to imagine a future, where North America becomes Asian-dominated. Strong eugenic pressure will be forced upon blacks and the bottom 75% of latins, and probably the bottom 50% of whites. People don’t realize how *alien* Asians are to us. To be honest, an ideal situation would have all of America (North and South) fighting against *all* Asian immigration. Because believe it or not, we have alot more in common with Mexicans and even blacks than we do with Asians. I’m meeting Spanish speaking Asians from South America now even.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @rob
    I hate to disagree with you after you praised my comment, but are you so sure that aborting accidental shutting around pregnancies is such a bad thing? I can see that once upon a time when the father would ‘man up’ and they’d get married and be more or less responsible parents, but today? With the sexual marketplace and social situation we have today? If the woman ‘chooses life’ she’s probably going to be the single mother of a child with a (from our POV) a low-quality father. From a demographic perspective, she’ll have fewer children than if she marries, even if later.If the woman aborts, she has a better better chance of finding a decent husband than she does as a single mom.

    I guess my perspctive is skewed by not seeing abortion as immoral in and of itself, but from a purely consequentialist view. Aborting a pregnancy that has a high chance of producing a criminal or a rapper? Pretty peachy. Aborting a pregnancy that has a good chance at producing a net contributor Pretty bad.

    I can see the view that ready abortion enables people to have sex in ways that doesn’t lead to healthy, functional families. But with abortion pills readily available, we’re never going to put that mushroom cloud back into the bombshell. The reasonable thing to do seems to be to consider abortion another tool in toolbox that can be used either for good or evil. I think we’ve reached a point where encouraging women to make the ‘brave’ decision to be a single mom is a net negative.
    , @YetAnotherAnon
    " I don’t want to spend my life looking after a drooling retard"

    Downs kids (and people) are generally friendly and affectionate. They are easy to love. The trouble is when their parents get old, and who'll care for them then.

    NS - what if the people with an IQ over 120 were to decide to genocide everyone under 120? Slippery slope.

    , @SunBakedSuburb
    "I don't want to spend my life looking after a drooling retard ..."

    That's what my mom said. But look at her now.
    , @Corvinus
    "I would abort my baby if it had down syndrome or other mental handicaps. I don’t want to spend my life looking after a drooling retard, and I don’t think it’s ethical to even bring a child into this world who cannot be self sufficient."

    Thank you for demonstrating the cheapness of life. You sound like an SJW screaming "Well, it's about me".

    "Abortion because “I was sleeping around and an accident happened” is not acceptable. But abortion due to genetic defects is."

    Doesn't work that way. Either abortion is murder or it is not murder. You are trying to weasel your way out of responsibility.

    "People don’t realize how *alien* Asians are to us."

    To YOU, but not to we or us.

    "To be honest, an ideal situation would have all of America (North and South) fighting against *all* Asian immigration."

    John Derbyshire would probably not appreciate your sentiments.
    , @EastKekistani
    I have a deal for you.

    1. All Northeast Asians will leave white majority countries and be resettled in Southeast Asia and non-white Oceania.

    2. The territories mentioned above in Southeast Asia and non-white Oceania should become a lot of independent states allied with the West and controlled by Japan, Taiwan or Singapore. Western military bases in the region will be preserved indefinitely.

    3, Europe, the entire Americas, Australia, New Zealand and Southern Africa (defined as South Africa, South-West Africa and Rhodesia) should be exclusively white.

    4. The area between Sahara Desert and white Africa should be turned over to us to be our racial colony for NE Asia is absurdly overcrowded. We will take care of everyone and everything in the region and will not allow even one refugee to bother white or other countries.

    Deal?

    I believe you guys and we guys should have separate racial spheres and not harm each other. Maybe in the future if you don't want to live with us on the same planet we can have separate planets too.

  4. Anon[230] • Disclaimer says:

    Americans oppose sensible eugenic policies, even to prevent inheritance of serious disease. A whopping 83% oppose genetic enhancements for intelligence and looks:

    https://www.statnews.com/2016/02/11/stat-harvard-poll-gene-editing/

    Honestly, I find this mind-boggling. Of course, some naysayer could come up with a list of potential drawbacks (as they could with any technology), but the potential benefits to human health and accomplishment seem so great as to easily overwhelm these concerns. Who wouldn’t want their child to be smarter, taller, healthier, and better looking? Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life – obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders? What gives?

    My vague impression on the subject relates to personality differences between Asians and other racial groups. Asians seem to be, on the whole, far less moralistic – far less susceptible to feelings of disgust. You see this in their cuisine: many Japanese have no problems eating barely dead frog sashimi and grilling live octopus; the Koreans eat live octopus; some Chinese restaurants serve live fish; many South East Asians eat live shrimp meals. You don’t see that in Western cultures nearly at all.

    Frog Sashimi:

    Dancing Shrimp salad:

    Chinese live fish:

    Korean live octopus:

    You additionally see this difference in personality in their entertainment industries, but to a more limited degree: Asians (not all but a large number) seem far less concerned with the subtle emotional and social aspects of many Western-type movies and books of yesteryear, before the fall in quality of Western entertainment that is; Asian entertainment revolves around broad-topic “things” over “feels” – the analytical side of romantic partnerships over pure feelings of love, science fiction robots, world-building over character building (which is why Japanese anime feels so different to Westerners – imaginative worlds with fantastical creatures and concepts but more limited character nuance), …

    As an aside, perhaps someone should conduct a poll asking what percentage of Western people would support germline enhancements if other people were already doing it; that might tell you the potential for adoption in the West as the Chinese are certain to go down that route at some point.

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Asians seem to be, on the whole, far less moralistic – far less susceptible to feelings of disgust.
     
    Right now I am very susceptible to being disgusted by your stupidity.

    On a more serious note, you've never read Confucius, I gather.

    One thing to keep in mind is that "Asian" is a rather nebulous category. In terms of the population in the United States, its composition has varied wildly by region and time period. Korean evangelicals, on the one hand, and atheist (worse, pro-communist) Chinese, on the other, are going to have very different outlooks on social and moral philosophy (and they are neighboring populations "back home"!).

    It is true that eugenic tendencies and feelings are very strong in East Asia, and this was so long before the days of CRISPR. I suspect that much of this has to do with pronounced East Asian tendencies toward perfectionism and low fertility.
    , @Trevor H.

    Honestly, I find this mind-boggling. Of course, some naysayer could come up with a list of potential drawbacks (as they could with any technology), but the potential benefits to human health and accomplishment seem so great as to easily overwhelm these concerns. Who wouldn’t want their child to be smarter, taller, healthier, and better looking? Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life – obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders? What gives?
     
    Simple. This is your society on Judaism.
    , @silviosilver

    Who wouldn’t want their child to be smarter, taller, healthier, and better looking? Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life – obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders? What gives?
     
    As I understand it, eugenics today can only increase the chances that your offspring will be smarter, healthier and better-looking, but it can't guarantee it. Potential parents may therefore be setting themselves up for some pretty serious disappointment.

    It would be wiser to focus on the benefits of eugenics for society at large, rather than the benefits for any given parents. In this case, we can be quite sure that on average eugenically conceived children will be smarter, healthier and better looking on average.

    Perhaps the most important objection to any of this is the fear that such people will know they are superior, will feel superior, and will act like it. They will "lord it over" everyone else. Absent this fear, it's hard to see why anyone would object to there being more intelligence, more health and more physical attractiveness in society.

    One way to quell these fears is to imagine that some (or all) of the very intelligent and very attractive people on earth today were, unbeknownst to any of us, actually eugenically conceived, and to then ask ourselves - is that really so horrible? If you learned that, say, Brad Pitt had been eugenically conceived, does really make you miserable? Or if you were already jealous of him, does it make you any more jealous? If not, then perhaps there really isn't so much to fear.
    , @Corvinus
    "Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life – obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders?"

    Assuming that those things are indeed a "curse" and assuming that the child will end up that way. Thanks for devaluing humanity, management appreciates it.
    , @SafeNow
    I would not dispute the perceptive description of Asians as stated; culinary perversions, pragmatic personality, and so on. Accurate as far as it goes, but consider the positives: Decent, industrious, intelligent, proficient, conscientious, fastidious, lean. Here in California, these are traits we can use more of, because we have been sliding downhill in these over recent decades. (I wonder why.) Perhaps these traits can be contageous, just as their absence has been.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    How long will it be until we have birth tourism *from* the US to China for the genetic engineering that is restricted in the US?
    , @TheBoom
    Asians are almost entirely driven by the question "what is in it for me and my family?" That applies to food (e.g., tastes great and cheap!) and eugenics (e.g., higher status kids who will make more money!).
  5. @Screwtape
    The low birthrate feeds the perfection obsession here too.

    Late marriage and careerism and feminist check-the-box one and done children are reverse engineered Harvard grads. The above-replacement vs 1.0 birthrate families do tend to differ in their aspirations toward perfection.

    I have a close friend in early childhood Ed. Seems kids are either ‘special needs’ aka no father in the home or ‘very advanced’ aka insufferable double income outsourcers insisting that their genius spawn maintain the pre-ordained trajectory.

    It will be interesting to see the science driving eugenics collide with all these last-egg IVF kids that seem to also be mysteriously aligned with the ‘spike’ in spergy-spectrum special needs.

    What will the messaging be when the perfect designer baby and the you can have it all last egg baby are at opposite ends of the science?

    Also, would ‘genetic defect’ also include not my DNA? Now that would be interesting.

    TFR For 2018 by Selected Asian regions

    South Korea – 0.97
    Hong Kong – < 1.1
    Taiwan – < 1.1
    Japan – 1.4
    China – Official is 1.6, but probably lower (some estimates are 1.2)
    Thailand – 1.38

    Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Myanmar, India (many provinces are below), Bangladesh are now floating right around replacement, and will soon plunge below.

    The population pyramids of some of these East Asian countries are absolutely horrific. Something will have to be done, because I don't see the countries surviving with such a sudden demographic contraction. Asians I know have no interest in having children. No East Asians are interested in family, and South Asians by the 2nd generation are engrossed in the rap/thug culture, also in no place to start a family.

    Anyways, the neo-liberal order is actually doing quite a good job at ethnically cleansing the world of Asians. White fertility seems to stick somewhere around 1.6, while Asians seems to be around 1?? or lower. Just keep the Muslims and Africans out of Europe and we're good to go.

    • Replies: @tamo
    You are full of wishful thinking. According to Anatoly Carlin, China's TFR is about 1.6 and maybe as high as 1.75. Meanwhile the U.S. WHITE TFR is 1.64, Russia 1.5, EU 1.45. Read RUSSIAN DEMOGRAPHICS IN 2019 and EMPEROR XI TRIES TO CORRECT DEMOGRAPHIC COURSE by Anatoly Carlin on this site.
    , @DRA
    Sounds to me like we are in the middle of very strong selection for people who have genes for wanting to have children. Or perhaps just selecting for people that are not too smart to have children.

    Previously we were just selecting for people with genes for wanting to have sex.
  6. @Anon
    Americans oppose sensible eugenic policies, even to prevent inheritance of serious disease. A whopping 83% oppose genetic enhancements for intelligence and looks:

    https://www.statnews.com/2016/02/11/stat-harvard-poll-gene-editing/

    Honestly, I find this mind-boggling. Of course, some naysayer could come up with a list of potential drawbacks (as they could with any technology), but the potential benefits to human health and accomplishment seem so great as to easily overwhelm these concerns. Who wouldn't want their child to be smarter, taller, healthier, and better looking? Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life - obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders? What gives?

    My vague impression on the subject relates to personality differences between Asians and other racial groups. Asians seem to be, on the whole, far less moralistic - far less susceptible to feelings of disgust. You see this in their cuisine: many Japanese have no problems eating barely dead frog sashimi and grilling live octopus; the Koreans eat live octopus; some Chinese restaurants serve live fish; many South East Asians eat live shrimp meals. You don't see that in Western cultures nearly at all.

    Frog Sashimi: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_NW2A9D-tw

    Dancing Shrimp salad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PX3NNmtRyI

    Chinese live fish: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPp1HmUe9Mw

    Korean live octopus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYDkzqCfJzg

    You additionally see this difference in personality in their entertainment industries, but to a more limited degree: Asians (not all but a large number) seem far less concerned with the subtle emotional and social aspects of many Western-type movies and books of yesteryear, before the fall in quality of Western entertainment that is; Asian entertainment revolves around broad-topic "things" over "feels" - the analytical side of romantic partnerships over pure feelings of love, science fiction robots, world-building over character building (which is why Japanese anime feels so different to Westerners - imaginative worlds with fantastical creatures and concepts but more limited character nuance), ...

    As an aside, perhaps someone should conduct a poll asking what percentage of Western people would support germline enhancements if other people were already doing it; that might tell you the potential for adoption in the West as the Chinese are certain to go down that route at some point.

    Asians seem to be, on the whole, far less moralistic – far less susceptible to feelings of disgust.

    Right now I am very susceptible to being disgusted by your stupidity.

    On a more serious note, you’ve never read Confucius, I gather.

    One thing to keep in mind is that “Asian” is a rather nebulous category. In terms of the population in the United States, its composition has varied wildly by region and time period. Korean evangelicals, on the one hand, and atheist (worse, pro-communist) Chinese, on the other, are going to have very different outlooks on social and moral philosophy (and they are neighboring populations “back home”!).

    It is true that eugenic tendencies and feelings are very strong in East Asia, and this was so long before the days of CRISPR. I suspect that much of this has to do with pronounced East Asian tendencies toward perfectionism and low fertility.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    First, before I read the rest of the comments, THANK YOU, Twinkie for pointing out the stupidity* of calling the Orientals "Asians". As I wrote in "Oriental is the term, and we're done talkin' about it.", Asia is a big damn continent (the biggest). OK, I've read some that ARE talking about all the countries from China to India to the Middle East, but most aren't.

    Next, the eugenics tendencies in mainland China have been due in large part to the one-child policy ruled into place by Chairman Deng in the late 1970's. Girls were aborted just for being girls, as the oldest boy (or only, for the most part) are responsible for taking care of the parents in old age.

    The low fertility in the Orient (at least China, from my experience) also has a factor of the weakness in the women there during pregnancy. They will stay in bed the 1st month of pregnancy and then for a month after the baby is born. Now, I'm no feminist pushing for those woman to be back in the cubicals pronto, but there is definitely more strength in Western woman in this important area. Maybe the Chinese do that just due to it being an old knocked-up wives tale. What's the story with Korean women in that regard, Twinkie?

    .

    * That's kind of harsh, but maybe it's a following of the PC, when it just confuciuses things.

    , @SunBakedSuburb
    "Right now I am very susceptible to being disgusted by your stupidity."

    I love this: a polite insult. It will come in handy for my 3:0opm meeting.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Genetic screening/engineering is the ultimate expression of the K-selection strategy in action!
    , @Stan d Mute

    Korean [and] Chinese ... are going to have very different outlooks
     
    Ah, so, but at least they have exactly the same appearance.
  7. @Anon
    Americans oppose sensible eugenic policies, even to prevent inheritance of serious disease. A whopping 83% oppose genetic enhancements for intelligence and looks:

    https://www.statnews.com/2016/02/11/stat-harvard-poll-gene-editing/

    Honestly, I find this mind-boggling. Of course, some naysayer could come up with a list of potential drawbacks (as they could with any technology), but the potential benefits to human health and accomplishment seem so great as to easily overwhelm these concerns. Who wouldn't want their child to be smarter, taller, healthier, and better looking? Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life - obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders? What gives?

    My vague impression on the subject relates to personality differences between Asians and other racial groups. Asians seem to be, on the whole, far less moralistic - far less susceptible to feelings of disgust. You see this in their cuisine: many Japanese have no problems eating barely dead frog sashimi and grilling live octopus; the Koreans eat live octopus; some Chinese restaurants serve live fish; many South East Asians eat live shrimp meals. You don't see that in Western cultures nearly at all.

    Frog Sashimi: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_NW2A9D-tw

    Dancing Shrimp salad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PX3NNmtRyI

    Chinese live fish: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPp1HmUe9Mw

    Korean live octopus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYDkzqCfJzg

    You additionally see this difference in personality in their entertainment industries, but to a more limited degree: Asians (not all but a large number) seem far less concerned with the subtle emotional and social aspects of many Western-type movies and books of yesteryear, before the fall in quality of Western entertainment that is; Asian entertainment revolves around broad-topic "things" over "feels" - the analytical side of romantic partnerships over pure feelings of love, science fiction robots, world-building over character building (which is why Japanese anime feels so different to Westerners - imaginative worlds with fantastical creatures and concepts but more limited character nuance), ...

    As an aside, perhaps someone should conduct a poll asking what percentage of Western people would support germline enhancements if other people were already doing it; that might tell you the potential for adoption in the West as the Chinese are certain to go down that route at some point.

    Honestly, I find this mind-boggling. Of course, some naysayer could come up with a list of potential drawbacks (as they could with any technology), but the potential benefits to human health and accomplishment seem so great as to easily overwhelm these concerns. Who wouldn’t want their child to be smarter, taller, healthier, and better looking? Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life – obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders? What gives?

    Simple. This is your society on Judaism.

    • Agree: Stan d Mute
    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    This is your society on Judaism.
     
    Especially Judaism v2.0
  8. rob says:
    @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    I would abort my baby if it had down syndrome or other mental handicaps. I don't want to spend my life looking after a drooling retard, and I don't think it's ethical to even bring a child into this world who cannot be self sufficient.

    Abortion because "I was sleeping around and an accident happened" is not acceptable. But abortion due to genetic defects is.

    I'm assuming the 29% who wouldn't are Filipinos, Korean Evangelicals and Muslim South-East Asians.

    British Columbia, Toronto, and Brampton (Chinese/Brown) have the highest abortion rates in Canada. About 1/3 (or as of 10 years ago more) of pregnancies are terminated. In the White rural areas, it's more like 1/10. So it doesn't seem like abortion, for any reason, presents any moral dilemma for the majority of Asians.

    It's not hard to imagine a future, where North America becomes Asian-dominated. Strong eugenic pressure will be forced upon blacks and the bottom 75% of latins, and probably the bottom 50% of whites. People don't realize how *alien* Asians are to us. To be honest, an ideal situation would have all of America (North and South) fighting against *all* Asian immigration. Because believe it or not, we have alot more in common with Mexicans and even blacks than we do with Asians. I'm meeting Spanish speaking Asians from South America now even.

    I hate to disagree with you after you praised my comment, but are you so sure that aborting accidental shutting around pregnancies is such a bad thing? I can see that once upon a time when the father would ‘man up’ and they’d get married and be more or less responsible parents, but today? With the sexual marketplace and social situation we have today? If the woman ‘chooses life’ she’s probably going to be the single mother of a child with a (from our POV) a low-quality father. From a demographic perspective, she’ll have fewer children than if she marries, even if later.If the woman aborts, she has a better better chance of finding a decent husband than she does as a single mom.

    I guess my perspctive is skewed by not seeing abortion as immoral in and of itself, but from a purely consequentialist view. Aborting a pregnancy that has a high chance of producing a criminal or a rapper? Pretty peachy. Aborting a pregnancy that has a good chance at producing a net contributor Pretty bad.

    I can see the view that ready abortion enables people to have sex in ways that doesn’t lead to healthy, functional families. But with abortion pills readily available, we’re never going to put that mushroom cloud back into the bombshell. The reasonable thing to do seems to be to consider abortion another tool in toolbox that can be used either for good or evil. I think we’ve reached a point where encouraging women to make the ‘brave’ decision to be a single mom is a net negative.

    • Agree: silviosilver
    • Disagree: atlantis_dweller
    • Replies: @Jay Fink
    My impression is that Republicans are no longer concerned about the destruction of the traditional family in all but the wealthiest and most educated social classes. They don't dare cut welfare or food stamps for single moms. I wonder if they are doing this as a favor to the anti-abortion movement?
    , @Silva
    One might argue that such a woman having less children in total is good, perhaps especially reducing the chance of a decent man marrying her to about 0. (But I do tend towards abortion myself.)
  9. @Anon
    Americans oppose sensible eugenic policies, even to prevent inheritance of serious disease. A whopping 83% oppose genetic enhancements for intelligence and looks:

    https://www.statnews.com/2016/02/11/stat-harvard-poll-gene-editing/

    Honestly, I find this mind-boggling. Of course, some naysayer could come up with a list of potential drawbacks (as they could with any technology), but the potential benefits to human health and accomplishment seem so great as to easily overwhelm these concerns. Who wouldn't want their child to be smarter, taller, healthier, and better looking? Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life - obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders? What gives?

    My vague impression on the subject relates to personality differences between Asians and other racial groups. Asians seem to be, on the whole, far less moralistic - far less susceptible to feelings of disgust. You see this in their cuisine: many Japanese have no problems eating barely dead frog sashimi and grilling live octopus; the Koreans eat live octopus; some Chinese restaurants serve live fish; many South East Asians eat live shrimp meals. You don't see that in Western cultures nearly at all.

    Frog Sashimi: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_NW2A9D-tw

    Dancing Shrimp salad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PX3NNmtRyI

    Chinese live fish: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPp1HmUe9Mw

    Korean live octopus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYDkzqCfJzg

    You additionally see this difference in personality in their entertainment industries, but to a more limited degree: Asians (not all but a large number) seem far less concerned with the subtle emotional and social aspects of many Western-type movies and books of yesteryear, before the fall in quality of Western entertainment that is; Asian entertainment revolves around broad-topic "things" over "feels" - the analytical side of romantic partnerships over pure feelings of love, science fiction robots, world-building over character building (which is why Japanese anime feels so different to Westerners - imaginative worlds with fantastical creatures and concepts but more limited character nuance), ...

    As an aside, perhaps someone should conduct a poll asking what percentage of Western people would support germline enhancements if other people were already doing it; that might tell you the potential for adoption in the West as the Chinese are certain to go down that route at some point.

    Who wouldn’t want their child to be smarter, taller, healthier, and better looking? Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life – obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders? What gives?

    As I understand it, eugenics today can only increase the chances that your offspring will be smarter, healthier and better-looking, but it can’t guarantee it. Potential parents may therefore be setting themselves up for some pretty serious disappointment.

    It would be wiser to focus on the benefits of eugenics for society at large, rather than the benefits for any given parents. In this case, we can be quite sure that on average eugenically conceived children will be smarter, healthier and better looking on average.

    Perhaps the most important objection to any of this is the fear that such people will know they are superior, will feel superior, and will act like it. They will “lord it over” everyone else. Absent this fear, it’s hard to see why anyone would object to there being more intelligence, more health and more physical attractiveness in society.

    One way to quell these fears is to imagine that some (or all) of the very intelligent and very attractive people on earth today were, unbeknownst to any of us, actually eugenically conceived, and to then ask ourselves – is that really so horrible? If you learned that, say, Brad Pitt had been eugenically conceived, does really make you miserable? Or if you were already jealous of him, does it make you any more jealous? If not, then perhaps there really isn’t so much to fear.

    • Replies: @Ns
    Why would it be wrong to genocide everyone on this Earth below an IQ of 70?
    , @Mr. Rational

    eugenics today can only increase the chances that your offspring will be smarter, healthier and better-looking, but it can’t guarantee it.
     
    Okay, suppose you use PIGD to select among a half-dozen zygotes to pick the one that's likely going to have the best health, looks and smarts.  You have a 20% chance of failing to improve on random chance.

    80% odds of beating chance is better than 50% odds.  80% odds spread over a population of millions is HUGE.

    Perhaps the most important objection to any of this is the fear that such people will know they are superior, will feel superior, and will act like it.
     
    You think they don't do this today?

    I can see where you'd have the opposite of this phenomenon.  If you started with a highly-selected population, say with a +2 SD lower cutoff, regression to the mean among the children would leave most of them inferior to the average of their parents.  However, selection for best traits could prevent that until the genes were fixated and the new mean was somewhere above the former +2 SD.
    , @Silva
    Both the "benefits on average" and solving the "lording it over" problem seem like they call for ... democracy and inclusion about eugenics as soon as possible. Also, a bunch of people today is the result of fairly conscious natural eugenics, and they do tend to lord it over everyone else (which would be the less feasible the more artificial eugenics was available and equivalent/superior to natural).
  10. Asians love child murder, who knew?

  11. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    TFR For 2018 by Selected Asian regions

    South Korea - 0.97
    Hong Kong - < 1.1
    Taiwan - < 1.1
    Japan - 1.4
    China - Official is 1.6, but probably lower (some estimates are 1.2)
    Thailand - 1.38

    Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Myanmar, India (many provinces are below), Bangladesh are now floating right around replacement, and will soon plunge below.

    The population pyramids of some of these East Asian countries are absolutely horrific. Something will have to be done, because I don't see the countries surviving with such a sudden demographic contraction. Asians I know have no interest in having children. No East Asians are interested in family, and South Asians by the 2nd generation are engrossed in the rap/thug culture, also in no place to start a family.

    Anyways, the neo-liberal order is actually doing quite a good job at ethnically cleansing the world of Asians. White fertility seems to stick somewhere around 1.6, while Asians seems to be around 1?? or lower. Just keep the Muslims and Africans out of Europe and we're good to go.

    You are full of wishful thinking. According to Anatoly Carlin, China’s TFR is about 1.6 and maybe as high as 1.75. Meanwhile the U.S. WHITE TFR is 1.64, Russia 1.5, EU 1.45. Read RUSSIAN DEMOGRAPHICS IN 2019 and EMPEROR XI TRIES TO CORRECT DEMOGRAPHIC COURSE by Anatoly Carlin on this site.

    • Replies: @silviosilver
    Look, can we stop with the demographic innumeracy, please?

    If the rate of white race-mixing is 15%, then the white fertility rate has to be adjusted downwards by 15%. It's not 1.66 white children that a born to each white mother, it's 1.66 * .85 = 1.41 white children.

    In simpler terms: if the child that is born isn't white, you can't count it as part of white fertility.

    I mean, seriously, how hard is it to grasp this? If every white woman had 5.0 children who looked like Obama, would you be saying the white fertility is sky high, so nothing to worry about?

  12. @silviosilver

    Who wouldn’t want their child to be smarter, taller, healthier, and better looking? Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life – obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders? What gives?
     
    As I understand it, eugenics today can only increase the chances that your offspring will be smarter, healthier and better-looking, but it can't guarantee it. Potential parents may therefore be setting themselves up for some pretty serious disappointment.

    It would be wiser to focus on the benefits of eugenics for society at large, rather than the benefits for any given parents. In this case, we can be quite sure that on average eugenically conceived children will be smarter, healthier and better looking on average.

    Perhaps the most important objection to any of this is the fear that such people will know they are superior, will feel superior, and will act like it. They will "lord it over" everyone else. Absent this fear, it's hard to see why anyone would object to there being more intelligence, more health and more physical attractiveness in society.

    One way to quell these fears is to imagine that some (or all) of the very intelligent and very attractive people on earth today were, unbeknownst to any of us, actually eugenically conceived, and to then ask ourselves - is that really so horrible? If you learned that, say, Brad Pitt had been eugenically conceived, does really make you miserable? Or if you were already jealous of him, does it make you any more jealous? If not, then perhaps there really isn't so much to fear.

    Why would it be wrong to genocide everyone on this Earth below an IQ of 70?

    • Troll: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @silviosilver
    The same reason it would be wrong to genocide anyone with an IQ over 70: genocide is wrong.

    Desiring more intelligent, healthier and better looking people doesn't require me to desire to be rid of less intelligent, less healthy and uglier people. The numbers of stupid, unhealthy and ugly people could even grow; I would only attempt to ensure that the numbers of intelligent, healthy and beautiful people grew at a faster rate. That is, I would seek to ensure a fertility differential favoring the latter. (Unlike today, where the fertility differential favors the former.)
    , @notanon
    that wouldn't be very nice

    especially given you could just say a couple below average 70 IQ could have one kid but only by screening so they fertilize n number of eggs and pick the one with the most IQ genes i.e. make it so they have 80 IQ kids and those kids have 85 IQ kids and those kids have ...etc.
    , @iffen
    Why would it be wrong to genocide everyone on this Earth below an IQ of 70?

    It would be wrong because it would miss you. The bar needs to be set at 71 in order to take care of toilet bowl base scrappings like you.
    , @anon
    just give them incentives not to procreate
    , @Stan d Mute

    Why would it be wrong to genocide everyone on this Earth below an IQ of 70?
     
    Who says it would be wrong? But then old Stan, were he King, would order genocide of everyone who drives at or below the speed limit in the left lane, everyone who fails to use a turn indicator, everyone who rides their brakes, and everyone who texts while driving.

    Fortunately for shitheads, Stan will never be King. But if we ever get to vote for a pragmatist I’ll be first in line voting for the mandatory sterilization of everyone with an IQ below 70. And I’ll also be first to vote for a policy of sterilization of every applicant for public benefits (as well as revocation of voting privileges for their time on the dole).

    Our species is in a state of constant warfare against Nature. It’s bad enough that sexual reproduction creates accidental freaks and monsters, we are simply fools to encourage deliberate procreation of them.
  13. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    I would abort my baby if it had down syndrome or other mental handicaps. I don't want to spend my life looking after a drooling retard, and I don't think it's ethical to even bring a child into this world who cannot be self sufficient.

    Abortion because "I was sleeping around and an accident happened" is not acceptable. But abortion due to genetic defects is.

    I'm assuming the 29% who wouldn't are Filipinos, Korean Evangelicals and Muslim South-East Asians.

    British Columbia, Toronto, and Brampton (Chinese/Brown) have the highest abortion rates in Canada. About 1/3 (or as of 10 years ago more) of pregnancies are terminated. In the White rural areas, it's more like 1/10. So it doesn't seem like abortion, for any reason, presents any moral dilemma for the majority of Asians.

    It's not hard to imagine a future, where North America becomes Asian-dominated. Strong eugenic pressure will be forced upon blacks and the bottom 75% of latins, and probably the bottom 50% of whites. People don't realize how *alien* Asians are to us. To be honest, an ideal situation would have all of America (North and South) fighting against *all* Asian immigration. Because believe it or not, we have alot more in common with Mexicans and even blacks than we do with Asians. I'm meeting Spanish speaking Asians from South America now even.

    ” I don’t want to spend my life looking after a drooling retard”

    Downs kids (and people) are generally friendly and affectionate. They are easy to love. The trouble is when their parents get old, and who’ll care for them then.

    NS – what if the people with an IQ over 120 were to decide to genocide everyone under 120? Slippery slope.

    • Replies: @silviosilver

    Downs kids (and people) are generally friendly and affectionate. They are easy to love. The trouble is when their parents get old, and who’ll care for them then.
     
    Okay, great. So how about you go love them and let parents who don't want to love them dodge the whole mess by aborting them? Win-win!
    , @res

    The trouble is when their parents get old, and who’ll care for them then.
     
    Made even worse by Down Syndrome being associated with older mothers so that point arrives relatively soon.
    , @Stan d Mute

    what if the people with an IQ over 120 were to decide to genocide everyone under 120?
     
    Given the track record of Utopian fantasies being implemented, I’d have to think it may not turn out so well.
  14. @Ns
    Why would it be wrong to genocide everyone on this Earth below an IQ of 70?

    The same reason it would be wrong to genocide anyone with an IQ over 70: genocide is wrong.

    Desiring more intelligent, healthier and better looking people doesn’t require me to desire to be rid of less intelligent, less healthy and uglier people. The numbers of stupid, unhealthy and ugly people could even grow; I would only attempt to ensure that the numbers of intelligent, healthy and beautiful people grew at a faster rate. That is, I would seek to ensure a fertility differential favoring the latter. (Unlike today, where the fertility differential favors the former.)

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Talha

    That is, I would seek to ensure a fertility differential favoring the latter.
     
    Is that through government intervention?

    If so, how would that work exactly? Socialism for the rich? Tax breaks depending on IQ testing and facial symmetry? Feel free to ignore if you don't mean through government-mandated programs.

    I would only attempt to ensure that the numbers of intelligent, healthy and beautiful people grew at a faster rate.
     
    It is the way of the world that this would only move the goal post. These assessments are all relative and subjective. In a future society in which beauty and intelligence is ubiquitous; a woman considered an 8 now would be a 4 or a 5 and a generally intelligent man might be the equivalent of the village idiot.

    I remember my mother-in-law telling me once about her childhood in Sweden (around WW2). She said the most beautiful girl in her class had brown hair and brown eyes. Since all the other kids had blonde hair and blue/green eyes, they had little value for beauty to offer in that market environment.

    Peace.
    , @Mr. Rational

    The same reason it would be wrong to genocide anyone with an IQ over 70: genocide is wrong.
     
    I can think of one circumstance where it might not be:  if they were creating circumstances that would produce a similar outcome anyway, but removing them early would prevent them from destroying other things on their way out.

    Simply cutting off trade with Nigeria would effect something of the sort.  The population can in no way feed itself, and collapse is a matter of when, not if.  Forcing that collapse now means a much smaller population affected.  If there were suddenly no food imports, a lot more would starve than could ever get out in time.

  15. @tamo
    You are full of wishful thinking. According to Anatoly Carlin, China's TFR is about 1.6 and maybe as high as 1.75. Meanwhile the U.S. WHITE TFR is 1.64, Russia 1.5, EU 1.45. Read RUSSIAN DEMOGRAPHICS IN 2019 and EMPEROR XI TRIES TO CORRECT DEMOGRAPHIC COURSE by Anatoly Carlin on this site.

    Look, can we stop with the demographic innumeracy, please?

    If the rate of white race-mixing is 15%, then the white fertility rate has to be adjusted downwards by 15%. It’s not 1.66 white children that a born to each white mother, it’s 1.66 * .85 = 1.41 white children.

    In simpler terms: if the child that is born isn’t white, you can’t count it as part of white fertility.

    I mean, seriously, how hard is it to grasp this? If every white woman had 5.0 children who looked like Obama, would you be saying the white fertility is sky high, so nothing to worry about?

    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @neutral
    You can reduce that number even more, non whites such as jews, Arabs, Mexicans, Turks are often considered white.
  16. It has long been established that people with low IQ’s tend to have more children than people with high IQ’s. It is also entirely obvious that we are screwing the world up with the numbers we already have. What we are effectively doing is sweeping away the natural world to make room for more and more increasingly devalued and increasingly stupid human stock. Anything within reason that bucks that trend is fine by me.

    • Agree: silviosilver
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    It didn't have to be this way, Mark. I've got one word for you today: Socialism.

    OK, I'll add a few more. Just to focus on America for this point, imagine if the welfare state had not been put into place, massive immigration had not be made the policy (no, that's not Socialism, but a big factor as we'd all agree), and the US population had just stablized at 200,000,000 or so.

    There may have been some labor shortages, meaning very good pay for lots of blue-collar jobs. That'd have kept on until 2 decades back when computer software started making many white-collar jobs obsolete and lately with robotics making a lot of blue-collar jobs obsolete. Yeah, but with the resources we have, and an intelligent population, born of people with RESPONSIBILITY, we could have been living the life of the science fiction books I used to read... working at interesting, creative jobs for 10 or 20 hours a week, visiting our far-off next-door neighbors with our flying cars, etc.

    The creation of the Welfare State, with its inherent quality of rewarding the irresponsible and burdening the responsible to support the former, put the kibosh on that dream. Thanks for ruining my science fiction future, LBJ, you Socialist Fuck!
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Reducing wealth inequality is one rhetorical approach for courting the left. If a poor couple has a net worth of $5k, if they have one child that child gets $5k worth of investment. If they have 5, each only get $1k. If an affluent couple with a net worth of $1m have a single child, it gets $1m. If they have 5, each 'only' get $200k. 'Eugenics' = child investment disparity of $195,000/child; 'dysgenics' = child investment disparity of $999,000.
  17. @YetAnotherAnon
    " I don’t want to spend my life looking after a drooling retard"

    Downs kids (and people) are generally friendly and affectionate. They are easy to love. The trouble is when their parents get old, and who'll care for them then.

    NS - what if the people with an IQ over 120 were to decide to genocide everyone under 120? Slippery slope.

    Downs kids (and people) are generally friendly and affectionate. They are easy to love. The trouble is when their parents get old, and who’ll care for them then.

    Okay, great. So how about you go love them and let parents who don’t want to love them dodge the whole mess by aborting them? Win-win!

  18. @silviosilver
    Look, can we stop with the demographic innumeracy, please?

    If the rate of white race-mixing is 15%, then the white fertility rate has to be adjusted downwards by 15%. It's not 1.66 white children that a born to each white mother, it's 1.66 * .85 = 1.41 white children.

    In simpler terms: if the child that is born isn't white, you can't count it as part of white fertility.

    I mean, seriously, how hard is it to grasp this? If every white woman had 5.0 children who looked like Obama, would you be saying the white fertility is sky high, so nothing to worry about?

    You can reduce that number even more, non whites such as jews, Arabs, Mexicans, Turks are often considered white.

    • Replies: @silviosilver
    This data is from the Centres for Disease Control, which allows for classification by non-hispanic whites, so it would not include "white Mexicans"; but the others you mentioned would be included, so the true picture is indeed worse than it appears.

    (Unfortunately, the CDC has removed the ability to query its database by race-of-mother/race-of-father, so it's no longer possible to obtain this data through the online database tool. You'd have to download the raw data, which apparently requires specialized software and programming skills.)

  19. “When it comes to making babies, the perfect very conceivably can be the enemy of the good.”

    or

    “Quantity has a quality all it’s own.”

  20. @neutral
    You can reduce that number even more, non whites such as jews, Arabs, Mexicans, Turks are often considered white.

    This data is from the Centres for Disease Control, which allows for classification by non-hispanic whites, so it would not include “white Mexicans”; but the others you mentioned would be included, so the true picture is indeed worse than it appears.

    (Unfortunately, the CDC has removed the ability to query its database by race-of-mother/race-of-father, so it’s no longer possible to obtain this data through the online database tool. You’d have to download the raw data, which apparently requires specialized software and programming skills.)

    • Replies: @res
    Here is the CDC birth data if anyone wants to take a look at it.
    https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data_access/vitalstatsonline.htm

    Wow. For 2017 they supply a 231MB zip file which unpacks to a 5GB (!) text file. They sure don't believe in making it easy.

    This page might be helpful: https://www.r-bloggers.com/analyze-the-national-vital-statistics-system-nvss-with-r-and-monetdb/
    it links to: https://blog.revolutionanalytics.com/2012/07/importing-public-data-with-sas-instructions-into-r.html

    This looks like it might be even more helpful: https://github.com/Mikuana/vitalstatistics

    AE, are you up for digging into this?
  21. The fertility rate in China increased a little after the end of the one child policy , but it only lasted a couple of years and is now in decline.

  22. An erroneous test indicated that I was at very high risk of serious birth defects, and the doctor recommended abortion to my mother. I turned out fine. So this one strikes pretty close to home.

    Our civilization’s sickness has nothing to do with insufficient vigor in exterminating undesirable children, nor with an insufficient focus on efficiency and following the path of least resistance. It does, however, have a great deal to do with our view of children, large families, and motherhood as undesirable in the first place. So I don’t rightly know how any good could come of doubling down on our disease.

    It is certain that the people who inherit the West, whatever their race or creed, will value children and motherhood much more than present society does.

    • Agree: Talha, Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    "It is certain that the people who inherit the West, whatever their race or creed, will value children and motherhood much more than present society does."

    Agreed. Hopefully they'll eliminate the West's current obsession with doggies.
  23. H.G. Wells had the right idea a century ago:

    And the ethical system of these men of the New Republic, the ethical system which will dominate the world state, will be shaped primarily to favour the procreation of what is fine and efficient and beautiful in humanity—beautiful and strong bodies, clear and powerful minds, and a growing body of knowledge—and to check the procreation of base and servile types, of fear-driven and cowardly souls, of all that is mean and ugly and bestial in the souls, bodies, or habits of men.

    Source:

    http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19229/19229-h/19229-h.htm

  24. @Twinkie

    Asians seem to be, on the whole, far less moralistic – far less susceptible to feelings of disgust.
     
    Right now I am very susceptible to being disgusted by your stupidity.

    On a more serious note, you've never read Confucius, I gather.

    One thing to keep in mind is that "Asian" is a rather nebulous category. In terms of the population in the United States, its composition has varied wildly by region and time period. Korean evangelicals, on the one hand, and atheist (worse, pro-communist) Chinese, on the other, are going to have very different outlooks on social and moral philosophy (and they are neighboring populations "back home"!).

    It is true that eugenic tendencies and feelings are very strong in East Asia, and this was so long before the days of CRISPR. I suspect that much of this has to do with pronounced East Asian tendencies toward perfectionism and low fertility.

    First, before I read the rest of the comments, THANK YOU, Twinkie for pointing out the stupidity* of calling the Orientals “Asians”. As I wrote in “Oriental is the term, and we’re done talkin’ about it.”, Asia is a big damn continent (the biggest). OK, I’ve read some that ARE talking about all the countries from China to India to the Middle East, but most aren’t.

    Next, the eugenics tendencies in mainland China have been due in large part to the one-child policy ruled into place by Chairman Deng in the late 1970’s. Girls were aborted just for being girls, as the oldest boy (or only, for the most part) are responsible for taking care of the parents in old age.

    The low fertility in the Orient (at least China, from my experience) also has a factor of the weakness in the women there during pregnancy. They will stay in bed the 1st month of pregnancy and then for a month after the baby is born. Now, I’m no feminist pushing for those woman to be back in the cubicals pronto, but there is definitely more strength in Western woman in this important area. Maybe the Chinese do that just due to it being an old knocked-up wives tale. What’s the story with Korean women in that regard, Twinkie?

    .

    * That’s kind of harsh, but maybe it’s a following of the PC, when it just confuciuses things.

  25. @MarkU
    It has long been established that people with low IQ's tend to have more children than people with high IQ's. It is also entirely obvious that we are screwing the world up with the numbers we already have. What we are effectively doing is sweeping away the natural world to make room for more and more increasingly devalued and increasingly stupid human stock. Anything within reason that bucks that trend is fine by me.

    It didn’t have to be this way, Mark. I’ve got one word for you today: Socialism.

    OK, I’ll add a few more. Just to focus on America for this point, imagine if the welfare state had not been put into place, massive immigration had not be made the policy (no, that’s not Socialism, but a big factor as we’d all agree), and the US population had just stablized at 200,000,000 or so.

    There may have been some labor shortages, meaning very good pay for lots of blue-collar jobs. That’d have kept on until 2 decades back when computer software started making many white-collar jobs obsolete and lately with robotics making a lot of blue-collar jobs obsolete. Yeah, but with the resources we have, and an intelligent population, born of people with RESPONSIBILITY, we could have been living the life of the science fiction books I used to read… working at interesting, creative jobs for 10 or 20 hours a week, visiting our far-off next-door neighbors with our flying cars, etc.

    The creation of the Welfare State, with its inherent quality of rewarding the irresponsible and burdening the responsible to support the former, put the kibosh on that dream. Thanks for ruining my science fiction future, LBJ, you Socialist Fuck!

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @advancedatheist

    we could have been living the life of the science fiction books I used to read
     
    Like real-life Mars colonization, for example.

    Only I don't see that happening in our current society, despite Elon Musk's fantasies, because a Mars colonization project that has any chance of success would validate the white-nationalist world view. You would want to eliminate foreseeable causes of failure, so that means you would send only conservative, healthy, competent white people with normal sexuality. Introduce race mixing, affirmative action, feminism and damaged sexuality, and you'll get nothing but stupid drama, strife and bad decisions from diversity hires which will doom the colony.
    , @silviosilver

    The creation of the Welfare State, with its inherent quality of rewarding the irresponsible and burdening the responsible to support the former, put the kibosh on that dream.
     
    Well, you can't keep crying over spilled milk forever. The welfare state's here and it's not going anywhere anytime soon. So a better idea than perpetually bemoaning it is to tweak its incentive structure so that the stupid, impulsive, violent etc (traits all fortuitously positively correlated with physical ugliness) end up breeding at a lower rate than the intelligent, conscientious, peaceful etc (traits all fortuitously positively correlated with physical attractiveness).

    For example, one partial but simple solution would to keep paying the poor if they have kids, but to pay them even more if they don't.

    Talha,

    Is that through government intervention?
     
    Abso-freakin-lutely.
    , @MarkU
    I do have a lot of sympathy with your point of view, I too read those same sci-fi books and I too believe that it could have been that way. However I do think you are being somewhat one sided in your apportioning of blame, I think that capitalism is at least equally responsible. I am not sure exactly how it played out in the US but here is what happened here in the UK.

    It was 1979 and Margaret Thatcher had just been elected, the Tory election posters were the famous "Labour isn't working". We had a labour government previously which was gradually reducing the working week in response to rising unemployment. We had a million unemployed at the time, that was no big deal, jobs were still easy enough to get. The only long term unemployed were the real hopeless cases or disabled.

    Within a few years there were 3.5 million unemployed, our industries were gutted and our nicely balanced mixed economy was privatised, sold off at bargain basement prices. A new generation was brought up on welfare, the previous work ethic was substantially damaged. There was no minimum wage then and the competition for work had resulted in a situation where the pay at the bottom was so bad that often people with children were actually better off on welfare.

    Worse still, the Tories decided they could save money by deciding that two could live as cheaply as one, couples who were cohabiting (with or without children) had their welfare cut. Result a massive increase in single parent families (and guess what? they didn't even save money because when the couples split for financial reasons the taxpayer got stiffed with an extra housing benefit bill)

    I ask you this question. Do you really still believe that in our corporate-controlled capitalist system we were ever going to be "working at interesting, creative jobs for 10 or 20 hours a week" or would it just be mass unemployment?

    Personally I blame both the right and the left for destroying our societies.
  26. Now, on a lighter note, I caught quite a few puns in this post, A.E. If you keep this up, I will have to petition Ron Unz for a [GROAN] button. ;-}

  27. @silviosilver
    The same reason it would be wrong to genocide anyone with an IQ over 70: genocide is wrong.

    Desiring more intelligent, healthier and better looking people doesn't require me to desire to be rid of less intelligent, less healthy and uglier people. The numbers of stupid, unhealthy and ugly people could even grow; I would only attempt to ensure that the numbers of intelligent, healthy and beautiful people grew at a faster rate. That is, I would seek to ensure a fertility differential favoring the latter. (Unlike today, where the fertility differential favors the former.)

    That is, I would seek to ensure a fertility differential favoring the latter.

    Is that through government intervention?

    If so, how would that work exactly? Socialism for the rich? Tax breaks depending on IQ testing and facial symmetry? Feel free to ignore if you don’t mean through government-mandated programs.

    I would only attempt to ensure that the numbers of intelligent, healthy and beautiful people grew at a faster rate.

    It is the way of the world that this would only move the goal post. These assessments are all relative and subjective. In a future society in which beauty and intelligence is ubiquitous; a woman considered an 8 now would be a 4 or a 5 and a generally intelligent man might be the equivalent of the village idiot.

    I remember my mother-in-law telling me once about her childhood in Sweden (around WW2). She said the most beautiful girl in her class had brown hair and brown eyes. Since all the other kids had blonde hair and blue/green eyes, they had little value for beauty to offer in that market environment.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Are you married into the Pelosi family?!
    , @Audacious Epigone
    There are times I read your posts and a stray thought about what conversion would look like for my family comes across my mind.
  28. @Achmed E. Newman
    It didn't have to be this way, Mark. I've got one word for you today: Socialism.

    OK, I'll add a few more. Just to focus on America for this point, imagine if the welfare state had not been put into place, massive immigration had not be made the policy (no, that's not Socialism, but a big factor as we'd all agree), and the US population had just stablized at 200,000,000 or so.

    There may have been some labor shortages, meaning very good pay for lots of blue-collar jobs. That'd have kept on until 2 decades back when computer software started making many white-collar jobs obsolete and lately with robotics making a lot of blue-collar jobs obsolete. Yeah, but with the resources we have, and an intelligent population, born of people with RESPONSIBILITY, we could have been living the life of the science fiction books I used to read... working at interesting, creative jobs for 10 or 20 hours a week, visiting our far-off next-door neighbors with our flying cars, etc.

    The creation of the Welfare State, with its inherent quality of rewarding the irresponsible and burdening the responsible to support the former, put the kibosh on that dream. Thanks for ruining my science fiction future, LBJ, you Socialist Fuck!

    we could have been living the life of the science fiction books I used to read

    Like real-life Mars colonization, for example.

    Only I don’t see that happening in our current society, despite Elon Musk’s fantasies, because a Mars colonization project that has any chance of success would validate the white-nationalist world view. You would want to eliminate foreseeable causes of failure, so that means you would send only conservative, healthy, competent white people with normal sexuality. Introduce race mixing, affirmative action, feminism and damaged sexuality, and you’ll get nothing but stupid drama, strife and bad decisions from diversity hires which will doom the colony.

    • Replies: @Silva
    East Asians appear to be more adapted to scarcity than whites.
  29. fnn says:

    Nice Guy sensible liberal thinks unprovoked Antifa violence is only sometimes necessary:
    https://fredrikdeboer.com/2019/04/03/living-on-easy-street/

    Antifa tactics are sometimes necessary, but they are an extremely limited tool, only useful in a set of very specific circumstances. I respect them when used under those particular conditions. For my entire life as a member of the left, this was broadly understood. And yet now in the last several years an absolute obsession has developed around antifa tactics – particularly among those who can’t be bothered to do the unglamorous work of canvassing, phone banking, leafleting, tabling. Why has this obsession developed? Have antifa tactics suddenly become effective against investment banks, the militarized border, implicit racism? No. Capital remains as indifferent to antifa as it always has been. But antifa posturing feels good. It feels cool to put on a black hoodie. It feels empowering to punch someone – or, let’s be real, to imagine yourself punching someone.

    Maybe Antifa violence is now more popular because they realize they have state protection (i.e., Even when prosecuted (rarely), they never get sent to prison while the right-wingers they attack sometimes do.)

    • Replies: @216
    https://twitter.com/AndyBCampbell/status/1113240167266115584

    In terms of Antifa violence, they've largely succeeded at halting right-wing demonstrations. They also are very good at doxxing anything that our movements produce that isn't anonymous like UNZ, even pseudonymous Discords have basically been ruined.

    What they obviously want is a hate-speech law, which can't pass constitutional muster until they can pack SCOTUS. In the meantime, they can use the "corporations are not government censorship" which they never used when applied to themselves (see: Dixie Chicks).

    What might pass constitutional muster is "Internet ID" and the disclosure of data to employers/banks, which achieves most of what they want: economic marginalization that will lead to most dissidents checking into "deradicalization"
  30. Wow. There is a lot of speculation about the ability of genetic engineering to improve or have any impact on subjective realities, such as IQ, personality traits, etc. We don’t even have the codes for such traits much less if they exist as solitary values.

    The hyper jump from what we now about biology and genetic manipulation is not yet transferable to subjective human existence. And certainly we ought to evaluating the moral and ethical questions.

    And no we should not be killing any children in the womb, regardless of potential drawbacks. There are moral absolutes and not murdering the innocent for convenience is one of them.

  31. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    I would abort my baby if it had down syndrome or other mental handicaps. I don't want to spend my life looking after a drooling retard, and I don't think it's ethical to even bring a child into this world who cannot be self sufficient.

    Abortion because "I was sleeping around and an accident happened" is not acceptable. But abortion due to genetic defects is.

    I'm assuming the 29% who wouldn't are Filipinos, Korean Evangelicals and Muslim South-East Asians.

    British Columbia, Toronto, and Brampton (Chinese/Brown) have the highest abortion rates in Canada. About 1/3 (or as of 10 years ago more) of pregnancies are terminated. In the White rural areas, it's more like 1/10. So it doesn't seem like abortion, for any reason, presents any moral dilemma for the majority of Asians.

    It's not hard to imagine a future, where North America becomes Asian-dominated. Strong eugenic pressure will be forced upon blacks and the bottom 75% of latins, and probably the bottom 50% of whites. People don't realize how *alien* Asians are to us. To be honest, an ideal situation would have all of America (North and South) fighting against *all* Asian immigration. Because believe it or not, we have alot more in common with Mexicans and even blacks than we do with Asians. I'm meeting Spanish speaking Asians from South America now even.

    “I don’t want to spend my life looking after a drooling retard …”

    That’s what my mom said. But look at her now.

    • LOL: Talha
    • Replies: @Talha
    I've noticed that people with Down's Syndrome are very genuine and extremely loving. Sure, you can't hold a conversation about politics or technology with them, but if you are willing to talk to them at their level - it can be a very relaxing and pleasant experience, kind of like speaking with children when you let them lead. And again, that unabashed love:
    https://twitter.com/BirdsOfJannah/status/1108675267474673664

    For anyone interested, I've donated to this place before (in our great state of Illinois) that does good work for people with these kinds of mental handicaps in helping them become more productive members of society:
    https://www.lambsfarm.org/

    Peace.
  32. @Twinkie

    Asians seem to be, on the whole, far less moralistic – far less susceptible to feelings of disgust.
     
    Right now I am very susceptible to being disgusted by your stupidity.

    On a more serious note, you've never read Confucius, I gather.

    One thing to keep in mind is that "Asian" is a rather nebulous category. In terms of the population in the United States, its composition has varied wildly by region and time period. Korean evangelicals, on the one hand, and atheist (worse, pro-communist) Chinese, on the other, are going to have very different outlooks on social and moral philosophy (and they are neighboring populations "back home"!).

    It is true that eugenic tendencies and feelings are very strong in East Asia, and this was so long before the days of CRISPR. I suspect that much of this has to do with pronounced East Asian tendencies toward perfectionism and low fertility.

    “Right now I am very susceptible to being disgusted by your stupidity.”

    I love this: a polite insult. It will come in handy for my 3:0opm meeting.

  33. @Wency
    An erroneous test indicated that I was at very high risk of serious birth defects, and the doctor recommended abortion to my mother. I turned out fine. So this one strikes pretty close to home.

    Our civilization's sickness has nothing to do with insufficient vigor in exterminating undesirable children, nor with an insufficient focus on efficiency and following the path of least resistance. It does, however, have a great deal to do with our view of children, large families, and motherhood as undesirable in the first place. So I don't rightly know how any good could come of doubling down on our disease.

    It is certain that the people who inherit the West, whatever their race or creed, will value children and motherhood much more than present society does.

    “It is certain that the people who inherit the West, whatever their race or creed, will value children and motherhood much more than present society does.”

    Agreed. Hopefully they’ll eliminate the West’s current obsession with doggies.

  34. @silviosilver

    Who wouldn’t want their child to be smarter, taller, healthier, and better looking? Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life – obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders? What gives?
     
    As I understand it, eugenics today can only increase the chances that your offspring will be smarter, healthier and better-looking, but it can't guarantee it. Potential parents may therefore be setting themselves up for some pretty serious disappointment.

    It would be wiser to focus on the benefits of eugenics for society at large, rather than the benefits for any given parents. In this case, we can be quite sure that on average eugenically conceived children will be smarter, healthier and better looking on average.

    Perhaps the most important objection to any of this is the fear that such people will know they are superior, will feel superior, and will act like it. They will "lord it over" everyone else. Absent this fear, it's hard to see why anyone would object to there being more intelligence, more health and more physical attractiveness in society.

    One way to quell these fears is to imagine that some (or all) of the very intelligent and very attractive people on earth today were, unbeknownst to any of us, actually eugenically conceived, and to then ask ourselves - is that really so horrible? If you learned that, say, Brad Pitt had been eugenically conceived, does really make you miserable? Or if you were already jealous of him, does it make you any more jealous? If not, then perhaps there really isn't so much to fear.

    eugenics today can only increase the chances that your offspring will be smarter, healthier and better-looking, but it can’t guarantee it.

    Okay, suppose you use PIGD to select among a half-dozen zygotes to pick the one that’s likely going to have the best health, looks and smarts.  You have a 20% chance of failing to improve on random chance.

    80% odds of beating chance is better than 50% odds.  80% odds spread over a population of millions is HUGE.

    Perhaps the most important objection to any of this is the fear that such people will know they are superior, will feel superior, and will act like it.

    You think they don’t do this today?

    I can see where you’d have the opposite of this phenomenon.  If you started with a highly-selected population, say with a +2 SD lower cutoff, regression to the mean among the children would leave most of them inferior to the average of their parents.  However, selection for best traits could prevent that until the genes were fixated and the new mean was somewhere above the former +2 SD.

    • Replies: @silviosilver

    Okay, suppose you use PIGD to select among a half-dozen zygotes to pick the one that’s likely going to have the best health, looks and smarts. You have a 20% chance of failing to improve on random chance.

    80% odds of beating chance is better than 50% odds. 80% odds spread over a population of millions is HUGE.
     
    Okay, great. I'm happy to hear that.

    I still think it's better to market it in terms of what it can do for society rather than in terms of what it can do for the parents. That way even people who are inclined to oppose the idea would be able to perceive a certain benefit in it.

    Simply cutting off trade with Nigeria would effect something of the sort. The population can in no way feed itself, and collapse is a matter of when, not if. Forcing that collapse now means a much smaller population affected. If there were suddenly no food imports, a lot more would starve than could ever get out in time.
     
    Sure, it's simple enough in technical terms. It's devilishly difficult to get anyone to agree to go along with the plan though. I really can't imagine us being in a position to "force" such a collapse anytime soon. It's almost absurd to even be discussing it.
  35. @SunBakedSuburb
    "I don't want to spend my life looking after a drooling retard ..."

    That's what my mom said. But look at her now.

    I’ve noticed that people with Down’s Syndrome are very genuine and extremely loving. Sure, you can’t hold a conversation about politics or technology with them, but if you are willing to talk to them at their level – it can be a very relaxing and pleasant experience, kind of like speaking with children when you let them lead. And again, that unabashed love:

    For anyone interested, I’ve donated to this place before (in our great state of Illinois) that does good work for people with these kinds of mental handicaps in helping them become more productive members of society:
    https://www.lambsfarm.org/

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    I’ve noticed that people with Down’s Syndrome are very genuine and extremely loving. Sure, you can’t hold a conversation about politics or technology with them, but if you are willing to talk to them at their level – it can be a very relaxing and pleasant experience, kind of like speaking with children when you let them lead. And again, that unabashed love:
     
    You’ve noticed eh? How closely? Because I have a bit more experience in this regard than most and I’ve noticed things too:

    First, there is a spectrum of behavior and disability, but having said that, like toddlers they tend to piss the bed - every night. After 53 years, that gets old. They’ll also shit themselves. That gets old even sooner. Imagine putting diaper creme on your 53 year old Downie and wiping his ass of the shit he’s too incompetent to remove - every day. They have no conception of germ theory and must be monitored incessantly for hygiene. They’re susceptible to diabetes but too stupid to self-regulate diet so must be fed and monitored constantly to prevent them eating themselves to death. They have no sense of self-consciousness as you note, not always a good thing.

    On the plus side, they don’t get cavities. Weird huh?

    The real problem with them is who pays? They will never be self-sufficient. If we can identify them in the womb and terminate the pregnancy, who pays when a mother chooses to deliver a trisomy 21 mutant? I know one couple that did just that, twice. Guess who’s paying?
  36. 216 says:
    @fnn
    Nice Guy sensible liberal thinks unprovoked Antifa violence is only sometimes necessary:
    https://fredrikdeboer.com/2019/04/03/living-on-easy-street/

    Antifa tactics are sometimes necessary, but they are an extremely limited tool, only useful in a set of very specific circumstances. I respect them when used under those particular conditions. For my entire life as a member of the left, this was broadly understood. And yet now in the last several years an absolute obsession has developed around antifa tactics – particularly among those who can’t be bothered to do the unglamorous work of canvassing, phone banking, leafleting, tabling. Why has this obsession developed? Have antifa tactics suddenly become effective against investment banks, the militarized border, implicit racism? No. Capital remains as indifferent to antifa as it always has been. But antifa posturing feels good. It feels cool to put on a black hoodie. It feels empowering to punch someone – or, let’s be real, to imagine yourself punching someone.
     
    Maybe Antifa violence is now more popular because they realize they have state protection (i.e., Even when prosecuted (rarely), they never get sent to prison while the right-wingers they attack sometimes do.)

    In terms of Antifa violence, they’ve largely succeeded at halting right-wing demonstrations. They also are very good at doxxing anything that our movements produce that isn’t anonymous like UNZ, even pseudonymous Discords have basically been ruined.

    What they obviously want is a hate-speech law, which can’t pass constitutional muster until they can pack SCOTUS. In the meantime, they can use the “corporations are not government censorship” which they never used when applied to themselves (see: Dixie Chicks).

    What might pass constitutional muster is “Internet ID” and the disclosure of data to employers/banks, which achieves most of what they want: economic marginalization that will lead to most dissidents checking into “deradicalization”

  37. @silviosilver
    The same reason it would be wrong to genocide anyone with an IQ over 70: genocide is wrong.

    Desiring more intelligent, healthier and better looking people doesn't require me to desire to be rid of less intelligent, less healthy and uglier people. The numbers of stupid, unhealthy and ugly people could even grow; I would only attempt to ensure that the numbers of intelligent, healthy and beautiful people grew at a faster rate. That is, I would seek to ensure a fertility differential favoring the latter. (Unlike today, where the fertility differential favors the former.)

    The same reason it would be wrong to genocide anyone with an IQ over 70: genocide is wrong.

    I can think of one circumstance where it might not be:  if they were creating circumstances that would produce a similar outcome anyway, but removing them early would prevent them from destroying other things on their way out.

    Simply cutting off trade with Nigeria would effect something of the sort.  The population can in no way feed itself, and collapse is a matter of when, not if.  Forcing that collapse now means a much smaller population affected.  If there were suddenly no food imports, a lot more would starve than could ever get out in time.

    • Replies: @Ns
    How is that different from just nerve gassing Africa? Well there are gentle eugenecists and the burn everything down eugenecists, but a utilitarian can argue that the burn everything down eugenecists are more efficient and end up wasting a lot less money the long run, than the bleeding heart eugenecists, ample reason to the skeptical of the eugenicists, btw the Nazis hated the idea of IQ tests.
  38. 216 says:

    O/T

    Interesting, but not a good sign as I’d expect. Trump won District 3 in ’16, which has one of the last remaining Blue Dogs as its representative.

    District 2 is whiter than District 4, but high turnout white leftists in Madison showed up lower turnout blacks in Milwaukee.

  39. @YetAnotherAnon
    " I don’t want to spend my life looking after a drooling retard"

    Downs kids (and people) are generally friendly and affectionate. They are easy to love. The trouble is when their parents get old, and who'll care for them then.

    NS - what if the people with an IQ over 120 were to decide to genocide everyone under 120? Slippery slope.

    The trouble is when their parents get old, and who’ll care for them then.

    Made even worse by Down Syndrome being associated with older mothers so that point arrives relatively soon.

    • Replies: @songbird
    People with Down's get Alzheimer's early too. Risk starts at about 45. Majority have it by 60. I imagine it progresses quickly, but it must be expensive and difficult to care for them nevertheless.

    It seems like it is also very expensive to put them in public schools. I don't think they can really be taught to contribute to the economy either. Not that I'm advocating policy - just that I am saying I can understand why some people think it is murky. But, then again, they may add some not easily quantifiable value to society, something like humility, or dare I say it, even love.

    One time I was punched in the face by one, who had been riled up by some idiots slapping the back of his neck. (Stronger arm then you'd expect) And I couldn't hit him back because I knew it was wrong. There may be some intangible value in an experience like that.

    I had a teacher who worked with them for a short time, and she seemed to be moved by the experience.
  40. res says:
    @silviosilver
    This data is from the Centres for Disease Control, which allows for classification by non-hispanic whites, so it would not include "white Mexicans"; but the others you mentioned would be included, so the true picture is indeed worse than it appears.

    (Unfortunately, the CDC has removed the ability to query its database by race-of-mother/race-of-father, so it's no longer possible to obtain this data through the online database tool. You'd have to download the raw data, which apparently requires specialized software and programming skills.)

    Here is the CDC birth data if anyone wants to take a look at it.
    https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data_access/vitalstatsonline.htm

    Wow. For 2017 they supply a 231MB zip file which unpacks to a 5GB (!) text file. They sure don’t believe in making it easy.

    This page might be helpful: https://www.r-bloggers.com/analyze-the-national-vital-statistics-system-nvss-with-r-and-monetdb/
    it links to: https://blog.revolutionanalytics.com/2012/07/importing-public-data-with-sas-instructions-into-r.html

    This looks like it might be even more helpful: https://github.com/Mikuana/vitalstatistics

    AE, are you up for digging into this?

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    I'll bookmark it, thanks.
    , @Bardon Kaldian
    Yeah, but they don't anymore register father's race as they used to. I have some tables from 2007 or so where you can see, in percentages, which percentage of white, black, Asian....mothers had children with white, black, Asian.... fathers- which you cannot detect now. Of course, even then there was a category not stated, not recorded & similar, but you would basically get the data.

    Now, with this type of data- you cannot.

    https://i.imgur.com/mII5fcvl.png

    https://i.imgur.com/f3X5j0Jl.png

    https://i.imgur.com/Dnn9N5Zl.png
  41. Is it surprising that the first CRISPR baby came out of the East?

    the West used to be pro-eugenics – it changed after ww2 due to cultural pressure from the media

    Asian fertility is the lowest in the world. When it comes to making babies, the perfect very conceivably can be the enemy of the good.

    if we were living in a sensible world not ruled by the banking mafia i think we’d all be gradually moving to sci/fantasy style space elves i.e. a *much* smaller population of people living 200-300 years and couples having one perfect kid.

    most likely end game east Asian terminator robots vs hordes of orcs with swords.

  42. @Achmed E. Newman
    It didn't have to be this way, Mark. I've got one word for you today: Socialism.

    OK, I'll add a few more. Just to focus on America for this point, imagine if the welfare state had not been put into place, massive immigration had not be made the policy (no, that's not Socialism, but a big factor as we'd all agree), and the US population had just stablized at 200,000,000 or so.

    There may have been some labor shortages, meaning very good pay for lots of blue-collar jobs. That'd have kept on until 2 decades back when computer software started making many white-collar jobs obsolete and lately with robotics making a lot of blue-collar jobs obsolete. Yeah, but with the resources we have, and an intelligent population, born of people with RESPONSIBILITY, we could have been living the life of the science fiction books I used to read... working at interesting, creative jobs for 10 or 20 hours a week, visiting our far-off next-door neighbors with our flying cars, etc.

    The creation of the Welfare State, with its inherent quality of rewarding the irresponsible and burdening the responsible to support the former, put the kibosh on that dream. Thanks for ruining my science fiction future, LBJ, you Socialist Fuck!

    The creation of the Welfare State, with its inherent quality of rewarding the irresponsible and burdening the responsible to support the former, put the kibosh on that dream.

    Well, you can’t keep crying over spilled milk forever. The welfare state’s here and it’s not going anywhere anytime soon. So a better idea than perpetually bemoaning it is to tweak its incentive structure so that the stupid, impulsive, violent etc (traits all fortuitously positively correlated with physical ugliness) end up breeding at a lower rate than the intelligent, conscientious, peaceful etc (traits all fortuitously positively correlated with physical attractiveness).

    For example, one partial but simple solution would to keep paying the poor if they have kids, but to pay them even more if they don’t.

    Talha,

    Is that through government intervention?

    Abso-freakin-lutely.

    • Replies: @Talha

    Abso-freakin-lutely.
     
    OK, but government-run eugenics programs don't have the best track record. Just sayin'...

    but to pay them even more if they don’t.
     
    Or...I see government sponsored transgenderism in the future for the lower classes (perhaps this is already the plan...?); you screw them up in the head regarding gender, then you pay for their surgery to let them know you fully support their life-style choice and are doing them a favor, now you screwed up any chance for them to have any kids...and plenty will willingly take themselves out of the welfare program early:
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DpHzC2bXgAARpsm.jpg

    Man, Machiavelli would be popping a champagne bottle!

    Peace.
    , @Rosie

    For example, one partial but simple solution would to keep paying the poor if they have kids, but to pay them even more if they don’t.
     
    The supposed dysgenic consequences of the welfare state are totally fake and unrelated to the welfare state as such. There is no reason at all why social assistance shouldn't be conditioned on long-term, idiot-proof birth control. Most responsible welfare recipients who are trying to get back on their feet would agree.
    , @Achmed E. Newman

    So a better idea than perpetually bemoaning it is to tweak its incentive structure so that the stupid, impulsive, violent etc (traits all fortuitously positively correlated with physical ugliness) end up breeding at a lower rate than the intelligent, conscientious, peaceful etc (traits all fortuitously positively correlated with physical attractiveness).
     
    I can't argue with that, in general, but you may just get outvoted by those who've been born out of irresponsibility and carry around that genetic trait to the voting booth.
  43. @Ns
    Why would it be wrong to genocide everyone on this Earth below an IQ of 70?

    that wouldn’t be very nice

    especially given you could just say a couple below average 70 IQ could have one kid but only by screening so they fertilize n number of eggs and pick the one with the most IQ genes i.e. make it so they have 80 IQ kids and those kids have 85 IQ kids and those kids have …etc.

  44. @Mr. Rational

    eugenics today can only increase the chances that your offspring will be smarter, healthier and better-looking, but it can’t guarantee it.
     
    Okay, suppose you use PIGD to select among a half-dozen zygotes to pick the one that's likely going to have the best health, looks and smarts.  You have a 20% chance of failing to improve on random chance.

    80% odds of beating chance is better than 50% odds.  80% odds spread over a population of millions is HUGE.

    Perhaps the most important objection to any of this is the fear that such people will know they are superior, will feel superior, and will act like it.
     
    You think they don't do this today?

    I can see where you'd have the opposite of this phenomenon.  If you started with a highly-selected population, say with a +2 SD lower cutoff, regression to the mean among the children would leave most of them inferior to the average of their parents.  However, selection for best traits could prevent that until the genes were fixated and the new mean was somewhere above the former +2 SD.

    Okay, suppose you use PIGD to select among a half-dozen zygotes to pick the one that’s likely going to have the best health, looks and smarts. You have a 20% chance of failing to improve on random chance.

    80% odds of beating chance is better than 50% odds. 80% odds spread over a population of millions is HUGE.

    Okay, great. I’m happy to hear that.

    I still think it’s better to market it in terms of what it can do for society rather than in terms of what it can do for the parents. That way even people who are inclined to oppose the idea would be able to perceive a certain benefit in it.

    Simply cutting off trade with Nigeria would effect something of the sort. The population can in no way feed itself, and collapse is a matter of when, not if. Forcing that collapse now means a much smaller population affected. If there were suddenly no food imports, a lot more would starve than could ever get out in time.

    Sure, it’s simple enough in technical terms. It’s devilishly difficult to get anyone to agree to go along with the plan though. I really can’t imagine us being in a position to “force” such a collapse anytime soon. It’s almost absurd to even be discussing it.

    • Replies: @Talha
    Cutting off trade to Nigeria wouldn't be genocide. Nobody is forced to trade with anyone else. It would hit them hard, but they would develop on their own track. They are not a desert wasteland - they have the resources, it's just badly managed and needs improvement. Someone will supply the know how for the right price; Russians, Chinese, Cubans, Turks, etc.

    The Nigerian upper class may have a massive revolution on their hands first though:
    "Some wealthy Nigerians are ordering pizzas from London and having them delivered back home on British Airways flights, a government minister has claimed."
    https://www.businessinsider.com/nigerians-order-pizza-in-london-british-airways-delivers-audu-ogbeh-2019-4

    In fact, the reliance on imports (often from countries that receive agricultural subsidies from their own governments) can actually harm the local farmers and business (also see above article).

    Peace.
  45. @res

    The trouble is when their parents get old, and who’ll care for them then.
     
    Made even worse by Down Syndrome being associated with older mothers so that point arrives relatively soon.

    People with Down’s get Alzheimer’s early too. Risk starts at about 45. Majority have it by 60. I imagine it progresses quickly, but it must be expensive and difficult to care for them nevertheless.

    It seems like it is also very expensive to put them in public schools. I don’t think they can really be taught to contribute to the economy either. Not that I’m advocating policy – just that I am saying I can understand why some people think it is murky. But, then again, they may add some not easily quantifiable value to society, something like humility, or dare I say it, even love.

    One time I was punched in the face by one, who had been riled up by some idiots slapping the back of his neck. (Stronger arm then you’d expect) And I couldn’t hit him back because I knew it was wrong. There may be some intangible value in an experience like that.

    I had a teacher who worked with them for a short time, and she seemed to be moved by the experience.

    • Replies: @silviosilver

    I had a teacher who worked with them for a short time, and she seemed to be moved by the experience.
     
    I could never doing anything like that, so it's great that there are people like that teacher in this world to make up for heartless bastards like me.

    I was taken on a field trip to a school for spastics (or whatever the correct term is these days) one day when I was ten or eleven. I found it extremely disturbing. I do recall observing that some of my classmates appeared to be completely at ease with it.

    I didn't find that strange though. We already had one spastic kid in our school who had to walk around on crutches (and barely even managed that) and sounded like Chewbacca when he talked. Some kids really enjoyed helping him and being around him. We all had to take turns to assist him, and whenever it was my turn I could barely even stand to look at him, and I'd wonder why the hell I was forced to help him when there were kids available who actually enjoyed it. If the goal was to teach me compassion, it either failed completely or had the opposite effect.
    , @Twinkie

    something like humility, or dare I say it, even love.
     
    Yes, indeed. “Defective” children can have a profound, positive influence on all of us. Witness the case of Bella Santorum. Say what you will of Sen. Santorum’s politics, he and his wife are good human beings and parents.

    https://www.lightworkers.com/rick-santorums-daughter/
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Kind of like a beloved family dog. That is not intended to dehumanize but to indicate that IQ isn't everything.
  46. @216
    O/T

    https://twitter.com/JMilesColeman/status/1113358126600851461

    Interesting, but not a good sign as I'd expect. Trump won District 3 in '16, which has one of the last remaining Blue Dogs as its representative.

    https://twitter.com/Geechie4Kamala/status/1113422132405469190

    District 2 is whiter than District 4, but high turnout white leftists in Madison showed up lower turnout blacks in Milwaukee.
  47. @silviosilver

    The creation of the Welfare State, with its inherent quality of rewarding the irresponsible and burdening the responsible to support the former, put the kibosh on that dream.
     
    Well, you can't keep crying over spilled milk forever. The welfare state's here and it's not going anywhere anytime soon. So a better idea than perpetually bemoaning it is to tweak its incentive structure so that the stupid, impulsive, violent etc (traits all fortuitously positively correlated with physical ugliness) end up breeding at a lower rate than the intelligent, conscientious, peaceful etc (traits all fortuitously positively correlated with physical attractiveness).

    For example, one partial but simple solution would to keep paying the poor if they have kids, but to pay them even more if they don't.

    Talha,

    Is that through government intervention?
     
    Abso-freakin-lutely.

    Abso-freakin-lutely.

    OK, but government-run eugenics programs don’t have the best track record. Just sayin’…

    but to pay them even more if they don’t.

    Or…I see government sponsored transgenderism in the future for the lower classes (perhaps this is already the plan…?); you screw them up in the head regarding gender, then you pay for their surgery to let them know you fully support their life-style choice and are doing them a favor, now you screwed up any chance for them to have any kids…and plenty will willingly take themselves out of the welfare program early:

    Man, Machiavelli would be popping a champagne bottle!

    Peace.

    • Replies: @silviosilver

    OK, but government-run eugenics programs don’t have the best track record. Just sayin’…
     
    "If at first you don't succeed, try, try again."

    You need to realize that any government policy affects breeding incentives to some degree. Today's policies, for instance, provide heavily dysgenic incentives. Since incentives of some sort or another are inevitable, eugenics simply says we should attempt to consciously influence them in a way we determine to be beneficial.
  48. @songbird
    People with Down's get Alzheimer's early too. Risk starts at about 45. Majority have it by 60. I imagine it progresses quickly, but it must be expensive and difficult to care for them nevertheless.

    It seems like it is also very expensive to put them in public schools. I don't think they can really be taught to contribute to the economy either. Not that I'm advocating policy - just that I am saying I can understand why some people think it is murky. But, then again, they may add some not easily quantifiable value to society, something like humility, or dare I say it, even love.

    One time I was punched in the face by one, who had been riled up by some idiots slapping the back of his neck. (Stronger arm then you'd expect) And I couldn't hit him back because I knew it was wrong. There may be some intangible value in an experience like that.

    I had a teacher who worked with them for a short time, and she seemed to be moved by the experience.

    I had a teacher who worked with them for a short time, and she seemed to be moved by the experience.

    I could never doing anything like that, so it’s great that there are people like that teacher in this world to make up for heartless bastards like me.

    I was taken on a field trip to a school for spastics (or whatever the correct term is these days) one day when I was ten or eleven. I found it extremely disturbing. I do recall observing that some of my classmates appeared to be completely at ease with it.

    I didn’t find that strange though. We already had one spastic kid in our school who had to walk around on crutches (and barely even managed that) and sounded like Chewbacca when he talked. Some kids really enjoyed helping him and being around him. We all had to take turns to assist him, and whenever it was my turn I could barely even stand to look at him, and I’d wonder why the hell I was forced to help him when there were kids available who actually enjoyed it. If the goal was to teach me compassion, it either failed completely or had the opposite effect.

    • Replies: @songbird
    Oddly enough, the smartest kid by far at my school had two gimp legs or something. I did not know him very well since he was in another grade, but he got a perfect score on his SAT and found two errors in the test. One fellow I knew much better got a 1540 (out of 1600), and one teacher said he couldn't hold a candle to this perpetually limping other guy.

    In terms of people not being able to speak, I think it is disturbing to go into old age homes sometimes. They are keeping people alive who seem to be in agony, if they even still have a mind at all, which I doubt. It must cost a fortune, and they are probably giving them dialysis. I don't think that is a moral decision. Medical care I think should really focus on fixing problems in young people, but the system in the US is the reverse. Kind of vampiric, and it is the doctors who really benefit, not the elderly.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Way on the male/systemizing end of the cognitive distribution, you are!
  49. @silviosilver

    Okay, suppose you use PIGD to select among a half-dozen zygotes to pick the one that’s likely going to have the best health, looks and smarts. You have a 20% chance of failing to improve on random chance.

    80% odds of beating chance is better than 50% odds. 80% odds spread over a population of millions is HUGE.
     
    Okay, great. I'm happy to hear that.

    I still think it's better to market it in terms of what it can do for society rather than in terms of what it can do for the parents. That way even people who are inclined to oppose the idea would be able to perceive a certain benefit in it.

    Simply cutting off trade with Nigeria would effect something of the sort. The population can in no way feed itself, and collapse is a matter of when, not if. Forcing that collapse now means a much smaller population affected. If there were suddenly no food imports, a lot more would starve than could ever get out in time.
     
    Sure, it's simple enough in technical terms. It's devilishly difficult to get anyone to agree to go along with the plan though. I really can't imagine us being in a position to "force" such a collapse anytime soon. It's almost absurd to even be discussing it.

    Cutting off trade to Nigeria wouldn’t be genocide. Nobody is forced to trade with anyone else. It would hit them hard, but they would develop on their own track. They are not a desert wasteland – they have the resources, it’s just badly managed and needs improvement. Someone will supply the know how for the right price; Russians, Chinese, Cubans, Turks, etc.

    The Nigerian upper class may have a massive revolution on their hands first though:
    “Some wealthy Nigerians are ordering pizzas from London and having them delivered back home on British Airways flights, a government minister has claimed.”
    https://www.businessinsider.com/nigerians-order-pizza-in-london-british-airways-delivers-audu-ogbeh-2019-4

    In fact, the reliance on imports (often from countries that receive agricultural subsidies from their own governments) can actually harm the local farmers and business (also see above article).

    Peace.

    • Replies: @silviosilver
    My response wasn't about trade policy specifically. It was about any similar such extreme plan, which it's nigh on lunacy to give any serious consideration to. But it's a given that any time you talk eugenics, someone will attempt to switch the conversation to "genocide."
  50. @Talha

    Abso-freakin-lutely.
     
    OK, but government-run eugenics programs don't have the best track record. Just sayin'...

    but to pay them even more if they don’t.
     
    Or...I see government sponsored transgenderism in the future for the lower classes (perhaps this is already the plan...?); you screw them up in the head regarding gender, then you pay for their surgery to let them know you fully support their life-style choice and are doing them a favor, now you screwed up any chance for them to have any kids...and plenty will willingly take themselves out of the welfare program early:
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DpHzC2bXgAARpsm.jpg

    Man, Machiavelli would be popping a champagne bottle!

    Peace.

    OK, but government-run eugenics programs don’t have the best track record. Just sayin’…

    “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again.”

    You need to realize that any government policy affects breeding incentives to some degree. Today’s policies, for instance, provide heavily dysgenic incentives. Since incentives of some sort or another are inevitable, eugenics simply says we should attempt to consciously influence them in a way we determine to be beneficial.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Talha

    Today’s policies, for instance, provide heavily dysgenic incentives.
     
    Agreed and maybe tomorrow's policies will produce a land full of docile nerds. Just sayin'...

    consciously influence them in a way we determine to be beneficial.
     
    I get this. That's what everyone says - until things play out and don't exactly go your way. "We have too many Chinese, people should only have one kid - what could go wrong?"

    It was about any similar such extreme plan
     
    OK, but I actually don't think that is an extreme plan. The Nigerians are obviously paying for these imports and farmers who are exporting to them are earning money in the transaction. The Nigerians will either learn to deal with it and meet the shortage themselves or find someone else to buy from...Western nations aren't exactly the only shop open. In fact, I would expect more resistance to the plan from Western nations' agricultural political lobbies.

    Peace.
  51. @Talha
    Cutting off trade to Nigeria wouldn't be genocide. Nobody is forced to trade with anyone else. It would hit them hard, but they would develop on their own track. They are not a desert wasteland - they have the resources, it's just badly managed and needs improvement. Someone will supply the know how for the right price; Russians, Chinese, Cubans, Turks, etc.

    The Nigerian upper class may have a massive revolution on their hands first though:
    "Some wealthy Nigerians are ordering pizzas from London and having them delivered back home on British Airways flights, a government minister has claimed."
    https://www.businessinsider.com/nigerians-order-pizza-in-london-british-airways-delivers-audu-ogbeh-2019-4

    In fact, the reliance on imports (often from countries that receive agricultural subsidies from their own governments) can actually harm the local farmers and business (also see above article).

    Peace.

    My response wasn’t about trade policy specifically. It was about any similar such extreme plan, which it’s nigh on lunacy to give any serious consideration to. But it’s a given that any time you talk eugenics, someone will attempt to switch the conversation to “genocide.”

  52. Many people with Down’s Syndrome are more profoundly retarded, having the minds of babies, with other health issues. They’re not all like the man in the video clip.

  53. @silviosilver

    OK, but government-run eugenics programs don’t have the best track record. Just sayin’…
     
    "If at first you don't succeed, try, try again."

    You need to realize that any government policy affects breeding incentives to some degree. Today's policies, for instance, provide heavily dysgenic incentives. Since incentives of some sort or another are inevitable, eugenics simply says we should attempt to consciously influence them in a way we determine to be beneficial.

    Today’s policies, for instance, provide heavily dysgenic incentives.

    Agreed and maybe tomorrow’s policies will produce a land full of docile nerds. Just sayin’…

    consciously influence them in a way we determine to be beneficial.

    I get this. That’s what everyone says – until things play out and don’t exactly go your way. “We have too many Chinese, people should only have one kid – what could go wrong?”

    It was about any similar such extreme plan

    OK, but I actually don’t think that is an extreme plan. The Nigerians are obviously paying for these imports and farmers who are exporting to them are earning money in the transaction. The Nigerians will either learn to deal with it and meet the shortage themselves or find someone else to buy from…Western nations aren’t exactly the only shop open. In fact, I would expect more resistance to the plan from Western nations’ agricultural political lobbies.

    Peace.

  54. @Ns
    Why would it be wrong to genocide everyone on this Earth below an IQ of 70?

    Why would it be wrong to genocide everyone on this Earth below an IQ of 70?

    It would be wrong because it would miss you. The bar needs to be set at 71 in order to take care of toilet bowl base scrappings like you.

  55. Anonymous[375] • Disclaimer says:

    The question is really more of a proxy for eugenics, rather than asking about eugenics itself directly. Specifically, the question is asking whether or not one supports preventing significant levels of dysgenics. “Genetic defects” implies significant dysgenics. It’s asking not whether one supports abortion for eugenic purposes, or for simply maintaining the genetic status quo, but for preventing significant levels of dysgenics.

    Whites, blacks, and Hispanics responding to this question are going to be influenced by Christianity and Liberalism. For the Christians, “abortion” tends to immediately and unequivocally signify something bad, and thus they will tend to be against it for whatever reason. They will mentally ignore whatever clause comes after the word “abort” in a question like this. It won’t register. For the liberals, abortion is fine because the free choice of women is sanctified and trumps almost everything. However, once “genetic defects” are brought up, it conjures up images of Hitler and becomes bad. They become less supportive of something like this. Abortion is fine as a woman’s sacred right to choose, because she wants to advance her career or just doesn’t feel like having a child, but once “genetic defects” comes into the equation, it becomes iffier.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Indeed. It's like the "hate crime" distinction without an effective difference. The unborn baby remains unborn either way.
  56. @silviosilver

    I had a teacher who worked with them for a short time, and she seemed to be moved by the experience.
     
    I could never doing anything like that, so it's great that there are people like that teacher in this world to make up for heartless bastards like me.

    I was taken on a field trip to a school for spastics (or whatever the correct term is these days) one day when I was ten or eleven. I found it extremely disturbing. I do recall observing that some of my classmates appeared to be completely at ease with it.

    I didn't find that strange though. We already had one spastic kid in our school who had to walk around on crutches (and barely even managed that) and sounded like Chewbacca when he talked. Some kids really enjoyed helping him and being around him. We all had to take turns to assist him, and whenever it was my turn I could barely even stand to look at him, and I'd wonder why the hell I was forced to help him when there were kids available who actually enjoyed it. If the goal was to teach me compassion, it either failed completely or had the opposite effect.

    Oddly enough, the smartest kid by far at my school had two gimp legs or something. I did not know him very well since he was in another grade, but he got a perfect score on his SAT and found two errors in the test. One fellow I knew much better got a 1540 (out of 1600), and one teacher said he couldn’t hold a candle to this perpetually limping other guy.

    In terms of people not being able to speak, I think it is disturbing to go into old age homes sometimes. They are keeping people alive who seem to be in agony, if they even still have a mind at all, which I doubt. It must cost a fortune, and they are probably giving them dialysis. I don’t think that is a moral decision. Medical care I think should really focus on fixing problems in young people, but the system in the US is the reverse. Kind of vampiric, and it is the doctors who really benefit, not the elderly.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
    The U.S. spends more on medical care than any other country in the world while not even being in the top 25 in terms of life expectancy. If you look at remaining life expectancy after the age of 70, though, the U.S. comes out practically at the top. This is because Medicare was set up in a way that it spends large amounts to keep elderly people in bad health alive for another year or two. It created a moral hazard situation where one group of people, old people and their children, can demand high spending on something like this while the costs are shifted elsewhere. This is one of the reasons medical spending has gone from six percent of GDP before Medicare was enacted to sixteen percent now. Doctor incomes have been rising at a faster rate than the incomes of other people so, like you say, they have benefited. If more money was spent on preventive medicine to prevent people from being in bad health when they reach old age then people would have an overall higher life expectancy. A free market health care system would work the best but if you are going to have a socialized health care system then the one we have now is suboptimal. It would be hard to change it, though, because elderly people are a powerful voting bloc and the doctors, specialists, and pharmaceutical companies who make money off them with the current system are powerful voting blocs too.
  57. @Achmed E. Newman
    It didn't have to be this way, Mark. I've got one word for you today: Socialism.

    OK, I'll add a few more. Just to focus on America for this point, imagine if the welfare state had not been put into place, massive immigration had not be made the policy (no, that's not Socialism, but a big factor as we'd all agree), and the US population had just stablized at 200,000,000 or so.

    There may have been some labor shortages, meaning very good pay for lots of blue-collar jobs. That'd have kept on until 2 decades back when computer software started making many white-collar jobs obsolete and lately with robotics making a lot of blue-collar jobs obsolete. Yeah, but with the resources we have, and an intelligent population, born of people with RESPONSIBILITY, we could have been living the life of the science fiction books I used to read... working at interesting, creative jobs for 10 or 20 hours a week, visiting our far-off next-door neighbors with our flying cars, etc.

    The creation of the Welfare State, with its inherent quality of rewarding the irresponsible and burdening the responsible to support the former, put the kibosh on that dream. Thanks for ruining my science fiction future, LBJ, you Socialist Fuck!

    I do have a lot of sympathy with your point of view, I too read those same sci-fi books and I too believe that it could have been that way. However I do think you are being somewhat one sided in your apportioning of blame, I think that capitalism is at least equally responsible. I am not sure exactly how it played out in the US but here is what happened here in the UK.

    It was 1979 and Margaret Thatcher had just been elected, the Tory election posters were the famous “Labour isn’t working”. We had a labour government previously which was gradually reducing the working week in response to rising unemployment. We had a million unemployed at the time, that was no big deal, jobs were still easy enough to get. The only long term unemployed were the real hopeless cases or disabled.

    Within a few years there were 3.5 million unemployed, our industries were gutted and our nicely balanced mixed economy was privatised, sold off at bargain basement prices. A new generation was brought up on welfare, the previous work ethic was substantially damaged. There was no minimum wage then and the competition for work had resulted in a situation where the pay at the bottom was so bad that often people with children were actually better off on welfare.

    Worse still, the Tories decided they could save money by deciding that two could live as cheaply as one, couples who were cohabiting (with or without children) had their welfare cut. Result a massive increase in single parent families (and guess what? they didn’t even save money because when the couples split for financial reasons the taxpayer got stiffed with an extra housing benefit bill)

    I ask you this question. Do you really still believe that in our corporate-controlled capitalist system we were ever going to be “working at interesting, creative jobs for 10 or 20 hours a week” or would it just be mass unemployment?

    Personally I blame both the right and the left for destroying our societies.

    • Replies: @Talha
    Clowns to the left of me,
    Jokers to the right,
    Here I am...

    Peace.
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    Sorry for the very late reply, Mark.

    Do you really still believe that in our corporate-controlled capitalist system we were ever going to be “working at interesting, creative jobs for 10 or 20 hours a week” or would it just be mass unemployment?
     
    I see you wrote "corporate-controlled" there. That's the answer - having Big-Biz control the economy via the heavy hand of the government is not what I call Capitalism. All the rules put on business by the government are drawn up to help Big Business and keep the small guy un-competitive.

    Do you think small businesses had it easy during the Maggie Thatcher / Ronald Reagan era? No, the regulation and heavy taxation had already been laid down on them during the decades before.

    The only solution is smaller government. To non-ironically paraphrase Homer Simpson here: Smaller government - what can't it do?!

    .

    BTW, don't think I am equating the "right" with real Capitalism along with the "left" with Socialism. The "right" hasn't been free-market oriented since my man Barry AuH2o. Yes, the red-squad along with the blue squad, of The Party, are both to blame.
  58. @songbird
    People with Down's get Alzheimer's early too. Risk starts at about 45. Majority have it by 60. I imagine it progresses quickly, but it must be expensive and difficult to care for them nevertheless.

    It seems like it is also very expensive to put them in public schools. I don't think they can really be taught to contribute to the economy either. Not that I'm advocating policy - just that I am saying I can understand why some people think it is murky. But, then again, they may add some not easily quantifiable value to society, something like humility, or dare I say it, even love.

    One time I was punched in the face by one, who had been riled up by some idiots slapping the back of his neck. (Stronger arm then you'd expect) And I couldn't hit him back because I knew it was wrong. There may be some intangible value in an experience like that.

    I had a teacher who worked with them for a short time, and she seemed to be moved by the experience.

    something like humility, or dare I say it, even love.

    Yes, indeed. “Defective” children can have a profound, positive influence on all of us. Witness the case of Bella Santorum. Say what you will of Sen. Santorum’s politics, he and his wife are good human beings and parents.

    https://www.lightworkers.com/rick-santorums-daughter/

    • Agree: songbird
  59. @MarkU
    I do have a lot of sympathy with your point of view, I too read those same sci-fi books and I too believe that it could have been that way. However I do think you are being somewhat one sided in your apportioning of blame, I think that capitalism is at least equally responsible. I am not sure exactly how it played out in the US but here is what happened here in the UK.

    It was 1979 and Margaret Thatcher had just been elected, the Tory election posters were the famous "Labour isn't working". We had a labour government previously which was gradually reducing the working week in response to rising unemployment. We had a million unemployed at the time, that was no big deal, jobs were still easy enough to get. The only long term unemployed were the real hopeless cases or disabled.

    Within a few years there were 3.5 million unemployed, our industries were gutted and our nicely balanced mixed economy was privatised, sold off at bargain basement prices. A new generation was brought up on welfare, the previous work ethic was substantially damaged. There was no minimum wage then and the competition for work had resulted in a situation where the pay at the bottom was so bad that often people with children were actually better off on welfare.

    Worse still, the Tories decided they could save money by deciding that two could live as cheaply as one, couples who were cohabiting (with or without children) had their welfare cut. Result a massive increase in single parent families (and guess what? they didn't even save money because when the couples split for financial reasons the taxpayer got stiffed with an extra housing benefit bill)

    I ask you this question. Do you really still believe that in our corporate-controlled capitalist system we were ever going to be "working at interesting, creative jobs for 10 or 20 hours a week" or would it just be mass unemployment?

    Personally I blame both the right and the left for destroying our societies.

    Clowns to the left of me,
    Jokers to the right,
    Here I am…

    Peace.

  60. @rob
    I hate to disagree with you after you praised my comment, but are you so sure that aborting accidental shutting around pregnancies is such a bad thing? I can see that once upon a time when the father would ‘man up’ and they’d get married and be more or less responsible parents, but today? With the sexual marketplace and social situation we have today? If the woman ‘chooses life’ she’s probably going to be the single mother of a child with a (from our POV) a low-quality father. From a demographic perspective, she’ll have fewer children than if she marries, even if later.If the woman aborts, she has a better better chance of finding a decent husband than she does as a single mom.

    I guess my perspctive is skewed by not seeing abortion as immoral in and of itself, but from a purely consequentialist view. Aborting a pregnancy that has a high chance of producing a criminal or a rapper? Pretty peachy. Aborting a pregnancy that has a good chance at producing a net contributor Pretty bad.

    I can see the view that ready abortion enables people to have sex in ways that doesn’t lead to healthy, functional families. But with abortion pills readily available, we’re never going to put that mushroom cloud back into the bombshell. The reasonable thing to do seems to be to consider abortion another tool in toolbox that can be used either for good or evil. I think we’ve reached a point where encouraging women to make the ‘brave’ decision to be a single mom is a net negative.

    My impression is that Republicans are no longer concerned about the destruction of the traditional family in all but the wealthiest and most educated social classes. They don’t dare cut welfare or food stamps for single moms. I wonder if they are doing this as a favor to the anti-abortion movement?

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    They don’t dare cut welfare or food stamps for single moms. I wonder if they are doing this as a favor to the anti-abortion movement?
     
    They've been doing this for decades.  Decades ago, my home state's "pro-lifers" defeated a bill to halt increases in welfare payments to women who had babies while they were on public assistance, calling this a "pro-abortion bill".

    The "pro-life" movement has long (if not always) been in service of dysgenics and White genocide.  Wonder why I hate fundamentalists?  Wonder no more.

    , @Toronto Russian

    My impression is that Republicans are no longer concerned about the destruction of the traditional family in all but the wealthiest and most educated social classes. They don’t dare cut welfare or food stamps for single moms.
     
    I don't know, how would they cut it more if it's miserable as is? I'm not in America but I've read this (2nd comment to Simcha Fisher's post):

    I grew up extremely poor, homeless at times, on Food Stamps most of the time. I remember the terrible shame that I felt going to the store as a teenager to buy food with the food stamps. My mother is a college educated woman, we still struggled. She couldn’t get a job she was ‘qualified’ for and yet many jobs told her she was ‘over qualified’. Any time she would get a decent job, and report the income, they dropped our benefits and raised our project-rent so fast that it was impossible to EVER get ahead. The system is so flawed, and set up that it’s very hard to get out from under it. And society punishes poor people. It punishes disabled people. It punished people of color (we are white). My mom got re-married to get out of it. That’s the only way the majority of single women ever escaped the hole we were in.
    https://www.simchafisher.com/2016/02/21/the-day-i-bought-steak-with-my-food-stamps-2/
     
    Also, the public doesn't like finding babies in dumpsters, and this (no help for single mothers and shaming of them in favor of traditional family) is how you get babies in dumpsters.
  61. @silviosilver

    The creation of the Welfare State, with its inherent quality of rewarding the irresponsible and burdening the responsible to support the former, put the kibosh on that dream.
     
    Well, you can't keep crying over spilled milk forever. The welfare state's here and it's not going anywhere anytime soon. So a better idea than perpetually bemoaning it is to tweak its incentive structure so that the stupid, impulsive, violent etc (traits all fortuitously positively correlated with physical ugliness) end up breeding at a lower rate than the intelligent, conscientious, peaceful etc (traits all fortuitously positively correlated with physical attractiveness).

    For example, one partial but simple solution would to keep paying the poor if they have kids, but to pay them even more if they don't.

    Talha,

    Is that through government intervention?
     
    Abso-freakin-lutely.

    For example, one partial but simple solution would to keep paying the poor if they have kids, but to pay them even more if they don’t.

    The supposed dysgenic consequences of the welfare state are totally fake and unrelated to the welfare state as such. There is no reason at all why social assistance shouldn’t be conditioned on long-term, idiot-proof birth control. Most responsible welfare recipients who are trying to get back on their feet would agree.

    • Replies: @silviosilver

    The supposed dysgenic consequences of the welfare state are totally fake and unrelated to the welfare state as such.
     
    I'd like to think you're correct, but logic and my own personal observations suggest to me it's all too true.

    I admit my perceptions are biased by some pretty strong revulsion to what I witnessed when I was younger, way before I knew anything about heredity. I had a high school friend who was reasonably smart, but otherwise a complete bum, incapable of holding down a job. He had he his first kid at 20 and then twins a year or so later, and I distinctly recall him being excited by the increase in "family payments" (this is in Australia) his girlfriend was going to get. I remember feeling disgusted that the system rewards scum like him for having big families, and feeling sorry for the kids who'd have to grow up with that POS for a father. (Years later I heard they split up and the kids (5!) hate him - big surprise lol.)

    I think that's what's always driven my support for abortion too. I've always viewed it (perhaps incorrectly) as a distinctly low class thing to do, so I've been glad that it's helping to keep their numbers down. You don't even need to invoke heredity here. You can explain the phenomenon strictly within environmentalist bounds: poor people pass their poverty and associated scummy behaviors onto their offspring, who pass it onto theirs, and so on and on.
  62. Priss Factor [AKA "Asagirian"] says: • Website

    Isn’t interracism pushed as a kind of eugenics?

    It’s premised on the perception that

    1. Black men are racially-sexually superior to white men cuz they are more muscular and have bigger dongs.

    2. White women are racially-sexually most attractive and therefore should belong to the most alpha males who are black.

    Thus, Negro as top male should mate with White woman as top female to create the superhuman mulatto race.

    And they pushing it big time in Jewish-controlled advertising.

    The message of advertising is ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs. It says to white guys, “You guys are inferior to black men who, as alpha males, should take the prettiest white women while leaving fat ugly white girls for beta white guys.”

    White race has gotten so pathetic.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    “You guys are inferior to black men who, as alpha males, should take the prettiest white women while leaving fat ugly white girls for beta white guys.”
     
    Heh.  As it would happen, when I was out to dinner tonight in my Whitopia a couple was seated at the table next to mine.

    He:  tall, presumably good-looking VERY black male.
    She:  short, very dumpy (BMI 45-50), late 30's or older White female.

    He could have done far better among his own race, but he chose the fat ugly White girl instead.  It was loud enough in the venue that I could not catch his accent to judge whether he was an American n1663r or foreign, but her choice of partner left nothing to doubt:  she could not do better.  This proves the racio-sexual hierarchy:  among black males, White female trumps black, period.
    , @UrbaneFrancoOntarian

    White race has gotten so pathetic.
     
    What a crock. How many couples like that do you actually see? Beautiful white woman with strong black man. I've seen, maybe 2 couples like that in my whole life. Usually, the black-white couples are very poor looking, and the woman looks like white trash.

    It actually shows the strength and resistance of the white race. Despite the constant Jewish brainwashing, very few quality white women are interested in negroes. I understand the meme, but you've gotta look outside at the reality sometimes.
  63. @Jay Fink
    My impression is that Republicans are no longer concerned about the destruction of the traditional family in all but the wealthiest and most educated social classes. They don't dare cut welfare or food stamps for single moms. I wonder if they are doing this as a favor to the anti-abortion movement?

    They don’t dare cut welfare or food stamps for single moms. I wonder if they are doing this as a favor to the anti-abortion movement?

    They’ve been doing this for decades.  Decades ago, my home state’s “pro-lifers” defeated a bill to halt increases in welfare payments to women who had babies while they were on public assistance, calling this a “pro-abortion bill”.

    The “pro-life” movement has long (if not always) been in service of dysgenics and White genocide.  Wonder why I hate fundamentalists?  Wonder no more.

  64. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    I would abort my baby if it had down syndrome or other mental handicaps. I don't want to spend my life looking after a drooling retard, and I don't think it's ethical to even bring a child into this world who cannot be self sufficient.

    Abortion because "I was sleeping around and an accident happened" is not acceptable. But abortion due to genetic defects is.

    I'm assuming the 29% who wouldn't are Filipinos, Korean Evangelicals and Muslim South-East Asians.

    British Columbia, Toronto, and Brampton (Chinese/Brown) have the highest abortion rates in Canada. About 1/3 (or as of 10 years ago more) of pregnancies are terminated. In the White rural areas, it's more like 1/10. So it doesn't seem like abortion, for any reason, presents any moral dilemma for the majority of Asians.

    It's not hard to imagine a future, where North America becomes Asian-dominated. Strong eugenic pressure will be forced upon blacks and the bottom 75% of latins, and probably the bottom 50% of whites. People don't realize how *alien* Asians are to us. To be honest, an ideal situation would have all of America (North and South) fighting against *all* Asian immigration. Because believe it or not, we have alot more in common with Mexicans and even blacks than we do with Asians. I'm meeting Spanish speaking Asians from South America now even.

    “I would abort my baby if it had down syndrome or other mental handicaps. I don’t want to spend my life looking after a drooling retard, and I don’t think it’s ethical to even bring a child into this world who cannot be self sufficient.”

    Thank you for demonstrating the cheapness of life. You sound like an SJW screaming “Well, it’s about me”.

    “Abortion because “I was sleeping around and an accident happened” is not acceptable. But abortion due to genetic defects is.”

    Doesn’t work that way. Either abortion is murder or it is not murder. You are trying to weasel your way out of responsibility.

    “People don’t realize how *alien* Asians are to us.”

    To YOU, but not to we or us.

    “To be honest, an ideal situation would have all of America (North and South) fighting against *all* Asian immigration.”

    John Derbyshire would probably not appreciate your sentiments.

  65. @Anon
    Americans oppose sensible eugenic policies, even to prevent inheritance of serious disease. A whopping 83% oppose genetic enhancements for intelligence and looks:

    https://www.statnews.com/2016/02/11/stat-harvard-poll-gene-editing/

    Honestly, I find this mind-boggling. Of course, some naysayer could come up with a list of potential drawbacks (as they could with any technology), but the potential benefits to human health and accomplishment seem so great as to easily overwhelm these concerns. Who wouldn't want their child to be smarter, taller, healthier, and better looking? Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life - obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders? What gives?

    My vague impression on the subject relates to personality differences between Asians and other racial groups. Asians seem to be, on the whole, far less moralistic - far less susceptible to feelings of disgust. You see this in their cuisine: many Japanese have no problems eating barely dead frog sashimi and grilling live octopus; the Koreans eat live octopus; some Chinese restaurants serve live fish; many South East Asians eat live shrimp meals. You don't see that in Western cultures nearly at all.

    Frog Sashimi: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_NW2A9D-tw

    Dancing Shrimp salad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PX3NNmtRyI

    Chinese live fish: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPp1HmUe9Mw

    Korean live octopus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYDkzqCfJzg

    You additionally see this difference in personality in their entertainment industries, but to a more limited degree: Asians (not all but a large number) seem far less concerned with the subtle emotional and social aspects of many Western-type movies and books of yesteryear, before the fall in quality of Western entertainment that is; Asian entertainment revolves around broad-topic "things" over "feels" - the analytical side of romantic partnerships over pure feelings of love, science fiction robots, world-building over character building (which is why Japanese anime feels so different to Westerners - imaginative worlds with fantastical creatures and concepts but more limited character nuance), ...

    As an aside, perhaps someone should conduct a poll asking what percentage of Western people would support germline enhancements if other people were already doing it; that might tell you the potential for adoption in the West as the Chinese are certain to go down that route at some point.

    “Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life – obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders?”

    Assuming that those things are indeed a “curse” and assuming that the child will end up that way. Thanks for devaluing humanity, management appreciates it.

    • Replies: @silviosilver

    Assuming that those things are indeed a “curse” and assuming that the child will end up that way. Thanks for devaluing humanity, management appreciates it.
     
    Some traits really are undesirable though. It's undesirable to be fat, stupid, ugly, lazy, etc. It would indeed be "devaluing humanity" if we all went about insulting and mocking people with undesirable traits right to their faces, and making it clear that we're treating them like shit precisely because of those undesirable traits. People often do discriminate based on those traits, but at least most people who do so have learned to be subtle about it. That's about the best that can be expected, frankly.

    With respect to feeling "cursed," I've always felt this way about my hair, and the feeling was particularly pronounced in high school. I'm quite happy about the way I look, but there is really only one basic hairstyle that looks good on me. So as a younger man, when everyone else was getting the fashionable hair styles, I couldn't follow along, because my hair just wouldn't stay the way it was styled. Christ I hated that.
  66. @Priss Factor
    Isn't interracism pushed as a kind of eugenics?

    It's premised on the perception that

    1. Black men are racially-sexually superior to white men cuz they are more muscular and have bigger dongs.

    2. White women are racially-sexually most attractive and therefore should belong to the most alpha males who are black.

    Thus, Negro as top male should mate with White woman as top female to create the superhuman mulatto race.

    And they pushing it big time in Jewish-controlled advertising.

    https://gab.com/media/image/bq-5ca55cb7b6add.png

    The message of advertising is ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs. It says to white guys, "You guys are inferior to black men who, as alpha males, should take the prettiest white women while leaving fat ugly white girls for beta white guys."

    White race has gotten so pathetic.

    “You guys are inferior to black men who, as alpha males, should take the prettiest white women while leaving fat ugly white girls for beta white guys.”

    Heh.  As it would happen, when I was out to dinner tonight in my Whitopia a couple was seated at the table next to mine.

    He:  tall, presumably good-looking VERY black male.
    She:  short, very dumpy (BMI 45-50), late 30’s or older White female.

    He could have done far better among his own race, but he chose the fat ugly White girl instead.  It was loud enough in the venue that I could not catch his accent to judge whether he was an American n1663r or foreign, but her choice of partner left nothing to doubt:  she could not do better.  This proves the racio-sexual hierarchy:  among black males, White female trumps black, period.

    • Replies: @Talha
    That seems to proves your particular environment. I go into Chicago quite a bit, plenty of Black male/White female couples walking around - not a huge amount, but not that infrequent either.

    It’s split about half-way; the White woman is sometimes dumpy and chubby or even looks significantly older than the man while about 50% of the time, the girl is quite attractive.

    So it all depends.

    One thing for sure, I’ve rarely see Black women in a mixed race couple, even in a cosmopolitan place like Chicago.

    Peace.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    (BMI 45-50)

    Hyperbole? That's morbidly obese.
  67. Anon[193] • Disclaimer says:

    “Right now I am very susceptible to being disgusted by your stupidity.”

    The comment was very clearly a compliment from someone noting excessive squeamishness on the part of Westerners. He might be right. Westerners obsess over morality – feelings of disgust and fairness and the like. That could be detrimental to a civilization if done in excess.

    • Replies: @UrbaneFrancoOntarian

    Westerners obsess over morality – feelings of disgust and fairness and the like. That could be detrimental to a civilization if done in excess.
     
    Agreed. When I hear these liberals promoting "equality" and yelling about "income disparities" and "multiculturalism", I think *why*? Who cares? Why do you, a white liberal, care about some Muslim immigrant? Why are you so obsessed with making society completely even?

    I will always fight for myself and my own group. It's pretty simple.

    Right wingers do the same with abortion. Abortion is very good. 15 million blacks and probably just as many Hispanics have been aborted since 1973. Whites have a very low abortion rate, whether it is legal or illegal. Republicans should be putting free abortion clinics on every block in Detroit and Chicago. I discourage abortion from white women, because I believe it is a byproduct of toxic feminism and the freedom to abort is causing society to falter. But for non-whites, I say full steam ahead.

    Fairness is not a good thing to pursue, rather, loyalty is what's important. By being loyal to my own people, the White race, I can try to make sure all my people prosper. Fairness for my own group. The USA had that until the Baby Boomers took over...
  68. @Mr. Rational

    “You guys are inferior to black men who, as alpha males, should take the prettiest white women while leaving fat ugly white girls for beta white guys.”
     
    Heh.  As it would happen, when I was out to dinner tonight in my Whitopia a couple was seated at the table next to mine.

    He:  tall, presumably good-looking VERY black male.
    She:  short, very dumpy (BMI 45-50), late 30's or older White female.

    He could have done far better among his own race, but he chose the fat ugly White girl instead.  It was loud enough in the venue that I could not catch his accent to judge whether he was an American n1663r or foreign, but her choice of partner left nothing to doubt:  she could not do better.  This proves the racio-sexual hierarchy:  among black males, White female trumps black, period.

    That seems to proves your particular environment. I go into Chicago quite a bit, plenty of Black male/White female couples walking around – not a huge amount, but not that infrequent either.

    It’s split about half-way; the White woman is sometimes dumpy and chubby or even looks significantly older than the man while about 50% of the time, the girl is quite attractive.

    So it all depends.

    One thing for sure, I’ve rarely see Black women in a mixed race couple, even in a cosmopolitan place like Chicago.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @songbird
    Maybe, that is why the new mayor is a black lesbian.
    , @Mr. Rational

    I’ve rarely see Black women in a mixed race couple
     
    Black women are the least feminine and are at the absolute bottom of the spectrum of desirability.  I have known exactly one WM/BF couple personally (I spotted another one last year, and in all my decades in liberal circles that's saying something; "rare as hen's teeth" is almost literally true) and he eventually dumped her and hooked up with a White girl.
  69. @Anon
    Americans oppose sensible eugenic policies, even to prevent inheritance of serious disease. A whopping 83% oppose genetic enhancements for intelligence and looks:

    https://www.statnews.com/2016/02/11/stat-harvard-poll-gene-editing/

    Honestly, I find this mind-boggling. Of course, some naysayer could come up with a list of potential drawbacks (as they could with any technology), but the potential benefits to human health and accomplishment seem so great as to easily overwhelm these concerns. Who wouldn't want their child to be smarter, taller, healthier, and better looking? Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life - obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders? What gives?

    My vague impression on the subject relates to personality differences between Asians and other racial groups. Asians seem to be, on the whole, far less moralistic - far less susceptible to feelings of disgust. You see this in their cuisine: many Japanese have no problems eating barely dead frog sashimi and grilling live octopus; the Koreans eat live octopus; some Chinese restaurants serve live fish; many South East Asians eat live shrimp meals. You don't see that in Western cultures nearly at all.

    Frog Sashimi: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_NW2A9D-tw

    Dancing Shrimp salad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PX3NNmtRyI

    Chinese live fish: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPp1HmUe9Mw

    Korean live octopus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYDkzqCfJzg

    You additionally see this difference in personality in their entertainment industries, but to a more limited degree: Asians (not all but a large number) seem far less concerned with the subtle emotional and social aspects of many Western-type movies and books of yesteryear, before the fall in quality of Western entertainment that is; Asian entertainment revolves around broad-topic "things" over "feels" - the analytical side of romantic partnerships over pure feelings of love, science fiction robots, world-building over character building (which is why Japanese anime feels so different to Westerners - imaginative worlds with fantastical creatures and concepts but more limited character nuance), ...

    As an aside, perhaps someone should conduct a poll asking what percentage of Western people would support germline enhancements if other people were already doing it; that might tell you the potential for adoption in the West as the Chinese are certain to go down that route at some point.

    I would not dispute the perceptive description of Asians as stated; culinary perversions, pragmatic personality, and so on. Accurate as far as it goes, but consider the positives: Decent, industrious, intelligent, proficient, conscientious, fastidious, lean. Here in California, these are traits we can use more of, because we have been sliding downhill in these over recent decades. (I wonder why.) Perhaps these traits can be contageous, just as their absence has been.

  70. @Talha
    That seems to proves your particular environment. I go into Chicago quite a bit, plenty of Black male/White female couples walking around - not a huge amount, but not that infrequent either.

    It’s split about half-way; the White woman is sometimes dumpy and chubby or even looks significantly older than the man while about 50% of the time, the girl is quite attractive.

    So it all depends.

    One thing for sure, I’ve rarely see Black women in a mixed race couple, even in a cosmopolitan place like Chicago.

    Peace.

    Maybe, that is why the new mayor is a black lesbian.

    • Replies: @Talha
    Possibly. Weird stuff - I just hope this doesn’t mean more pro-gay stuff in the city, I already have to explain more stuff than I want to my boys.

    Also, a bit off topic but some seriously wise words from Malcolm X (ra) to the Blacks of his day, which still ring true:
    https://www.twitter.com/CountOnRodney/status/1113242862076850176

    That brother was solid, probably why he had to be eliminated.

    Peace.
  71. @Priss Factor
    Isn't interracism pushed as a kind of eugenics?

    It's premised on the perception that

    1. Black men are racially-sexually superior to white men cuz they are more muscular and have bigger dongs.

    2. White women are racially-sexually most attractive and therefore should belong to the most alpha males who are black.

    Thus, Negro as top male should mate with White woman as top female to create the superhuman mulatto race.

    And they pushing it big time in Jewish-controlled advertising.

    https://gab.com/media/image/bq-5ca55cb7b6add.png

    The message of advertising is ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs. It says to white guys, "You guys are inferior to black men who, as alpha males, should take the prettiest white women while leaving fat ugly white girls for beta white guys."

    White race has gotten so pathetic.

    White race has gotten so pathetic.

    What a crock. How many couples like that do you actually see? Beautiful white woman with strong black man. I’ve seen, maybe 2 couples like that in my whole life. Usually, the black-white couples are very poor looking, and the woman looks like white trash.

    It actually shows the strength and resistance of the white race. Despite the constant Jewish brainwashing, very few quality white women are interested in negroes. I understand the meme, but you’ve gotta look outside at the reality sometimes.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    What a crock. How many couples like that do you actually see? Beautiful white woman with strong black man.

    I suppose it depends on where you live.

    I see more and more, and I hear it's very common in integrated high schools.

    Also, I've seen so much of it in the South.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    3x as many white women are interested in black men as white men are interested in black women. With whites/Asians, it is virtually the reverse.
  72. @Anon
    "Right now I am very susceptible to being disgusted by your stupidity."

    The comment was very clearly a compliment from someone noting excessive squeamishness on the part of Westerners. He might be right. Westerners obsess over morality - feelings of disgust and fairness and the like. That could be detrimental to a civilization if done in excess.

    Westerners obsess over morality – feelings of disgust and fairness and the like. That could be detrimental to a civilization if done in excess.

    Agreed. When I hear these liberals promoting “equality” and yelling about “income disparities” and “multiculturalism”, I think *why*? Who cares? Why do you, a white liberal, care about some Muslim immigrant? Why are you so obsessed with making society completely even?

    I will always fight for myself and my own group. It’s pretty simple.

    Right wingers do the same with abortion. Abortion is very good. 15 million blacks and probably just as many Hispanics have been aborted since 1973. Whites have a very low abortion rate, whether it is legal or illegal. Republicans should be putting free abortion clinics on every block in Detroit and Chicago. I discourage abortion from white women, because I believe it is a byproduct of toxic feminism and the freedom to abort is causing society to falter. But for non-whites, I say full steam ahead.

    Fairness is not a good thing to pursue, rather, loyalty is what’s important. By being loyal to my own people, the White race, I can try to make sure all my people prosper. Fairness for my own group. The USA had that until the Baby Boomers took over…

    • Replies: @anon
    most of what you say in the post is along the lines of what i'm thinking

    i start to realize that these other races aren't my friends, they're competitors. even NE Asians, i see more and more that are doing things that are anti-white like that Asian woman in the Smolett case and the Korean girl that was hired by the NYT. I look forward to the day when whites band together and look out for each other like jews do.
  73. @songbird
    Maybe, that is why the new mayor is a black lesbian.

    Possibly. Weird stuff – I just hope this doesn’t mean more pro-gay stuff in the city, I already have to explain more stuff than I want to my boys.

    Also, a bit off topic but some seriously wise words from Malcolm X (ra) to the Blacks of his day, which still ring true:

    That brother was solid, probably why he had to be eliminated.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @songbird
    Can urban centers get any gayer? I hope not.

    Though it may be incident, once again I am awed by the political power gays attain. I think black lesbians must really have disproportionate influence, if you include organizational structures at the workplace.

    I have been thinking about Nation of Islam. I honestly don't know too much about it, but I wonder if one of the original attractions was trying to separate from the bad influence of general black culture. One of the ways, I genuinely feel sorry for blacks is a lot of their role models are sports or music stars or actors. Or even on the ground level, teachers, who, I think tend to be left of center and promote victimhood.
  74. Priss Factor [AKA "Asagirian"] says: • Website
    @UrbaneFrancoOntarian

    White race has gotten so pathetic.
     
    What a crock. How many couples like that do you actually see? Beautiful white woman with strong black man. I've seen, maybe 2 couples like that in my whole life. Usually, the black-white couples are very poor looking, and the woman looks like white trash.

    It actually shows the strength and resistance of the white race. Despite the constant Jewish brainwashing, very few quality white women are interested in negroes. I understand the meme, but you've gotta look outside at the reality sometimes.

    What a crock. How many couples like that do you actually see? Beautiful white woman with strong black man.

    I suppose it depends on where you live.

    I see more and more, and I hear it’s very common in integrated high schools.

    Also, I’ve seen so much of it in the South.

    • Replies: @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Yikes, that's not good to hear. I could see that in the South, though. Nice white Beckies banging a black guy to make up for slavery and segregation. Proves she's goodwhite.

    You know how they say in the South, people are more open about race but also live together. The North is full of liberals claiming to love blacks, but is highly segregated. This fits in with that trend.

    In Canada the racial segregation in high schools is insane. Arabs/browns, yellows, negroes and whites. People don't talk to people outside their group (which is a good thing, I speak as little as possible to them). But it's to the point where inter-racial dating would be frowned upon, especially by salty brown kids.

    Keep in mind, this is for the 2nd generation non whites. 1st generation don't race mix either, but they're not so anti-white.

    I'm seeing so much promise in Canada. Seeing heavy racism (real racism) coming from young whites. Lots of young white guys are getting guns. Brown people 2nd generation try to be negro thugs. Soft, feminine and leftist. Of course this is bad for our societal fabric, but good for our race. Nothing funnier than a bunch of wigger muslims and Indians trying to copy Drake, while simultaneously spouting SJW nonsense.
    , @mark green
    Black/white miscegenation is increasingly common. Unquestionably. And this trend is no accident.

    Here's a very insightful video on the subject:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2_K5koFGRY

  75. @Priss Factor
    What a crock. How many couples like that do you actually see? Beautiful white woman with strong black man.

    I suppose it depends on where you live.

    I see more and more, and I hear it's very common in integrated high schools.

    Also, I've seen so much of it in the South.

    Yikes, that’s not good to hear. I could see that in the South, though. Nice white Beckies banging a black guy to make up for slavery and segregation. Proves she’s goodwhite.

    You know how they say in the South, people are more open about race but also live together. The North is full of liberals claiming to love blacks, but is highly segregated. This fits in with that trend.

    In Canada the racial segregation in high schools is insane. Arabs/browns, yellows, negroes and whites. People don’t talk to people outside their group (which is a good thing, I speak as little as possible to them). But it’s to the point where inter-racial dating would be frowned upon, especially by salty brown kids.

    Keep in mind, this is for the 2nd generation non whites. 1st generation don’t race mix either, but they’re not so anti-white.

    I’m seeing so much promise in Canada. Seeing heavy racism (real racism) coming from young whites. Lots of young white guys are getting guns. Brown people 2nd generation try to be negro thugs. Soft, feminine and leftist. Of course this is bad for our societal fabric, but good for our race. Nothing funnier than a bunch of wigger muslims and Indians trying to copy Drake, while simultaneously spouting SJW nonsense.

  76. anon[338] • Disclaimer says:
    @UrbaneFrancoOntarian

    Westerners obsess over morality – feelings of disgust and fairness and the like. That could be detrimental to a civilization if done in excess.
     
    Agreed. When I hear these liberals promoting "equality" and yelling about "income disparities" and "multiculturalism", I think *why*? Who cares? Why do you, a white liberal, care about some Muslim immigrant? Why are you so obsessed with making society completely even?

    I will always fight for myself and my own group. It's pretty simple.

    Right wingers do the same with abortion. Abortion is very good. 15 million blacks and probably just as many Hispanics have been aborted since 1973. Whites have a very low abortion rate, whether it is legal or illegal. Republicans should be putting free abortion clinics on every block in Detroit and Chicago. I discourage abortion from white women, because I believe it is a byproduct of toxic feminism and the freedom to abort is causing society to falter. But for non-whites, I say full steam ahead.

    Fairness is not a good thing to pursue, rather, loyalty is what's important. By being loyal to my own people, the White race, I can try to make sure all my people prosper. Fairness for my own group. The USA had that until the Baby Boomers took over...

    most of what you say in the post is along the lines of what i’m thinking

    i start to realize that these other races aren’t my friends, they’re competitors. even NE Asians, i see more and more that are doing things that are anti-white like that Asian woman in the Smolett case and the Korean girl that was hired by the NYT. I look forward to the day when whites band together and look out for each other like jews do.

  77. @Ns
    Why would it be wrong to genocide everyone on this Earth below an IQ of 70?

    just give them incentives not to procreate

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "just give them incentives not to procreate"

    What ought to be done is to give incentives to WHITES to procreate, since we are concerned about the white gene pool needlessly being diluted by the undesired offspring of vibrants when they engage in coitus at a record pac. Indeed, the desired course of action is to vociferously remind whites of their duty to pop out kids like a Pez dispenser as a counter to the darkies breeding like rabbits.

    We are mindful that the Roman emperor Augustus made adultery a public crime and established financial penalties for citizens who outright refused to marry and bear a certain number of children.

    So on to “inducing” women to birth and raise children. Indeed, females in their prime must be compelled to forgo their own life in order to produce offspring. The passage of a law, not substantial social pressure, is demanded to ensure white men will marry and have their wife bear five children in eight years. Dare I say the Russian model in the form of housing and education, direct cash payments to women who have more chilluns (and even adjusting their work schedules to meet maternal demands!), and programs to dry out the Vodka swilling man-childs running amok, is the model.

    Regardless if couples have a steadfast belief they are not financially ready to have children, or have serious reservations to bring Bobby or Susie into a world of Cultural Marxism, for the benefit of humanity, they must be brought into submission. After all, today's young people lack the intellectual capacity and political liberty to make their own decisions on this important matter.

    What about single men who are simply interested in the “pump and dump” strategies of such prominent Gamers like Roissy, and less inclined to bear children with whiny females because they ruin everything? Tough, instant fatherhood it is!

    Although, given the fact that MPAI, perhaps this course of action be seriously contemplated--white young boys entering middle school age will endure a battery of tests to determine their level of leadership, competition, and stamina. In a “Fight Club” exercise, platoons will be created based on their test scores, who will strap on red or blue arm bands and hunt down the "enemy" to rip off their emblems. Outright brawls demonstrate a sign of strength; younger, weaker boys will summarily get pummeled and bloodied to a pulp. Ripped shirts, scraped knees, and broken noses are considered badges of honor. White boys who failed to measure up will be barred from reproducing; those who "manned up" will procure a young lass and have multiple rug rats.

    After all, in the immortal words of Oliver Wendell Holmes, “[one] generation[s] of imbeciles are enough”.

    We ALL have a moral duty to hit the road as traveling salesmen to pitch the idea to the unwashed masses how their utter stupidity will undeniably result in catastrophic demographic turmoil unless they “properly” live their life. The plans I humbly laid out are MOST desirable, for the societal price for replacing children with uncivilized immigrants is too high.
  78. anon[381] • Disclaimer says:

    “Assuming that those things are indeed a “curse” and assuming that the child will end up that way.”

    Something like Huntington’s Disease is definitely a curse, and I’m sure the people who have it think the same.

    “Thanks for devaluing humanity, management appreciates it.”

    You guys should be happy in your poverty. Deprivation is the spice of life, after all. You wouldn’t want to devalue a hard day’s work, would you:

    “Are there no prisons?” asked Scrooge. “Plenty of prisons,” said the gentleman, laying down the pen again. “And the Union workhouses?” demanded Scrooge. “Are they still in operation?” “They are. Still,” returned the gentleman, “I wish I could say they were not.” “The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour, then?” said Scrooge.”

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Something like Huntington’s Disease is definitely a curse, and I’m sure the people who have it think the same."

    Indeed, but we are assuming that a couple's offspring WILL end up having that affliction based on odds. So, it would appear that you support terminating a pregnancy just because the odds are against the child. Is that really we want to make decisions as a human race?

    "“Are there no prisons?” asked Scrooge."

    I believe Scrooge himself came from a poor background who rose to the top.
  79. anon[331] • Disclaimer says:

    “Thank you for demonstrating the cheapness of life. You sound like an SJW screaming “Well, it’s about me”.”

    Says the moral prude who thinks every comment is about him.

    “Doesn’t work that way.”

    Says who? The great Corvinus? Lol.

    “Either abortion is murder or it is not murder. You are trying to weasel your way out of responsibility.”

    The dancer is either spinning clockwise or counterclockwise. It’s not like it’s a matter of perspective or anything: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinning_Dancer

    “To YOU, but not to we or us.”

    Speak for yourself, which is something you seem to have a problem with. To most Westerners, yes. Asians – East Asians – are quite different; they feel the same way about some Westerners. I say that as someone who has actually lived and worked in Asia. Can you say the same? I very much doubt it.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Says the moral prude who thinks every comment is about him."

    Are you a Secret King?

    "I say that as someone who has actually lived and worked in Asia. Can you say the same? I very much doubt it."

    "I say that as someone who has actually lived and worked in Asia. Can you say the same? I very much doubt it."

    Based on YOUR experiences. Other people may have had different encounters and thus do not share your sentiments.
  80. @Mr. Rational

    The same reason it would be wrong to genocide anyone with an IQ over 70: genocide is wrong.
     
    I can think of one circumstance where it might not be:  if they were creating circumstances that would produce a similar outcome anyway, but removing them early would prevent them from destroying other things on their way out.

    Simply cutting off trade with Nigeria would effect something of the sort.  The population can in no way feed itself, and collapse is a matter of when, not if.  Forcing that collapse now means a much smaller population affected.  If there were suddenly no food imports, a lot more would starve than could ever get out in time.

    How is that different from just nerve gassing Africa? Well there are gentle eugenecists and the burn everything down eugenecists, but a utilitarian can argue that the burn everything down eugenecists are more efficient and end up wasting a lot less money the long run, than the bleeding heart eugenecists, ample reason to the skeptical of the eugenicists, btw the Nazis hated the idea of IQ tests.

    • Troll: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    How is that different from just nerve gassing Africa?
     
    If your intellect is so weak that you can't see the difference, you are not worth the trouble of writing a serious answer.

    We actually have a good reason to shut down trade with Nigeria.  Nigerians are invading the entire White world, including a flood coming to Europe illegally.  Telling Nigeria that we're not having any more of it and to shut its borders or we cut off their food is a legitimate and measured response.
  81. An amoral social darwinist utilitarian can also argue with respect to IQ and inferior peoples that the strong do what they will, while the weak suffer what they must, to quote Thucydides.

  82. @rob
    I hate to disagree with you after you praised my comment, but are you so sure that aborting accidental shutting around pregnancies is such a bad thing? I can see that once upon a time when the father would ‘man up’ and they’d get married and be more or less responsible parents, but today? With the sexual marketplace and social situation we have today? If the woman ‘chooses life’ she’s probably going to be the single mother of a child with a (from our POV) a low-quality father. From a demographic perspective, she’ll have fewer children than if she marries, even if later.If the woman aborts, she has a better better chance of finding a decent husband than she does as a single mom.

    I guess my perspctive is skewed by not seeing abortion as immoral in and of itself, but from a purely consequentialist view. Aborting a pregnancy that has a high chance of producing a criminal or a rapper? Pretty peachy. Aborting a pregnancy that has a good chance at producing a net contributor Pretty bad.

    I can see the view that ready abortion enables people to have sex in ways that doesn’t lead to healthy, functional families. But with abortion pills readily available, we’re never going to put that mushroom cloud back into the bombshell. The reasonable thing to do seems to be to consider abortion another tool in toolbox that can be used either for good or evil. I think we’ve reached a point where encouraging women to make the ‘brave’ decision to be a single mom is a net negative.

    One might argue that such a woman having less children in total is good, perhaps especially reducing the chance of a decent man marrying her to about 0. (But I do tend towards abortion myself.)

  83. @silviosilver

    Who wouldn’t want their child to be smarter, taller, healthier, and better looking? Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life – obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders? What gives?
     
    As I understand it, eugenics today can only increase the chances that your offspring will be smarter, healthier and better-looking, but it can't guarantee it. Potential parents may therefore be setting themselves up for some pretty serious disappointment.

    It would be wiser to focus on the benefits of eugenics for society at large, rather than the benefits for any given parents. In this case, we can be quite sure that on average eugenically conceived children will be smarter, healthier and better looking on average.

    Perhaps the most important objection to any of this is the fear that such people will know they are superior, will feel superior, and will act like it. They will "lord it over" everyone else. Absent this fear, it's hard to see why anyone would object to there being more intelligence, more health and more physical attractiveness in society.

    One way to quell these fears is to imagine that some (or all) of the very intelligent and very attractive people on earth today were, unbeknownst to any of us, actually eugenically conceived, and to then ask ourselves - is that really so horrible? If you learned that, say, Brad Pitt had been eugenically conceived, does really make you miserable? Or if you were already jealous of him, does it make you any more jealous? If not, then perhaps there really isn't so much to fear.

    Both the “benefits on average” and solving the “lording it over” problem seem like they call for … democracy and inclusion about eugenics as soon as possible. Also, a bunch of people today is the result of fairly conscious natural eugenics, and they do tend to lord it over everyone else (which would be the less feasible the more artificial eugenics was available and equivalent/superior to natural).

  84. @Jay Fink
    My impression is that Republicans are no longer concerned about the destruction of the traditional family in all but the wealthiest and most educated social classes. They don't dare cut welfare or food stamps for single moms. I wonder if they are doing this as a favor to the anti-abortion movement?

    My impression is that Republicans are no longer concerned about the destruction of the traditional family in all but the wealthiest and most educated social classes. They don’t dare cut welfare or food stamps for single moms.

    I don’t know, how would they cut it more if it’s miserable as is? I’m not in America but I’ve read this (2nd comment to Simcha Fisher’s post):

    I grew up extremely poor, homeless at times, on Food Stamps most of the time. I remember the terrible shame that I felt going to the store as a teenager to buy food with the food stamps. My mother is a college educated woman, we still struggled. She couldn’t get a job she was ‘qualified’ for and yet many jobs told her she was ‘over qualified’. Any time she would get a decent job, and report the income, they dropped our benefits and raised our project-rent so fast that it was impossible to EVER get ahead. The system is so flawed, and set up that it’s very hard to get out from under it. And society punishes poor people. It punishes disabled people. It punished people of color (we are white). My mom got re-married to get out of it. That’s the only way the majority of single women ever escaped the hole we were in.
    https://www.simchafisher.com/2016/02/21/the-day-i-bought-steak-with-my-food-stamps-2/

    Also, the public doesn’t like finding babies in dumpsters, and this (no help for single mothers and shaming of them in favor of traditional family) is how you get babies in dumpsters.

  85. @advancedatheist

    we could have been living the life of the science fiction books I used to read
     
    Like real-life Mars colonization, for example.

    Only I don't see that happening in our current society, despite Elon Musk's fantasies, because a Mars colonization project that has any chance of success would validate the white-nationalist world view. You would want to eliminate foreseeable causes of failure, so that means you would send only conservative, healthy, competent white people with normal sexuality. Introduce race mixing, affirmative action, feminism and damaged sexuality, and you'll get nothing but stupid drama, strife and bad decisions from diversity hires which will doom the colony.

    East Asians appear to be more adapted to scarcity than whites.

  86. @Rosie

    For example, one partial but simple solution would to keep paying the poor if they have kids, but to pay them even more if they don’t.
     
    The supposed dysgenic consequences of the welfare state are totally fake and unrelated to the welfare state as such. There is no reason at all why social assistance shouldn't be conditioned on long-term, idiot-proof birth control. Most responsible welfare recipients who are trying to get back on their feet would agree.

    The supposed dysgenic consequences of the welfare state are totally fake and unrelated to the welfare state as such.

    I’d like to think you’re correct, but logic and my own personal observations suggest to me it’s all too true.

    I admit my perceptions are biased by some pretty strong revulsion to what I witnessed when I was younger, way before I knew anything about heredity. I had a high school friend who was reasonably smart, but otherwise a complete bum, incapable of holding down a job. He had he his first kid at 20 and then twins a year or so later, and I distinctly recall him being excited by the increase in “family payments” (this is in Australia) his girlfriend was going to get. I remember feeling disgusted that the system rewards scum like him for having big families, and feeling sorry for the kids who’d have to grow up with that POS for a father. (Years later I heard they split up and the kids (5!) hate him – big surprise lol.)

    I think that’s what’s always driven my support for abortion too. I’ve always viewed it (perhaps incorrectly) as a distinctly low class thing to do, so I’ve been glad that it’s helping to keep their numbers down. You don’t even need to invoke heredity here. You can explain the phenomenon strictly within environmentalist bounds: poor people pass their poverty and associated scummy behaviors onto their offspring, who pass it onto theirs, and so on and on.

  87. @Corvinus
    "Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life – obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders?"

    Assuming that those things are indeed a "curse" and assuming that the child will end up that way. Thanks for devaluing humanity, management appreciates it.

    Assuming that those things are indeed a “curse” and assuming that the child will end up that way. Thanks for devaluing humanity, management appreciates it.

    Some traits really are undesirable though. It’s undesirable to be fat, stupid, ugly, lazy, etc. It would indeed be “devaluing humanity” if we all went about insulting and mocking people with undesirable traits right to their faces, and making it clear that we’re treating them like shit precisely because of those undesirable traits. People often do discriminate based on those traits, but at least most people who do so have learned to be subtle about it. That’s about the best that can be expected, frankly.

    With respect to feeling “cursed,” I’ve always felt this way about my hair, and the feeling was particularly pronounced in high school. I’m quite happy about the way I look, but there is really only one basic hairstyle that looks good on me. So as a younger man, when everyone else was getting the fashionable hair styles, I couldn’t follow along, because my hair just wouldn’t stay the way it was styled. Christ I hated that.

    • Replies: @anon

    With respect to feeling “cursed,” I’ve always felt this way about my hair, and the feeling was particularly pronounced in high school. I’m quite happy about the way I look, but there is really only one basic hairstyle that looks good on me. So as a younger man, when everyone else was getting the fashionable hair styles, I couldn’t follow along, because my hair just wouldn’t stay the way it was styled. Christ I hated that.
     
    life is rough

    try going bald by 22 and then complain about your hairstyle
  88. @Screwtape
    The low birthrate feeds the perfection obsession here too.

    Late marriage and careerism and feminist check-the-box one and done children are reverse engineered Harvard grads. The above-replacement vs 1.0 birthrate families do tend to differ in their aspirations toward perfection.

    I have a close friend in early childhood Ed. Seems kids are either ‘special needs’ aka no father in the home or ‘very advanced’ aka insufferable double income outsourcers insisting that their genius spawn maintain the pre-ordained trajectory.

    It will be interesting to see the science driving eugenics collide with all these last-egg IVF kids that seem to also be mysteriously aligned with the ‘spike’ in spergy-spectrum special needs.

    What will the messaging be when the perfect designer baby and the you can have it all last egg baby are at opposite ends of the science?

    Also, would ‘genetic defect’ also include not my DNA? Now that would be interesting.

    low birth rate caused by one child policy?

  89. There are two distinct threads to this ‘eugenics’ debate.

    The first one would be the editing or selecting out of deleterious genes, this one I would actually support. We as a species are no longer subject to natural selection which has a definite function as quality control. It was customary in many societies to leave deformed babies out for the predators which was arguably a primitive form of eugenics. I see no good reason why anyone should have to be born with a club foot or any other unequivocal handicap if the defective gene could be edited out, or a congenitally defective embryo selected out.

    The second thread would be ‘designer babies’, this I would oppose vehemently. I don’t believe that we are fit to decide our own evolutionary destiny nor is any creature, that I believe must be left to nature. That is just a personal philosophical objection, no more than that. The real and most important objections to designer babies would be the horrible potential for abuse, specially bred designer soldiers come to mind. We also have the ghastly prospect of babies designed with cosmetic factors uppermost, a huge number of Elvis Presley lookalikes or whatever is fashionable at the time.

  90. anonymous[389] • Disclaimer says:

    I am a firm supporter of, “Eugenics, by Morality.”

    Bye, bye, whitey race.

    • Replies: @anon
    sounds like the member of a race that's never produced anything

    bye bye brownie

  91. @anon
    "Assuming that those things are indeed a “curse” and assuming that the child will end up that way."

    Something like Huntington's Disease is definitely a curse, and I'm sure the people who have it think the same.

    "Thanks for devaluing humanity, management appreciates it."

    You guys should be happy in your poverty. Deprivation is the spice of life, after all. You wouldn't want to devalue a hard day's work, would you:

    "Are there no prisons?" asked Scrooge. "Plenty of prisons," said the gentleman, laying down the pen again. "And the Union workhouses?" demanded Scrooge. "Are they still in operation?" "They are. Still," returned the gentleman, "I wish I could say they were not." "The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour, then?" said Scrooge."

    “Something like Huntington’s Disease is definitely a curse, and I’m sure the people who have it think the same.”

    Indeed, but we are assuming that a couple’s offspring WILL end up having that affliction based on odds. So, it would appear that you support terminating a pregnancy just because the odds are against the child. Is that really we want to make decisions as a human race?

    ““Are there no prisons?” asked Scrooge.”

    I believe Scrooge himself came from a poor background who rose to the top.

  92. @anon
    "Thank you for demonstrating the cheapness of life. You sound like an SJW screaming “Well, it’s about me”."

    Says the moral prude who thinks every comment is about him.

    "Doesn’t work that way."

    Says who? The great Corvinus? Lol.

    "Either abortion is murder or it is not murder. You are trying to weasel your way out of responsibility."

    The dancer is either spinning clockwise or counterclockwise. It's not like it's a matter of perspective or anything: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinning_Dancer

    "To YOU, but not to we or us."

    Speak for yourself, which is something you seem to have a problem with. To most Westerners, yes. Asians - East Asians - are quite different; they feel the same way about some Westerners. I say that as someone who has actually lived and worked in Asia. Can you say the same? I very much doubt it.

    “Says the moral prude who thinks every comment is about him.”

    Are you a Secret King?

    “I say that as someone who has actually lived and worked in Asia. Can you say the same? I very much doubt it.”

    “I say that as someone who has actually lived and worked in Asia. Can you say the same? I very much doubt it.”

    Based on YOUR experiences. Other people may have had different encounters and thus do not share your sentiments.

  93. @anon
    just give them incentives not to procreate

    “just give them incentives not to procreate”

    What ought to be done is to give incentives to WHITES to procreate, since we are concerned about the white gene pool needlessly being diluted by the undesired offspring of vibrants when they engage in coitus at a record pac. Indeed, the desired course of action is to vociferously remind whites of their duty to pop out kids like a Pez dispenser as a counter to the darkies breeding like rabbits.

    We are mindful that the Roman emperor Augustus made adultery a public crime and established financial penalties for citizens who outright refused to marry and bear a certain number of children.

    So on to “inducing” women to birth and raise children. Indeed, females in their prime must be compelled to forgo their own life in order to produce offspring. The passage of a law, not substantial social pressure, is demanded to ensure white men will marry and have their wife bear five children in eight years. Dare I say the Russian model in the form of housing and education, direct cash payments to women who have more chilluns (and even adjusting their work schedules to meet maternal demands!), and programs to dry out the Vodka swilling man-childs running amok, is the model.

    Regardless if couples have a steadfast belief they are not financially ready to have children, or have serious reservations to bring Bobby or Susie into a world of Cultural Marxism, for the benefit of humanity, they must be brought into submission. After all, today’s young people lack the intellectual capacity and political liberty to make their own decisions on this important matter.

    What about single men who are simply interested in the “pump and dump” strategies of such prominent Gamers like Roissy, and less inclined to bear children with whiny females because they ruin everything? Tough, instant fatherhood it is!

    Although, given the fact that MPAI, perhaps this course of action be seriously contemplated–white young boys entering middle school age will endure a battery of tests to determine their level of leadership, competition, and stamina. In a “Fight Club” exercise, platoons will be created based on their test scores, who will strap on red or blue arm bands and hunt down the “enemy” to rip off their emblems. Outright brawls demonstrate a sign of strength; younger, weaker boys will summarily get pummeled and bloodied to a pulp. Ripped shirts, scraped knees, and broken noses are considered badges of honor. White boys who failed to measure up will be barred from reproducing; those who “manned up” will procure a young lass and have multiple rug rats.

    After all, in the immortal words of Oliver Wendell Holmes, “[one] generation[s] of imbeciles are enough”.

    We ALL have a moral duty to hit the road as traveling salesmen to pitch the idea to the unwashed masses how their utter stupidity will undeniably result in catastrophic demographic turmoil unless they “properly” live their life. The plans I humbly laid out are MOST desirable, for the societal price for replacing children with uncivilized immigrants is too high.

  94. @Talha
    That seems to proves your particular environment. I go into Chicago quite a bit, plenty of Black male/White female couples walking around - not a huge amount, but not that infrequent either.

    It’s split about half-way; the White woman is sometimes dumpy and chubby or even looks significantly older than the man while about 50% of the time, the girl is quite attractive.

    So it all depends.

    One thing for sure, I’ve rarely see Black women in a mixed race couple, even in a cosmopolitan place like Chicago.

    Peace.

    I’ve rarely see Black women in a mixed race couple

    Black women are the least feminine and are at the absolute bottom of the spectrum of desirability.  I have known exactly one WM/BF couple personally (I spotted another one last year, and in all my decades in liberal circles that’s saying something; “rare as hen’s teeth” is almost literally true) and he eventually dumped her and hooked up with a White girl.

    • Replies: @Talha

    Black women are the least feminine and are at the absolute bottom of the spectrum of desirability.
     
    Depends on the Black woman. My experience has mostly been in the Muslim community and the sisters who are Black (meaning African American) seem feminine enough, especially the ones that are on the traditional spectrum, they can be quite feminine.

    As far as non-Muslim Black women - I have a difficult time understanding them and they do seem to be the least compatible to someone like me who values a traditional family.

    Now as far as immigrant Black women, they seem to still have that traditional femininity (good wife/mother material) about them. I know a few convert brothers that married them (mostly White guys, but also one Puerto Rican) - the wives being mostly East African. They seem to have a good and stable family life.

    One of those brothers that I knew closely had nothing but praise for his wife. He was from a lower-class, not too educated background - what many people would call "White trash". He actually initially wanted to join the NOI since that was the only thing he knew about Islam, but they refused him because he was White. Anyway, he told me how his parents fell in love with his wife because of how well she treated them, how she never argued or complained about money (even though he didn't make much money) and was always encouraging and lifting up her man. On top of that, she was a gracious host and a good cook and bore him four beautiful kids (White and East African combo is actually different than with West Africans - there is more of a fusion and seems to have less of a contrast). Women like that still exist (Black or otherwise).

    Peace.
  95. anon[216] • Disclaimer says:
    @silviosilver

    Assuming that those things are indeed a “curse” and assuming that the child will end up that way. Thanks for devaluing humanity, management appreciates it.
     
    Some traits really are undesirable though. It's undesirable to be fat, stupid, ugly, lazy, etc. It would indeed be "devaluing humanity" if we all went about insulting and mocking people with undesirable traits right to their faces, and making it clear that we're treating them like shit precisely because of those undesirable traits. People often do discriminate based on those traits, but at least most people who do so have learned to be subtle about it. That's about the best that can be expected, frankly.

    With respect to feeling "cursed," I've always felt this way about my hair, and the feeling was particularly pronounced in high school. I'm quite happy about the way I look, but there is really only one basic hairstyle that looks good on me. So as a younger man, when everyone else was getting the fashionable hair styles, I couldn't follow along, because my hair just wouldn't stay the way it was styled. Christ I hated that.

    With respect to feeling “cursed,” I’ve always felt this way about my hair, and the feeling was particularly pronounced in high school. I’m quite happy about the way I look, but there is really only one basic hairstyle that looks good on me. So as a younger man, when everyone else was getting the fashionable hair styles, I couldn’t follow along, because my hair just wouldn’t stay the way it was styled. Christ I hated that.

    life is rough

    try going bald by 22 and then complain about your hairstyle

    • Replies: @silviosilver
    Well, the point I was trying to make was that even feeling "cursed" by such imperfections is really not that big a deal. So if a "eugenically minded" society were to deem certain traits more worthy of propagation than others, and you don't happen to have those traits, it's really not that different to the world we already live in. Therefore it's nothing to inordinately fear.
  96. @anonymous
    I am a firm supporter of, "Eugenics, by Morality."

    Bye, bye, whitey race.

    sounds like the member of a race that’s never produced anything

    bye bye brownie

  97. @Ns
    How is that different from just nerve gassing Africa? Well there are gentle eugenecists and the burn everything down eugenecists, but a utilitarian can argue that the burn everything down eugenecists are more efficient and end up wasting a lot less money the long run, than the bleeding heart eugenecists, ample reason to the skeptical of the eugenicists, btw the Nazis hated the idea of IQ tests.

    How is that different from just nerve gassing Africa?

    If your intellect is so weak that you can’t see the difference, you are not worth the trouble of writing a serious answer.

    We actually have a good reason to shut down trade with Nigeria.  Nigerians are invading the entire White world, including a flood coming to Europe illegally.  Telling Nigeria that we’re not having any more of it and to shut its borders or we cut off their food is a legitimate and measured response.

    • Replies: @Ns
    How would nerve gassing everyone there and having some 100 IQ folks take over the land and its resources be less efficient?
  98. @Mr. Rational

    How is that different from just nerve gassing Africa?
     
    If your intellect is so weak that you can't see the difference, you are not worth the trouble of writing a serious answer.

    We actually have a good reason to shut down trade with Nigeria.  Nigerians are invading the entire White world, including a flood coming to Europe illegally.  Telling Nigeria that we're not having any more of it and to shut its borders or we cut off their food is a legitimate and measured response.

    How would nerve gassing everyone there and having some 100 IQ folks take over the land and its resources be less efficient?

    • Troll: Audacious Epigone
  99. @Mr. Rational

    I’ve rarely see Black women in a mixed race couple
     
    Black women are the least feminine and are at the absolute bottom of the spectrum of desirability.  I have known exactly one WM/BF couple personally (I spotted another one last year, and in all my decades in liberal circles that's saying something; "rare as hen's teeth" is almost literally true) and he eventually dumped her and hooked up with a White girl.

    Black women are the least feminine and are at the absolute bottom of the spectrum of desirability.

    Depends on the Black woman. My experience has mostly been in the Muslim community and the sisters who are Black (meaning African American) seem feminine enough, especially the ones that are on the traditional spectrum, they can be quite feminine.

    As far as non-Muslim Black women – I have a difficult time understanding them and they do seem to be the least compatible to someone like me who values a traditional family.

    Now as far as immigrant Black women, they seem to still have that traditional femininity (good wife/mother material) about them. I know a few convert brothers that married them (mostly White guys, but also one Puerto Rican) – the wives being mostly East African. They seem to have a good and stable family life.

    One of those brothers that I knew closely had nothing but praise for his wife. He was from a lower-class, not too educated background – what many people would call “White trash”. He actually initially wanted to join the NOI since that was the only thing he knew about Islam, but they refused him because he was White. Anyway, he told me how his parents fell in love with his wife because of how well she treated them, how she never argued or complained about money (even though he didn’t make much money) and was always encouraging and lifting up her man. On top of that, she was a gracious host and a good cook and bore him four beautiful kids (White and East African combo is actually different than with West Africans – there is more of a fusion and seems to have less of a contrast). Women like that still exist (Black or otherwise).

    Peace.

    • Replies: @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Hey Talha,

    Sorry to hijack this thread but it's in its end stages anyways.

    Here is a picture from a wonderful Toronto high school. As you can see, hundreds of your Muslim girls, as well as brown girls of all varieties (and a couple whites) are out protesting today.

    They are *so* angry that Premier Doug Ford is getting rid of the new "sex-ed" curriculum - written by a pedophile - that teaches about homosexuals in 3rd grade, with transgenders and gay sex being taught in the 8th grade. As you can see, the SJW brainwashing affects all races, but especially seems to hit brown girls the hardest.

    https://imgur.com/SuremET
  100. @MarkU
    I do have a lot of sympathy with your point of view, I too read those same sci-fi books and I too believe that it could have been that way. However I do think you are being somewhat one sided in your apportioning of blame, I think that capitalism is at least equally responsible. I am not sure exactly how it played out in the US but here is what happened here in the UK.

    It was 1979 and Margaret Thatcher had just been elected, the Tory election posters were the famous "Labour isn't working". We had a labour government previously which was gradually reducing the working week in response to rising unemployment. We had a million unemployed at the time, that was no big deal, jobs were still easy enough to get. The only long term unemployed were the real hopeless cases or disabled.

    Within a few years there were 3.5 million unemployed, our industries were gutted and our nicely balanced mixed economy was privatised, sold off at bargain basement prices. A new generation was brought up on welfare, the previous work ethic was substantially damaged. There was no minimum wage then and the competition for work had resulted in a situation where the pay at the bottom was so bad that often people with children were actually better off on welfare.

    Worse still, the Tories decided they could save money by deciding that two could live as cheaply as one, couples who were cohabiting (with or without children) had their welfare cut. Result a massive increase in single parent families (and guess what? they didn't even save money because when the couples split for financial reasons the taxpayer got stiffed with an extra housing benefit bill)

    I ask you this question. Do you really still believe that in our corporate-controlled capitalist system we were ever going to be "working at interesting, creative jobs for 10 or 20 hours a week" or would it just be mass unemployment?

    Personally I blame both the right and the left for destroying our societies.

    Sorry for the very late reply, Mark.

    Do you really still believe that in our corporate-controlled capitalist system we were ever going to be “working at interesting, creative jobs for 10 or 20 hours a week” or would it just be mass unemployment?

    I see you wrote “corporate-controlled” there. That’s the answer – having Big-Biz control the economy via the heavy hand of the government is not what I call Capitalism. All the rules put on business by the government are drawn up to help Big Business and keep the small guy un-competitive.

    Do you think small businesses had it easy during the Maggie Thatcher / Ronald Reagan era? No, the regulation and heavy taxation had already been laid down on them during the decades before.

    The only solution is smaller government. To non-ironically paraphrase Homer Simpson here: Smaller government – what can’t it do?!

    .

    BTW, don’t think I am equating the “right” with real Capitalism along with the “left” with Socialism. The “right” hasn’t been free-market oriented since my man Barry AuH2o. Yes, the red-squad along with the blue squad, of The Party, are both to blame.

    • Agree: Mark G.
    • Replies: @MarkU
    I don't think there is a huge difference in our positions really, we seem to share a common vision for the future after all.
  101. @songbird
    Oddly enough, the smartest kid by far at my school had two gimp legs or something. I did not know him very well since he was in another grade, but he got a perfect score on his SAT and found two errors in the test. One fellow I knew much better got a 1540 (out of 1600), and one teacher said he couldn't hold a candle to this perpetually limping other guy.

    In terms of people not being able to speak, I think it is disturbing to go into old age homes sometimes. They are keeping people alive who seem to be in agony, if they even still have a mind at all, which I doubt. It must cost a fortune, and they are probably giving them dialysis. I don't think that is a moral decision. Medical care I think should really focus on fixing problems in young people, but the system in the US is the reverse. Kind of vampiric, and it is the doctors who really benefit, not the elderly.

    The U.S. spends more on medical care than any other country in the world while not even being in the top 25 in terms of life expectancy. If you look at remaining life expectancy after the age of 70, though, the U.S. comes out practically at the top. This is because Medicare was set up in a way that it spends large amounts to keep elderly people in bad health alive for another year or two. It created a moral hazard situation where one group of people, old people and their children, can demand high spending on something like this while the costs are shifted elsewhere. This is one of the reasons medical spending has gone from six percent of GDP before Medicare was enacted to sixteen percent now. Doctor incomes have been rising at a faster rate than the incomes of other people so, like you say, they have benefited. If more money was spent on preventive medicine to prevent people from being in bad health when they reach old age then people would have an overall higher life expectancy. A free market health care system would work the best but if you are going to have a socialized health care system then the one we have now is suboptimal. It would be hard to change it, though, because elderly people are a powerful voting bloc and the doctors, specialists, and pharmaceutical companies who make money off them with the current system are powerful voting blocs too.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  102. @silviosilver

    The creation of the Welfare State, with its inherent quality of rewarding the irresponsible and burdening the responsible to support the former, put the kibosh on that dream.
     
    Well, you can't keep crying over spilled milk forever. The welfare state's here and it's not going anywhere anytime soon. So a better idea than perpetually bemoaning it is to tweak its incentive structure so that the stupid, impulsive, violent etc (traits all fortuitously positively correlated with physical ugliness) end up breeding at a lower rate than the intelligent, conscientious, peaceful etc (traits all fortuitously positively correlated with physical attractiveness).

    For example, one partial but simple solution would to keep paying the poor if they have kids, but to pay them even more if they don't.

    Talha,

    Is that through government intervention?
     
    Abso-freakin-lutely.

    So a better idea than perpetually bemoaning it is to tweak its incentive structure so that the stupid, impulsive, violent etc (traits all fortuitously positively correlated with physical ugliness) end up breeding at a lower rate than the intelligent, conscientious, peaceful etc (traits all fortuitously positively correlated with physical attractiveness).

    I can’t argue with that, in general, but you may just get outvoted by those who’ve been born out of irresponsibility and carry around that genetic trait to the voting booth.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    you may just get outvoted by those who’ve been born out of irresponsibility and carry around that genetic trait to the voting booth.
     
    Easy solution:  pay them to use long-term contraception and also stay off the voting rolls.  If they go off contraception their money stops immediately but they don't get to vote for 1 year.  The high time-preference people will neither reproduce nor vote very much.
  103. AE —

    I think you have to look at actual revealed preferences rather than what people say. The difference is profound.

    https://www.focusonthefamily.com/socialissues/life-issues/down-syndrome/a-world-with-no-down-syndrome-babies

    “67-85% of [fetuses] diagnosed with Down syndrome are aborted in the United States. As a result, the population of people living with the condition has decreased by 30%. In other countries, the abortion rate for Down syndrome can be as high as 90% in the United Kingdom, 98% in Denmark and 100% in Iceland.”

    Taking the middle of that range for the US, 75% of Americans “have an abortion if it was revealed that the unborn baby would have “genetic defects””.

    That is a far cry from the 30% who will admit as much.

    • Replies: @Johann Ricke

    Taking the middle of that range for the US, 75% of Americans “have an abortion if it was revealed that the unborn baby would have “genetic defects””.

    That is a far cry from the 30% who will admit as much.
     

    I'm not entirely surprised. The traditional idea behind having children, aside from passing on your family name/likeness, was to have someone to comfort you in your old age. Down Syndrome children are typically sterile, so that even if they get married, typically to others with the same condition, they can't have children. As to having someone to help with the trials of old age, Down Syndrome children not only provide zero assistance, they're a source of constant worry. The average couple looking to have children will typically abort and try again rather than have 1 Down Syndrome child suck up all their time, energy and money. It's not pretty, but it's likely the principal explanation.
  104. I really get quite a kick from listening to black commenter/radio host Jesse Lee Peterson. He is more critical of blacks than a white person could ever get away with and still keep his radio gig. On a recent broadcast he said that whites need to start having more babies. He said, and rightly so, that the country is finished without a white majority, that blacks are too stupid to go to college, and that blacks were better off before the civil rights movement and the welfare state. If you haven’t heard of him, you can check him out on YouTube.

  105. @Achmed E. Newman

    So a better idea than perpetually bemoaning it is to tweak its incentive structure so that the stupid, impulsive, violent etc (traits all fortuitously positively correlated with physical ugliness) end up breeding at a lower rate than the intelligent, conscientious, peaceful etc (traits all fortuitously positively correlated with physical attractiveness).
     
    I can't argue with that, in general, but you may just get outvoted by those who've been born out of irresponsibility and carry around that genetic trait to the voting booth.

    you may just get outvoted by those who’ve been born out of irresponsibility and carry around that genetic trait to the voting booth.

    Easy solution:  pay them to use long-term contraception and also stay off the voting rolls.  If they go off contraception their money stops immediately but they don’t get to vote for 1 year.  The high time-preference people will neither reproduce nor vote very much.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    I don't argue with your solution, Mr. Rational. My point was: how are you going to get something like that implemented? All those new votes (since the start of the Welfare State) are going to be against it, and we'd be outnumbered. This Socialist project has become too big a monster to kill easily. I don't think voting will do it at this point - may have worked if suggested by Bill Clinton in 1995...

    ... well, or if the states were left alone to do whatever they want to about it. In that case, I'd think you'd have a winner of a plan.
  106. @Achmed E. Newman
    Sorry for the very late reply, Mark.

    Do you really still believe that in our corporate-controlled capitalist system we were ever going to be “working at interesting, creative jobs for 10 or 20 hours a week” or would it just be mass unemployment?
     
    I see you wrote "corporate-controlled" there. That's the answer - having Big-Biz control the economy via the heavy hand of the government is not what I call Capitalism. All the rules put on business by the government are drawn up to help Big Business and keep the small guy un-competitive.

    Do you think small businesses had it easy during the Maggie Thatcher / Ronald Reagan era? No, the regulation and heavy taxation had already been laid down on them during the decades before.

    The only solution is smaller government. To non-ironically paraphrase Homer Simpson here: Smaller government - what can't it do?!

    .

    BTW, don't think I am equating the "right" with real Capitalism along with the "left" with Socialism. The "right" hasn't been free-market oriented since my man Barry AuH2o. Yes, the red-squad along with the blue squad, of The Party, are both to blame.

    I don’t think there is a huge difference in our positions really, we seem to share a common vision for the future after all.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  107. Looks like the bigger problem is Ewwwwgenics.

    https://hornet.com/stories/2019-hump-film-festival/

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    The abyss has been staring back into us for a long time now.
  108. I suppose the line is drawn in different places for different people. Attempting to breed what is essentially a more efficient human is not an immoral endeavor. The fewer children born with even minor birth defects, the better.

    The predictable virtue signalling from our usual suspects on the topic of the mentally (and physically) retarded is another example of our dysfunctional decline. So many resources are wasted on caring for these people who are unable to keep themselves alive independently, most of those resources courtesy of the taxpayer. (AE – I’d be curious to see the relationship between class and the mentally retarded – I suspect more of our retarded infants are born to people nearer poverty than not, meaning the parents are not capable of caring for the child without government assistance.) The trade off of a Down’s sufferer providing what is essentially the same thing a registered comfort dog is not reasonable.

    There are several mentally retarded people that I have the misfortune of interacting with on some level. The local grocery store hires them to bag groceries. They are terrible at it, and they are either extremely aloof or borderline obnoxious. At the gym I used to lift weights at, the manager would let a woman bring her moderately severe Down’s child run free in the weights area while she was on the treadmill. This kid was obnoxious; laughing and running and shrieking all over and generally being a nuisance to the rest of the patrons. Not to mention the fact that kids was a major injury risk to himself and others. A softball teammate of my older daughter has an autistic little brother. During games, he would crouch right behind the home plate backstop, play in the gravel and make a loud “reeeerearrreeeerear” sound. He would do it the entire game. Every game. For the 4 years his sister and my daughter were teammates. At other times he was just rude and ignorant – walking up behind other parents and stealing their hats or glasses, or smacking them on the head or arms. His parents did nothing to stop him. (I’m not even ashamed to admit that several times I imagined a pack of hyenas emerging from the nearby woods and dragging the kid off as he giggled, unaware of the horrible death that soon awaited him.) The couple of other Down’s sufferers I know of, are mostly better behaved but still prone to annoying public outbursts.

    The reality is that the love and affection these broken humans may or may not provide their families is in no way close to being worth the massive burden they are for their parents, the taxpayers, and just about everyone else. (Present day parents could never and would never admit to it, due to our society’s bi-polar relationship with “morality”)

    If there was a way to prevent anymore of them from being conceived, that would be a great thing.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @MarkU

    I suppose the line is drawn in different places for different people. Attempting to breed what is essentially a more efficient human is not an immoral endeavor. The fewer children born with even minor birth defects, the better.
     
    If you are simply talking about screening for unequivocal defects then I am with you completely but I am uneasy about the "Attempting to breed what is essentially a more efficient human" part. That phrase summons up visions of a 'Brave New World' type society complete with genetically engineered soldiers and docile compliant workers. I doubt that the oligarchs that own most of the world would be interested in having a more intelligent population capable of critical thinking. I am fairly sure that is not what you meant btw, I'm just flagging up an unfortunate sounding phrase.
    , @anon

    Attempting to breed what is essentially a more efficient human is not an immoral endeavor.
     
    except for this line^^ i agree with most of the rest of the post

    virtue signalling on how wonderful retards are has grown old. i wonder if it was started so that whites would more easily tolerate forced integration and invasion of low IQ black and brown
    , @Corvinus
    "There are several mentally retarded people that I have the misfortune of interacting with on some level."

    You mean they had the misfortune of interacting with you.

    "The reality is that the love and affection these broken humans may or may not provide their families is in no way close to being worth the massive burden they are for their parents, the taxpayers, and just about everyone else. (Present day parents could never and would never admit to it, due to our society’s bi-polar relationship with “morality”)"

    Actually, the reality is that the love and affection for these human beings is well worth the cost, as the general public supports this "subsidizing". It never ceases to amaze me the idiocy that is displayed on some of these threads.
  109. @MikeatMikedotMike
    I suppose the line is drawn in different places for different people. Attempting to breed what is essentially a more efficient human is not an immoral endeavor. The fewer children born with even minor birth defects, the better.

    The predictable virtue signalling from our usual suspects on the topic of the mentally (and physically) retarded is another example of our dysfunctional decline. So many resources are wasted on caring for these people who are unable to keep themselves alive independently, most of those resources courtesy of the taxpayer. (AE - I'd be curious to see the relationship between class and the mentally retarded - I suspect more of our retarded infants are born to people nearer poverty than not, meaning the parents are not capable of caring for the child without government assistance.) The trade off of a Down's sufferer providing what is essentially the same thing a registered comfort dog is not reasonable.

    There are several mentally retarded people that I have the misfortune of interacting with on some level. The local grocery store hires them to bag groceries. They are terrible at it, and they are either extremely aloof or borderline obnoxious. At the gym I used to lift weights at, the manager would let a woman bring her moderately severe Down's child run free in the weights area while she was on the treadmill. This kid was obnoxious; laughing and running and shrieking all over and generally being a nuisance to the rest of the patrons. Not to mention the fact that kids was a major injury risk to himself and others. A softball teammate of my older daughter has an autistic little brother. During games, he would crouch right behind the home plate backstop, play in the gravel and make a loud "reeeerearrreeeerear" sound. He would do it the entire game. Every game. For the 4 years his sister and my daughter were teammates. At other times he was just rude and ignorant - walking up behind other parents and stealing their hats or glasses, or smacking them on the head or arms. His parents did nothing to stop him. (I'm not even ashamed to admit that several times I imagined a pack of hyenas emerging from the nearby woods and dragging the kid off as he giggled, unaware of the horrible death that soon awaited him.) The couple of other Down's sufferers I know of, are mostly better behaved but still prone to annoying public outbursts.

    The reality is that the love and affection these broken humans may or may not provide their families is in no way close to being worth the massive burden they are for their parents, the taxpayers, and just about everyone else. (Present day parents could never and would never admit to it, due to our society's bi-polar relationship with "morality")

    If there was a way to prevent anymore of them from being conceived, that would be a great thing.

    I suppose the line is drawn in different places for different people. Attempting to breed what is essentially a more efficient human is not an immoral endeavor. The fewer children born with even minor birth defects, the better.

    If you are simply talking about screening for unequivocal defects then I am with you completely but I am uneasy about the “Attempting to breed what is essentially a more efficient human” part. That phrase summons up visions of a ‘Brave New World’ type society complete with genetically engineered soldiers and docile compliant workers. I doubt that the oligarchs that own most of the world would be interested in having a more intelligent population capable of critical thinking. I am fairly sure that is not what you meant btw, I’m just flagging up an unfortunate sounding phrase.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
    I suppose my choice of words could lead one to think that, but I merely meant eliminating physical and mental defects. Ridding the world of things like Down's, Cerebral Palsy, homosexuality, and even controlling for later onset afflictions like Schizophrenia and ALS would be beneficial outcomes of eugenics.

    I'm not speaking of behavior programming such as creating worker drones or conscious absent soldiers. Besides, the world has the Chinese so we're close enough already. (that's for you, T. :) )
  110. I believe destroying one’s own offspring, because it is defective, is a sin against God. Never-the-less, were I ever in that position, it’s an abomination I’d be sorely tempted to commit.

    I thank God I never found myself in such a position.

  111. @Screwtape
    The low birthrate feeds the perfection obsession here too.

    Late marriage and careerism and feminist check-the-box one and done children are reverse engineered Harvard grads. The above-replacement vs 1.0 birthrate families do tend to differ in their aspirations toward perfection.

    I have a close friend in early childhood Ed. Seems kids are either ‘special needs’ aka no father in the home or ‘very advanced’ aka insufferable double income outsourcers insisting that their genius spawn maintain the pre-ordained trajectory.

    It will be interesting to see the science driving eugenics collide with all these last-egg IVF kids that seem to also be mysteriously aligned with the ‘spike’ in spergy-spectrum special needs.

    What will the messaging be when the perfect designer baby and the you can have it all last egg baby are at opposite ends of the science?

    Also, would ‘genetic defect’ also include not my DNA? Now that would be interesting.

    “genetic defect” is a phrase that is to some extent in the eye of the beholder. When full genome sequencing of embryos a la Razib Khan becomes commonplace, the definition will presumably expand.

  112. @Anon
    Americans oppose sensible eugenic policies, even to prevent inheritance of serious disease. A whopping 83% oppose genetic enhancements for intelligence and looks:

    https://www.statnews.com/2016/02/11/stat-harvard-poll-gene-editing/

    Honestly, I find this mind-boggling. Of course, some naysayer could come up with a list of potential drawbacks (as they could with any technology), but the potential benefits to human health and accomplishment seem so great as to easily overwhelm these concerns. Who wouldn't want their child to be smarter, taller, healthier, and better looking? Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life - obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders? What gives?

    My vague impression on the subject relates to personality differences between Asians and other racial groups. Asians seem to be, on the whole, far less moralistic - far less susceptible to feelings of disgust. You see this in their cuisine: many Japanese have no problems eating barely dead frog sashimi and grilling live octopus; the Koreans eat live octopus; some Chinese restaurants serve live fish; many South East Asians eat live shrimp meals. You don't see that in Western cultures nearly at all.

    Frog Sashimi: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_NW2A9D-tw

    Dancing Shrimp salad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PX3NNmtRyI

    Chinese live fish: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPp1HmUe9Mw

    Korean live octopus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYDkzqCfJzg

    You additionally see this difference in personality in their entertainment industries, but to a more limited degree: Asians (not all but a large number) seem far less concerned with the subtle emotional and social aspects of many Western-type movies and books of yesteryear, before the fall in quality of Western entertainment that is; Asian entertainment revolves around broad-topic "things" over "feels" - the analytical side of romantic partnerships over pure feelings of love, science fiction robots, world-building over character building (which is why Japanese anime feels so different to Westerners - imaginative worlds with fantastical creatures and concepts but more limited character nuance), ...

    As an aside, perhaps someone should conduct a poll asking what percentage of Western people would support germline enhancements if other people were already doing it; that might tell you the potential for adoption in the West as the Chinese are certain to go down that route at some point.

    How long will it be until we have birth tourism *from* the US to China for the genetic engineering that is restricted in the US?

  113. @Twinkie

    Asians seem to be, on the whole, far less moralistic – far less susceptible to feelings of disgust.
     
    Right now I am very susceptible to being disgusted by your stupidity.

    On a more serious note, you've never read Confucius, I gather.

    One thing to keep in mind is that "Asian" is a rather nebulous category. In terms of the population in the United States, its composition has varied wildly by region and time period. Korean evangelicals, on the one hand, and atheist (worse, pro-communist) Chinese, on the other, are going to have very different outlooks on social and moral philosophy (and they are neighboring populations "back home"!).

    It is true that eugenic tendencies and feelings are very strong in East Asia, and this was so long before the days of CRISPR. I suspect that much of this has to do with pronounced East Asian tendencies toward perfectionism and low fertility.

    Genetic screening/engineering is the ultimate expression of the K-selection strategy in action!

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    I simply don't get the analysis here. I didn't get when it was introduced here severeal months back in an article on the cite. And I certainly don't get it whenever it was raised in the past or now.

    The K strategy only makes sense it has nonthreatening environments -- nonstressful. But under the stress which many are complaining is here or is on its way -- the R strategy will beat out K strategy without so much as a blink.

    There's a reason there's more Tuna than whales.


    " [Search domain www.bioexpedition.com/yellowfin-tuna/] https://www.bioexpedition.com/yellowfin-tuna/
    Yellowfin Tuna Reproduction. Spawning can occur at various times of the year depending on the locations. The Yellowfin Tuna may travel long distances to take part in such efforts for mating. They are ready for mating when they are from 2 to 3 years of age. A female can release up to 10 million eggs per season."

  114. @MarkU
    It has long been established that people with low IQ's tend to have more children than people with high IQ's. It is also entirely obvious that we are screwing the world up with the numbers we already have. What we are effectively doing is sweeping away the natural world to make room for more and more increasingly devalued and increasingly stupid human stock. Anything within reason that bucks that trend is fine by me.

    Reducing wealth inequality is one rhetorical approach for courting the left. If a poor couple has a net worth of $5k, if they have one child that child gets $5k worth of investment. If they have 5, each only get $1k. If an affluent couple with a net worth of $1m have a single child, it gets $1m. If they have 5, each ‘only’ get $200k. ‘Eugenics’ = child investment disparity of $195,000/child; ‘dysgenics’ = child investment disparity of $999,000.

    • Replies: @res
    That is an interesting take on this.

    It is also a very useful way of looking at the effect differential fertility has on wealth inequality right now.
  115. @Talha

    That is, I would seek to ensure a fertility differential favoring the latter.
     
    Is that through government intervention?

    If so, how would that work exactly? Socialism for the rich? Tax breaks depending on IQ testing and facial symmetry? Feel free to ignore if you don't mean through government-mandated programs.

    I would only attempt to ensure that the numbers of intelligent, healthy and beautiful people grew at a faster rate.
     
    It is the way of the world that this would only move the goal post. These assessments are all relative and subjective. In a future society in which beauty and intelligence is ubiquitous; a woman considered an 8 now would be a 4 or a 5 and a generally intelligent man might be the equivalent of the village idiot.

    I remember my mother-in-law telling me once about her childhood in Sweden (around WW2). She said the most beautiful girl in her class had brown hair and brown eyes. Since all the other kids had blonde hair and blue/green eyes, they had little value for beauty to offer in that market environment.

    Peace.

    Are you married into the Pelosi family?!

    • Replies: @Talha
    Are they Swedish? I married into a branch of this (originally German) house:
    https://www.houseofnames.com/troye-family-crest

    Apparently the ones my wife’s family descends from were sell-swords that ended up in Scandinavia.

    Peace.
  116. 3132248

    Schoolmarm disapproves of “turdlets” and implied praise of genocide. Please respect the comment guidelines here.

    • Replies: @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    You have to admit, you at least chuckled when reading his comment.
  117. @res
    Here is the CDC birth data if anyone wants to take a look at it.
    https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data_access/vitalstatsonline.htm

    Wow. For 2017 they supply a 231MB zip file which unpacks to a 5GB (!) text file. They sure don't believe in making it easy.

    This page might be helpful: https://www.r-bloggers.com/analyze-the-national-vital-statistics-system-nvss-with-r-and-monetdb/
    it links to: https://blog.revolutionanalytics.com/2012/07/importing-public-data-with-sas-instructions-into-r.html

    This looks like it might be even more helpful: https://github.com/Mikuana/vitalstatistics

    AE, are you up for digging into this?

    I’ll bookmark it, thanks.

  118. @songbird
    People with Down's get Alzheimer's early too. Risk starts at about 45. Majority have it by 60. I imagine it progresses quickly, but it must be expensive and difficult to care for them nevertheless.

    It seems like it is also very expensive to put them in public schools. I don't think they can really be taught to contribute to the economy either. Not that I'm advocating policy - just that I am saying I can understand why some people think it is murky. But, then again, they may add some not easily quantifiable value to society, something like humility, or dare I say it, even love.

    One time I was punched in the face by one, who had been riled up by some idiots slapping the back of his neck. (Stronger arm then you'd expect) And I couldn't hit him back because I knew it was wrong. There may be some intangible value in an experience like that.

    I had a teacher who worked with them for a short time, and she seemed to be moved by the experience.

    Kind of like a beloved family dog. That is not intended to dehumanize but to indicate that IQ isn’t everything.

  119. @silviosilver

    I had a teacher who worked with them for a short time, and she seemed to be moved by the experience.
     
    I could never doing anything like that, so it's great that there are people like that teacher in this world to make up for heartless bastards like me.

    I was taken on a field trip to a school for spastics (or whatever the correct term is these days) one day when I was ten or eleven. I found it extremely disturbing. I do recall observing that some of my classmates appeared to be completely at ease with it.

    I didn't find that strange though. We already had one spastic kid in our school who had to walk around on crutches (and barely even managed that) and sounded like Chewbacca when he talked. Some kids really enjoyed helping him and being around him. We all had to take turns to assist him, and whenever it was my turn I could barely even stand to look at him, and I'd wonder why the hell I was forced to help him when there were kids available who actually enjoyed it. If the goal was to teach me compassion, it either failed completely or had the opposite effect.

    Way on the male/systemizing end of the cognitive distribution, you are!

  120. @Anonymous
    The question is really more of a proxy for eugenics, rather than asking about eugenics itself directly. Specifically, the question is asking whether or not one supports preventing significant levels of dysgenics. "Genetic defects" implies significant dysgenics. It's asking not whether one supports abortion for eugenic purposes, or for simply maintaining the genetic status quo, but for preventing significant levels of dysgenics.

    Whites, blacks, and Hispanics responding to this question are going to be influenced by Christianity and Liberalism. For the Christians, "abortion" tends to immediately and unequivocally signify something bad, and thus they will tend to be against it for whatever reason. They will mentally ignore whatever clause comes after the word "abort" in a question like this. It won't register. For the liberals, abortion is fine because the free choice of women is sanctified and trumps almost everything. However, once "genetic defects" are brought up, it conjures up images of Hitler and becomes bad. They become less supportive of something like this. Abortion is fine as a woman's sacred right to choose, because she wants to advance her career or just doesn't feel like having a child, but once "genetic defects" comes into the equation, it becomes iffier.

    Indeed. It’s like the “hate crime” distinction without an effective difference. The unborn baby remains unborn either way.

  121. @Mr. Rational

    “You guys are inferior to black men who, as alpha males, should take the prettiest white women while leaving fat ugly white girls for beta white guys.”
     
    Heh.  As it would happen, when I was out to dinner tonight in my Whitopia a couple was seated at the table next to mine.

    He:  tall, presumably good-looking VERY black male.
    She:  short, very dumpy (BMI 45-50), late 30's or older White female.

    He could have done far better among his own race, but he chose the fat ugly White girl instead.  It was loud enough in the venue that I could not catch his accent to judge whether he was an American n1663r or foreign, but her choice of partner left nothing to doubt:  she could not do better.  This proves the racio-sexual hierarchy:  among black males, White female trumps black, period.

    (BMI 45-50)

    Hyperbole? That’s morbidly obese.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
    Not hyperbole.  She was a roller.  She didn't walk, she waddled.
  122. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian

    White race has gotten so pathetic.
     
    What a crock. How many couples like that do you actually see? Beautiful white woman with strong black man. I've seen, maybe 2 couples like that in my whole life. Usually, the black-white couples are very poor looking, and the woman looks like white trash.

    It actually shows the strength and resistance of the white race. Despite the constant Jewish brainwashing, very few quality white women are interested in negroes. I understand the meme, but you've gotta look outside at the reality sometimes.

    3x as many white women are interested in black men as white men are interested in black women. With whites/Asians, it is virtually the reverse.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    3x as many white women are interested in black men as white men are interested in black women.
     
    It's the hair thing.
    , @Twinkie

    3x as many white women are interested in black men as white men are interested in black women. With whites/Asians, it is virtually the reverse.
     
    1. Marriage numbers are different.

    2. With Asians, you have to look at the American-born numbers.
    , @Meretricious
    most white women interested in black men are proles, fat and stupid
  123. @Talha

    Black women are the least feminine and are at the absolute bottom of the spectrum of desirability.
     
    Depends on the Black woman. My experience has mostly been in the Muslim community and the sisters who are Black (meaning African American) seem feminine enough, especially the ones that are on the traditional spectrum, they can be quite feminine.

    As far as non-Muslim Black women - I have a difficult time understanding them and they do seem to be the least compatible to someone like me who values a traditional family.

    Now as far as immigrant Black women, they seem to still have that traditional femininity (good wife/mother material) about them. I know a few convert brothers that married them (mostly White guys, but also one Puerto Rican) - the wives being mostly East African. They seem to have a good and stable family life.

    One of those brothers that I knew closely had nothing but praise for his wife. He was from a lower-class, not too educated background - what many people would call "White trash". He actually initially wanted to join the NOI since that was the only thing he knew about Islam, but they refused him because he was White. Anyway, he told me how his parents fell in love with his wife because of how well she treated them, how she never argued or complained about money (even though he didn't make much money) and was always encouraging and lifting up her man. On top of that, she was a gracious host and a good cook and bore him four beautiful kids (White and East African combo is actually different than with West Africans - there is more of a fusion and seems to have less of a contrast). Women like that still exist (Black or otherwise).

    Peace.

    Hey Talha,

    Sorry to hijack this thread but it’s in its end stages anyways.

    Here is a picture from a wonderful Toronto high school. As you can see, hundreds of your Muslim girls, as well as brown girls of all varieties (and a couple whites) are out protesting today.

    They are *so* angry that Premier Doug Ford is getting rid of the new “sex-ed” curriculum – written by a pedophile – that teaches about homosexuals in 3rd grade, with transgenders and gay sex being taught in the 8th grade. As you can see, the SJW brainwashing affects all races, but especially seems to hit brown girls the hardest.

    View post on imgur.com

    • Replies: @Talha
    This is a problem and a good brother has been pointing this out on his invaluable blog:
    https://muslimskeptic.com/2019/04/02/muslimgirl-and-friends-wage-ideological-war-on-the-muslim-community/

    I have had to work much harder on my daughter from getting pozzed than my sons - girls seem to be much more susceptible. I’ve seen it in my cousins’ kids too.

    But there is a solution and it’s not the same thing that works for boys - you have to know what is at the core of females which is a stronger pull than males.

    However, that photo doesn’t really fit your description; it looks like a bunch of brown girls protesting about education, but it’s not indicative of anything regarding sex-Ed by a pedophile. I’m not saying that’s not true, I’m just saying they could just as easily be protesting cuts in education for indigenous tribal areas...

    Peace.

    , @BengaliCanadianDude
    Your overall point cannot be denied, and yes, our girls and boys are slowly turning into degenerates themselves, bowing down to the SchlomoHomo agendas and the likes. However, you have failed to prove your point. There were other things involved, regarding autism funding, classroom size changes, teachers cuts and other things. How can you be so sure from this one picture alone that it is solely because of the homosexual question?
  124. @Priss Factor
    Looks like the bigger problem is Ewwwwgenics.

    https://hornet.com/stories/2019-hump-film-festival/

    The abyss has been staring back into us for a long time now.

  125. @Audacious Epigone
    3x as many white women are interested in black men as white men are interested in black women. With whites/Asians, it is virtually the reverse.

    3x as many white women are interested in black men as white men are interested in black women.

    It’s the hair thing.

  126. @DaninMD
    AE --

    I think you have to look at actual revealed preferences rather than what people say. The difference is profound.

    https://www.focusonthefamily.com/socialissues/life-issues/down-syndrome/a-world-with-no-down-syndrome-babies

    "67-85% of [fetuses] diagnosed with Down syndrome are aborted in the United States. As a result, the population of people living with the condition has decreased by 30%. In other countries, the abortion rate for Down syndrome can be as high as 90% in the United Kingdom, 98% in Denmark and 100% in Iceland."

    Taking the middle of that range for the US, 75% of Americans "have an abortion if it was revealed that the unborn baby would have “genetic defects”".

    That is a far cry from the 30% who will admit as much.

    Taking the middle of that range for the US, 75% of Americans “have an abortion if it was revealed that the unborn baby would have “genetic defects””.

    That is a far cry from the 30% who will admit as much.

    I’m not entirely surprised. The traditional idea behind having children, aside from passing on your family name/likeness, was to have someone to comfort you in your old age. Down Syndrome children are typically sterile, so that even if they get married, typically to others with the same condition, they can’t have children. As to having someone to help with the trials of old age, Down Syndrome children not only provide zero assistance, they’re a source of constant worry. The average couple looking to have children will typically abort and try again rather than have 1 Down Syndrome child suck up all their time, energy and money. It’s not pretty, but it’s likely the principal explanation.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    The average couple looking to have children will typically abort and try again rather than have 1 Down Syndrome child suck up all their time, energy and money. It’s not pretty, but it’s likely the principal explanation.
     
    Down's (perpetual) children often have serious circulatory and digestive malformations, too.  Back before modern surgery there was no problem with sustaining them because the majority simply died in infancy.  Arguably, they were never meant to live and what we are doing in the name of "pro-life" is anti-nature.
  127. @Audacious Epigone
    Genetic screening/engineering is the ultimate expression of the K-selection strategy in action!

    I simply don’t get the analysis here. I didn’t get when it was introduced here severeal months back in an article on the cite. And I certainly don’t get it whenever it was raised in the past or now.

    The K strategy only makes sense it has nonthreatening environments — nonstressful. But under the stress which many are complaining is here or is on its way — the R strategy will beat out K strategy without so much as a blink.

    There’s a reason there’s more Tuna than whales.

    ” [Search domain http://www.bioexpedition.com/yellowfin-tuna/%5D https://www.bioexpedition.com/yellowfin-tuna/
    Yellowfin Tuna Reproduction. Spawning can occur at various times of the year depending on the locations. The Yellowfin Tuna may travel long distances to take part in such efforts for mating. They are ready for mating when they are from 2 to 3 years of age. A female can release up to 10 million eggs per season.”

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    The K strategy only makes sense it has nonthreatening environments
     
    Environments can be “threatening” for different reasons, e.g. random (or seemingly random) vs. predictable. Some people claim that this is Sub-Saharan Africa vs. Siberia.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    I find little utility in applying the theory to humans, especially by political orientation. Generally the argument is that lefties are more r-oriented but that flies in the face of actual fertility rates. Maybe it has some utility by race, but American blacks are less fecund than Amerindians and way less so than sub-Saharan Africans despite broadly sharing ~80% of their genes, so if it has any utility, it's limited.
  128. @EliteCommInc.
    I simply don't get the analysis here. I didn't get when it was introduced here severeal months back in an article on the cite. And I certainly don't get it whenever it was raised in the past or now.

    The K strategy only makes sense it has nonthreatening environments -- nonstressful. But under the stress which many are complaining is here or is on its way -- the R strategy will beat out K strategy without so much as a blink.

    There's a reason there's more Tuna than whales.


    " [Search domain www.bioexpedition.com/yellowfin-tuna/] https://www.bioexpedition.com/yellowfin-tuna/
    Yellowfin Tuna Reproduction. Spawning can occur at various times of the year depending on the locations. The Yellowfin Tuna may travel long distances to take part in such efforts for mating. They are ready for mating when they are from 2 to 3 years of age. A female can release up to 10 million eggs per season."

    The K strategy only makes sense it has nonthreatening environments

    Environments can be “threatening” for different reasons, e.g. random (or seemingly random) vs. predictable. Some people claim that this is Sub-Saharan Africa vs. Siberia.

  129. @Audacious Epigone
    3x as many white women are interested in black men as white men are interested in black women. With whites/Asians, it is virtually the reverse.

    3x as many white women are interested in black men as white men are interested in black women. With whites/Asians, it is virtually the reverse.

    1. Marriage numbers are different.

    2. With Asians, you have to look at the American-born numbers.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    These figures are a couple of decades old now, but the ratio pretty much holds by marriage and by cohabitation.
  130. anon[744] • Disclaimer says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike
    I suppose the line is drawn in different places for different people. Attempting to breed what is essentially a more efficient human is not an immoral endeavor. The fewer children born with even minor birth defects, the better.

    The predictable virtue signalling from our usual suspects on the topic of the mentally (and physically) retarded is another example of our dysfunctional decline. So many resources are wasted on caring for these people who are unable to keep themselves alive independently, most of those resources courtesy of the taxpayer. (AE - I'd be curious to see the relationship between class and the mentally retarded - I suspect more of our retarded infants are born to people nearer poverty than not, meaning the parents are not capable of caring for the child without government assistance.) The trade off of a Down's sufferer providing what is essentially the same thing a registered comfort dog is not reasonable.

    There are several mentally retarded people that I have the misfortune of interacting with on some level. The local grocery store hires them to bag groceries. They are terrible at it, and they are either extremely aloof or borderline obnoxious. At the gym I used to lift weights at, the manager would let a woman bring her moderately severe Down's child run free in the weights area while she was on the treadmill. This kid was obnoxious; laughing and running and shrieking all over and generally being a nuisance to the rest of the patrons. Not to mention the fact that kids was a major injury risk to himself and others. A softball teammate of my older daughter has an autistic little brother. During games, he would crouch right behind the home plate backstop, play in the gravel and make a loud "reeeerearrreeeerear" sound. He would do it the entire game. Every game. For the 4 years his sister and my daughter were teammates. At other times he was just rude and ignorant - walking up behind other parents and stealing their hats or glasses, or smacking them on the head or arms. His parents did nothing to stop him. (I'm not even ashamed to admit that several times I imagined a pack of hyenas emerging from the nearby woods and dragging the kid off as he giggled, unaware of the horrible death that soon awaited him.) The couple of other Down's sufferers I know of, are mostly better behaved but still prone to annoying public outbursts.

    The reality is that the love and affection these broken humans may or may not provide their families is in no way close to being worth the massive burden they are for their parents, the taxpayers, and just about everyone else. (Present day parents could never and would never admit to it, due to our society's bi-polar relationship with "morality")

    If there was a way to prevent anymore of them from being conceived, that would be a great thing.

    Attempting to breed what is essentially a more efficient human is not an immoral endeavor.

    except for this line^^ i agree with most of the rest of the post

    virtue signalling on how wonderful retards are has grown old. i wonder if it was started so that whites would more easily tolerate forced integration and invasion of low IQ black and brown

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    virtue signalling on how wonderful retards are has grown old.
     
    The revealed preference numbers (30% say it's OK to abort a Down or otherwise defective fetus, 75% actually abort) are eerily like the way White shitlibs claim to love blacks but segregate aggressively under the fig leaf of "good schools" and "safe neighborhoods".
    , @MikeatMikedotMike
    See comment 154 for clarification on that sentence.
  131. @anon

    With respect to feeling “cursed,” I’ve always felt this way about my hair, and the feeling was particularly pronounced in high school. I’m quite happy about the way I look, but there is really only one basic hairstyle that looks good on me. So as a younger man, when everyone else was getting the fashionable hair styles, I couldn’t follow along, because my hair just wouldn’t stay the way it was styled. Christ I hated that.
     
    life is rough

    try going bald by 22 and then complain about your hairstyle

    Well, the point I was trying to make was that even feeling “cursed” by such imperfections is really not that big a deal. So if a “eugenically minded” society were to deem certain traits more worthy of propagation than others, and you don’t happen to have those traits, it’s really not that different to the world we already live in. Therefore it’s nothing to inordinately fear.

  132. @res
    Here is the CDC birth data if anyone wants to take a look at it.
    https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data_access/vitalstatsonline.htm

    Wow. For 2017 they supply a 231MB zip file which unpacks to a 5GB (!) text file. They sure don't believe in making it easy.

    This page might be helpful: https://www.r-bloggers.com/analyze-the-national-vital-statistics-system-nvss-with-r-and-monetdb/
    it links to: https://blog.revolutionanalytics.com/2012/07/importing-public-data-with-sas-instructions-into-r.html

    This looks like it might be even more helpful: https://github.com/Mikuana/vitalstatistics

    AE, are you up for digging into this?

    Yeah, but they don’t anymore register father’s race as they used to. I have some tables from 2007 or so where you can see, in percentages, which percentage of white, black, Asian….mothers had children with white, black, Asian…. fathers- which you cannot detect now. Of course, even then there was a category not stated, not recorded & similar, but you would basically get the data.

    Now, with this type of data- you cannot.

    • Replies: @res
    My understanding (from silviosilver's comment) is that the father's race along with mother's race is still in the data files but not the online data browser (or reports, it seems). Are your tables from a PDF, online, or where?

    Some notes from the user's guide to the data.

    There are multiple race fields at varying levels of granularity.

    105-106 2 MRACE31 Mother’s Race Recode 31
    107 2 MRACE6 Mother’s Race Recode 6
    108-109 2 MRACE15 Mother’s Race Recode 15
    111 1 MRACEIMP Mother’s Race Imputed Flag Blank Mother’s race not imputed
    151-152 2 FRACE31 Father’s Race Recode 31
    153 1 FRACE6 Father’s Race Recode 6
    154-155 2 FRACE15 Father’s Race Recode 15
     
    I did not see how they handled missing father race data. Here is how they impute the mother's race when necessary.

    Where race of the mother is not reported, if the race of the father is known, the race of the father is assigned to the mother. When information is not available for either parent, the race of the mother is imputed according to the specific race of the mother on the preceding record with a known race of mother. In 2017, race of mother was imputed for 6.1% of births (by occurrence).
     
    P.S. Any idea when the policy changed? You show tables from 2005 and 2011. Looks like another "gift" from Obama's second term.
  133. @Audacious Epigone
    Are you married into the Pelosi family?!

    Are they Swedish? I married into a branch of this (originally German) house:
    https://www.houseofnames.com/troye-family-crest

    Apparently the ones my wife’s family descends from were sell-swords that ended up in Scandinavia.

    Peace.

  134. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Hey Talha,

    Sorry to hijack this thread but it's in its end stages anyways.

    Here is a picture from a wonderful Toronto high school. As you can see, hundreds of your Muslim girls, as well as brown girls of all varieties (and a couple whites) are out protesting today.

    They are *so* angry that Premier Doug Ford is getting rid of the new "sex-ed" curriculum - written by a pedophile - that teaches about homosexuals in 3rd grade, with transgenders and gay sex being taught in the 8th grade. As you can see, the SJW brainwashing affects all races, but especially seems to hit brown girls the hardest.

    https://imgur.com/SuremET

    This is a problem and a good brother has been pointing this out on his invaluable blog:
    https://muslimskeptic.com/2019/04/02/muslimgirl-and-friends-wage-ideological-war-on-the-muslim-community/

    I have had to work much harder on my daughter from getting pozzed than my sons – girls seem to be much more susceptible. I’ve seen it in my cousins’ kids too.

    But there is a solution and it’s not the same thing that works for boys – you have to know what is at the core of females which is a stronger pull than males.

    However, that photo doesn’t really fit your description; it looks like a bunch of brown girls protesting about education, but it’s not indicative of anything regarding sex-Ed by a pedophile. I’m not saying that’s not true, I’m just saying they could just as easily be protesting cuts in education for indigenous tribal areas…

    Peace.

    • Replies: @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Thanks for the link, it seems like a decent blog.

    I have had to work much harder on my daughter from getting pozzed than my sons – girls seem to be much more susceptible.
     
    I think it's because of the mothering instinct of girls and women. It seems to be easy for liberals to shift the focus of this drive from "family" and "kids" and "husband" to "gays" and "women's rights" and "refugees". They just want to be nice and help people in need. And they're taught that gays (for instance) are the most oppressed.

    I would say that much of it can be undone with proper male role models. For instance, I've met some "right wing" women online and IRL. They don't really care about politics, as with the majority of women. But they have right wing boyfriends, or husbands, and this seems to be enough to snap them out of their delusions.

    But there is a solution and it’s not the same thing that works for boys – you have to know what is at the core of females which is a stronger pull than males.
     
    What do you say the solutions are? And what do you think is at the core?

    it looks like a bunch of brown girls protesting about education,
     
    There were walkouts yesterday across Ontario to protest "education". It seems to be with respect to a mix of things. The repeal of the new sex-ed is certainly a major factor, along with banning cell phones in class and increasing class sizes. But basically the teachers are protesting through impressionable students, because the voting public is so fed up with their sh!t!

    One more thought: I read the Muslim Skeptic's response to The Great Replacement, and it was much better than anything I read in the MSM. I'm assuming the guy doesn't make millions of $$ per year either. Which leads to this: only the right wing, and conservatism, can stop the extreme right. They understand the motivations but offer a more reasonable solution, whereas libs blast on repeat: "racist, racist, racist".
  135. @Audacious Epigone
    (BMI 45-50)

    Hyperbole? That's morbidly obese.

    Not hyperbole.  She was a roller.  She didn’t walk, she waddled.

  136. @Johann Ricke

    Taking the middle of that range for the US, 75% of Americans “have an abortion if it was revealed that the unborn baby would have “genetic defects””.

    That is a far cry from the 30% who will admit as much.
     

    I'm not entirely surprised. The traditional idea behind having children, aside from passing on your family name/likeness, was to have someone to comfort you in your old age. Down Syndrome children are typically sterile, so that even if they get married, typically to others with the same condition, they can't have children. As to having someone to help with the trials of old age, Down Syndrome children not only provide zero assistance, they're a source of constant worry. The average couple looking to have children will typically abort and try again rather than have 1 Down Syndrome child suck up all their time, energy and money. It's not pretty, but it's likely the principal explanation.

    The average couple looking to have children will typically abort and try again rather than have 1 Down Syndrome child suck up all their time, energy and money. It’s not pretty, but it’s likely the principal explanation.

    Down’s (perpetual) children often have serious circulatory and digestive malformations, too.  Back before modern surgery there was no problem with sustaining them because the majority simply died in infancy.  Arguably, they were never meant to live and what we are doing in the name of “pro-life” is anti-nature.

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Arguably, they were never meant to live and what we are doing in the name of “pro-life” is anti-nature.
     
    You won’t use antibiotics or have major surgery?
  137. @anon

    Attempting to breed what is essentially a more efficient human is not an immoral endeavor.
     
    except for this line^^ i agree with most of the rest of the post

    virtue signalling on how wonderful retards are has grown old. i wonder if it was started so that whites would more easily tolerate forced integration and invasion of low IQ black and brown

    virtue signalling on how wonderful retards are has grown old.

    The revealed preference numbers (30% say it’s OK to abort a Down or otherwise defective fetus, 75% actually abort) are eerily like the way White shitlibs claim to love blacks but segregate aggressively under the fig leaf of “good schools” and “safe neighborhoods”.

    • Replies: @anon
    similarly from the chart if blacks were to be believed they are the least likely to abort a child with genetic defects but aren't blacks the most likely to abort overall?

    seems like people are lying
    , @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    At the gym I go to, there are usually some retards there, doing some machines one on one with some help. Some kind of group that takes them to the gym. I always have to wonder why these people exist. They are completely useless, a burden in fact, and in any earlier time they would be dead.

    Families are doing the humane thing by aborting heavily retarded fetuses.

    The funny thing is to see the (mostly brown) FOBs reaction to them. They keep a very large distance and look at them with disgust (the same way I do). They probably think "damn these canadians are crazy!" and I can't really disagree!
  138. @Mr. Rational

    virtue signalling on how wonderful retards are has grown old.
     
    The revealed preference numbers (30% say it's OK to abort a Down or otherwise defective fetus, 75% actually abort) are eerily like the way White shitlibs claim to love blacks but segregate aggressively under the fig leaf of "good schools" and "safe neighborhoods".

    similarly from the chart if blacks were to be believed they are the least likely to abort a child with genetic defects but aren’t blacks the most likely to abort overall?

    seems like people are lying

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    They're aborting for different reasons, presumably.
  139. @Talha
    This is a problem and a good brother has been pointing this out on his invaluable blog:
    https://muslimskeptic.com/2019/04/02/muslimgirl-and-friends-wage-ideological-war-on-the-muslim-community/

    I have had to work much harder on my daughter from getting pozzed than my sons - girls seem to be much more susceptible. I’ve seen it in my cousins’ kids too.

    But there is a solution and it’s not the same thing that works for boys - you have to know what is at the core of females which is a stronger pull than males.

    However, that photo doesn’t really fit your description; it looks like a bunch of brown girls protesting about education, but it’s not indicative of anything regarding sex-Ed by a pedophile. I’m not saying that’s not true, I’m just saying they could just as easily be protesting cuts in education for indigenous tribal areas...

    Peace.

    Thanks for the link, it seems like a decent blog.

    I have had to work much harder on my daughter from getting pozzed than my sons – girls seem to be much more susceptible.

    I think it’s because of the mothering instinct of girls and women. It seems to be easy for liberals to shift the focus of this drive from “family” and “kids” and “husband” to “gays” and “women’s rights” and “refugees”. They just want to be nice and help people in need. And they’re taught that gays (for instance) are the most oppressed.

    I would say that much of it can be undone with proper male role models. For instance, I’ve met some “right wing” women online and IRL. They don’t really care about politics, as with the majority of women. But they have right wing boyfriends, or husbands, and this seems to be enough to snap them out of their delusions.

    But there is a solution and it’s not the same thing that works for boys – you have to know what is at the core of females which is a stronger pull than males.

    What do you say the solutions are? And what do you think is at the core?

    it looks like a bunch of brown girls protesting about education,

    There were walkouts yesterday across Ontario to protest “education”. It seems to be with respect to a mix of things. The repeal of the new sex-ed is certainly a major factor, along with banning cell phones in class and increasing class sizes. But basically the teachers are protesting through impressionable students, because the voting public is so fed up with their sh!t!

    One more thought: I read the Muslim Skeptic’s response to The Great Replacement, and it was much better than anything I read in the MSM. I’m assuming the guy doesn’t make millions of $$ per year either. Which leads to this: only the right wing, and conservatism, can stop the extreme right. They understand the motivations but offer a more reasonable solution, whereas libs blast on repeat: “racist, racist, racist”.

    • Replies: @Talha

    They just want to be nice and help people in need.
     
    This is exactly it.

    What do you say the solutions are? And what do you think is at the core?
     
    They are far more spiritual creatures than people in the alt-right give them credit for. Which is why the alt-right will remain mostly a sausage-fest until they figure this issue out and make room for it. Unless there is a solid spiritual program to elevate people, you are going nowhere other than remaining in a mode where your only success is in how many people come to your side because of the excess of the other side - it is not a good place to be to belong at the mercy of the decisions of your opponent. This is one of the reasons why about 2/3 to 3/4 of our converts are women - my wife just received an email the other week from a lady who wants to convert.

    I would say that much of it can be undone with proper male role models.
     
    This is key.

    You mentioned the "mothering instinct of girls and women" which are deeply rooted in the spirit/soul. To simply be dismissive of wombs as a means to an end (reproducing one's ethnicity at replacement rates) is to miss the greater tragedy that has happened in the West. It has lost the sacred notion of the word "mother"...they must bring it back. It must be shown how much they have to gain in life from motherhood rather than every other distraction that is being thrown at them. But it has to be real, it has to be shown in the action of men and how they prioritize mothers in their life and in their societies:
    "Jahima came to the Prophet (pbuh) and he said, 'O Messenger of Allah, I intend to join the expedition (for jihad) and I seek your counsel.' The Prophet asked, 'Do you have a mother?' He said, 'Yes.' The Prophet said, 'Stay with her, for Paradise is beneath her feet.'” - reported in Nisa'i

    The way you treat your mother should be witnessed by your daughter and be an exemplary reason for what she sees in store for her as she ages in lieu of whatever else the world is throwing at her to convince her that there are better things for her in life.

    Once you have imbued this notion and understanding of the sacred role of mother in a young woman, she will naturally be more on guard against those things that will detract her from this.

    And of course, you have to provide some outlet for that innate spiritual desire they have otherwise it will be directed to whatever Left-liberal cause is being touted as the great new "moral crusade". If you can spark that spiritual desire, they are far more fascinated in that than any politics.

    There were walkouts yesterday across Ontario to protest “education”.
     
    That sounds more like it.

    But basically the teachers are protesting through impressionable students
     
    Figures - not that difficult; kids like days off of school. People need to be willing to take their kids out of the classroom and starve the beast. This should be prominent in people's minds right now as far as organizing and creating local support networks.

    I read the Muslim Skeptic’s response to The Great Replacement, and it was much better than anything I read in the MSM.
     
    Exactly.

    I’m assuming the guy doesn’t make millions of $$ per year either.
     
    No - and in fact, he gets hit by a lot of the "woke" Muslims supporting the poz. Mostly ad hominem, nothing dealing with the crux of his arguments.

    Which leads to this: only the right wing, and conservatism, can stop the extreme right. They understand the motivations but offer a more reasonable solution, whereas libs blast on repeat: “racist, racist, racist”.
     
    Exactly. The extreme-right is simply the outcome of the extreme-left pushing and pushing. The underlying motivational factors that give rise to this can easily be understood by those who have read into history and have a realistic view of human beings, natural law, etc.

    Peace.
  140. @Mr. Rational

    virtue signalling on how wonderful retards are has grown old.
     
    The revealed preference numbers (30% say it's OK to abort a Down or otherwise defective fetus, 75% actually abort) are eerily like the way White shitlibs claim to love blacks but segregate aggressively under the fig leaf of "good schools" and "safe neighborhoods".

    At the gym I go to, there are usually some retards there, doing some machines one on one with some help. Some kind of group that takes them to the gym. I always have to wonder why these people exist. They are completely useless, a burden in fact, and in any earlier time they would be dead.

    Families are doing the humane thing by aborting heavily retarded fetuses.

    The funny thing is to see the (mostly brown) FOBs reaction to them. They keep a very large distance and look at them with disgust (the same way I do). They probably think “damn these canadians are crazy!” and I can’t really disagree!

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "I discourage abortion from white women, because I believe it is a byproduct of toxic feminism and the freedom to abort is causing society to falter. But for non-whites, I say full steam ahead."

    Completely insane from a moral perspective. Thankfully, few people take you seriously.

    "At the gym I go to, there are usually some retards there, doing some machines one on one with some help. Some kind of group that takes them to the gym. I always have to wonder why these people exist. They are completely useless, a burden in fact, and in any earlier time they would be dead."

    I see you have perfected virtue signaling. The bottom line is that you do not value human life.
  141. @Mr. Rational

    you may just get outvoted by those who’ve been born out of irresponsibility and carry around that genetic trait to the voting booth.
     
    Easy solution:  pay them to use long-term contraception and also stay off the voting rolls.  If they go off contraception their money stops immediately but they don't get to vote for 1 year.  The high time-preference people will neither reproduce nor vote very much.

    I don’t argue with your solution, Mr. Rational. My point was: how are you going to get something like that implemented? All those new votes (since the start of the Welfare State) are going to be against it, and we’d be outnumbered. This Socialist project has become too big a monster to kill easily. I don’t think voting will do it at this point – may have worked if suggested by Bill Clinton in 1995…

    … well, or if the states were left alone to do whatever they want to about it. In that case, I’d think you’d have a winner of a plan.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    how are you going to get something like that implemented?
     
    Never let a fiscal crisis go to waste.
  142. @Talha
    Possibly. Weird stuff - I just hope this doesn’t mean more pro-gay stuff in the city, I already have to explain more stuff than I want to my boys.

    Also, a bit off topic but some seriously wise words from Malcolm X (ra) to the Blacks of his day, which still ring true:
    https://www.twitter.com/CountOnRodney/status/1113242862076850176

    That brother was solid, probably why he had to be eliminated.

    Peace.

    Can urban centers get any gayer? I hope not.

    Though it may be incident, once again I am awed by the political power gays attain. I think black lesbians must really have disproportionate influence, if you include organizational structures at the workplace.

    I have been thinking about Nation of Islam. I honestly don’t know too much about it, but I wonder if one of the original attractions was trying to separate from the bad influence of general black culture. One of the ways, I genuinely feel sorry for blacks is a lot of their role models are sports or music stars or actors. Or even on the ground level, teachers, who, I think tend to be left of center and promote victimhood.

    • Replies: @Talha

    if you include organizational structures at the workplace
     
    I could easily see them getting ensconced in HR departments of major corporations and wreaking havoc.

    one of the original attractions was trying to separate from the bad influence of general black culture.
     
    Definitely a serious impetus. They still wear bow ties.

    a lot of their role models are sports or music stars or actors.
     
    The people you look up to and aspire to be makes a huge difference in one's life and for a community.

    Peace.
  143. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    At the gym I go to, there are usually some retards there, doing some machines one on one with some help. Some kind of group that takes them to the gym. I always have to wonder why these people exist. They are completely useless, a burden in fact, and in any earlier time they would be dead.

    Families are doing the humane thing by aborting heavily retarded fetuses.

    The funny thing is to see the (mostly brown) FOBs reaction to them. They keep a very large distance and look at them with disgust (the same way I do). They probably think "damn these canadians are crazy!" and I can't really disagree!

    “I discourage abortion from white women, because I believe it is a byproduct of toxic feminism and the freedom to abort is causing society to falter. But for non-whites, I say full steam ahead.”

    Completely insane from a moral perspective. Thankfully, few people take you seriously.

    “At the gym I go to, there are usually some retards there, doing some machines one on one with some help. Some kind of group that takes them to the gym. I always have to wonder why these people exist. They are completely useless, a burden in fact, and in any earlier time they would be dead.”

    I see you have perfected virtue signaling. The bottom line is that you do not value human life.

  144. @MikeatMikedotMike
    I suppose the line is drawn in different places for different people. Attempting to breed what is essentially a more efficient human is not an immoral endeavor. The fewer children born with even minor birth defects, the better.

    The predictable virtue signalling from our usual suspects on the topic of the mentally (and physically) retarded is another example of our dysfunctional decline. So many resources are wasted on caring for these people who are unable to keep themselves alive independently, most of those resources courtesy of the taxpayer. (AE - I'd be curious to see the relationship between class and the mentally retarded - I suspect more of our retarded infants are born to people nearer poverty than not, meaning the parents are not capable of caring for the child without government assistance.) The trade off of a Down's sufferer providing what is essentially the same thing a registered comfort dog is not reasonable.

    There are several mentally retarded people that I have the misfortune of interacting with on some level. The local grocery store hires them to bag groceries. They are terrible at it, and they are either extremely aloof or borderline obnoxious. At the gym I used to lift weights at, the manager would let a woman bring her moderately severe Down's child run free in the weights area while she was on the treadmill. This kid was obnoxious; laughing and running and shrieking all over and generally being a nuisance to the rest of the patrons. Not to mention the fact that kids was a major injury risk to himself and others. A softball teammate of my older daughter has an autistic little brother. During games, he would crouch right behind the home plate backstop, play in the gravel and make a loud "reeeerearrreeeerear" sound. He would do it the entire game. Every game. For the 4 years his sister and my daughter were teammates. At other times he was just rude and ignorant - walking up behind other parents and stealing their hats or glasses, or smacking them on the head or arms. His parents did nothing to stop him. (I'm not even ashamed to admit that several times I imagined a pack of hyenas emerging from the nearby woods and dragging the kid off as he giggled, unaware of the horrible death that soon awaited him.) The couple of other Down's sufferers I know of, are mostly better behaved but still prone to annoying public outbursts.

    The reality is that the love and affection these broken humans may or may not provide their families is in no way close to being worth the massive burden they are for their parents, the taxpayers, and just about everyone else. (Present day parents could never and would never admit to it, due to our society's bi-polar relationship with "morality")

    If there was a way to prevent anymore of them from being conceived, that would be a great thing.

    “There are several mentally retarded people that I have the misfortune of interacting with on some level.”

    You mean they had the misfortune of interacting with you.

    “The reality is that the love and affection these broken humans may or may not provide their families is in no way close to being worth the massive burden they are for their parents, the taxpayers, and just about everyone else. (Present day parents could never and would never admit to it, due to our society’s bi-polar relationship with “morality”)”

    Actually, the reality is that the love and affection for these human beings is well worth the cost, as the general public supports this “subsidizing”. It never ceases to amaze me the idiocy that is displayed on some of these threads.

  145. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Thanks for the link, it seems like a decent blog.

    I have had to work much harder on my daughter from getting pozzed than my sons – girls seem to be much more susceptible.
     
    I think it's because of the mothering instinct of girls and women. It seems to be easy for liberals to shift the focus of this drive from "family" and "kids" and "husband" to "gays" and "women's rights" and "refugees". They just want to be nice and help people in need. And they're taught that gays (for instance) are the most oppressed.

    I would say that much of it can be undone with proper male role models. For instance, I've met some "right wing" women online and IRL. They don't really care about politics, as with the majority of women. But they have right wing boyfriends, or husbands, and this seems to be enough to snap them out of their delusions.

    But there is a solution and it’s not the same thing that works for boys – you have to know what is at the core of females which is a stronger pull than males.
     
    What do you say the solutions are? And what do you think is at the core?

    it looks like a bunch of brown girls protesting about education,
     
    There were walkouts yesterday across Ontario to protest "education". It seems to be with respect to a mix of things. The repeal of the new sex-ed is certainly a major factor, along with banning cell phones in class and increasing class sizes. But basically the teachers are protesting through impressionable students, because the voting public is so fed up with their sh!t!

    One more thought: I read the Muslim Skeptic's response to The Great Replacement, and it was much better than anything I read in the MSM. I'm assuming the guy doesn't make millions of $$ per year either. Which leads to this: only the right wing, and conservatism, can stop the extreme right. They understand the motivations but offer a more reasonable solution, whereas libs blast on repeat: "racist, racist, racist".

    They just want to be nice and help people in need.

    This is exactly it.

    What do you say the solutions are? And what do you think is at the core?

    They are far more spiritual creatures than people in the alt-right give them credit for. Which is why the alt-right will remain mostly a sausage-fest until they figure this issue out and make room for it. Unless there is a solid spiritual program to elevate people, you are going nowhere other than remaining in a mode where your only success is in how many people come to your side because of the excess of the other side – it is not a good place to be to belong at the mercy of the decisions of your opponent. This is one of the reasons why about 2/3 to 3/4 of our converts are women – my wife just received an email the other week from a lady who wants to convert.

    I would say that much of it can be undone with proper male role models.

    This is key.

    You mentioned the “mothering instinct of girls and women” which are deeply rooted in the spirit/soul. To simply be dismissive of wombs as a means to an end (reproducing one’s ethnicity at replacement rates) is to miss the greater tragedy that has happened in the West. It has lost the sacred notion of the word “mother”…they must bring it back. It must be shown how much they have to gain in life from motherhood rather than every other distraction that is being thrown at them. But it has to be real, it has to be shown in the action of men and how they prioritize mothers in their life and in their societies:
    “Jahima came to the Prophet (pbuh) and he said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, I intend to join the expedition (for jihad) and I seek your counsel.’ The Prophet asked, ‘Do you have a mother?’ He said, ‘Yes.’ The Prophet said, ‘Stay with her, for Paradise is beneath her feet.’” – reported in Nisa’i

    The way you treat your mother should be witnessed by your daughter and be an exemplary reason for what she sees in store for her as she ages in lieu of whatever else the world is throwing at her to convince her that there are better things for her in life.

    Once you have imbued this notion and understanding of the sacred role of mother in a young woman, she will naturally be more on guard against those things that will detract her from this.

    And of course, you have to provide some outlet for that innate spiritual desire they have otherwise it will be directed to whatever Left-liberal cause is being touted as the great new “moral crusade”. If you can spark that spiritual desire, they are far more fascinated in that than any politics.

    There were walkouts yesterday across Ontario to protest “education”.

    That sounds more like it.

    But basically the teachers are protesting through impressionable students

    Figures – not that difficult; kids like days off of school. People need to be willing to take their kids out of the classroom and starve the beast. This should be prominent in people’s minds right now as far as organizing and creating local support networks.

    I read the Muslim Skeptic’s response to The Great Replacement, and it was much better than anything I read in the MSM.

    Exactly.

    I’m assuming the guy doesn’t make millions of $$ per year either.

    No – and in fact, he gets hit by a lot of the “woke” Muslims supporting the poz. Mostly ad hominem, nothing dealing with the crux of his arguments.

    Which leads to this: only the right wing, and conservatism, can stop the extreme right. They understand the motivations but offer a more reasonable solution, whereas libs blast on repeat: “racist, racist, racist”.

    Exactly. The extreme-right is simply the outcome of the extreme-left pushing and pushing. The underlying motivational factors that give rise to this can easily be understood by those who have read into history and have a realistic view of human beings, natural law, etc.

    Peace.

  146. @songbird
    Can urban centers get any gayer? I hope not.

    Though it may be incident, once again I am awed by the political power gays attain. I think black lesbians must really have disproportionate influence, if you include organizational structures at the workplace.

    I have been thinking about Nation of Islam. I honestly don't know too much about it, but I wonder if one of the original attractions was trying to separate from the bad influence of general black culture. One of the ways, I genuinely feel sorry for blacks is a lot of their role models are sports or music stars or actors. Or even on the ground level, teachers, who, I think tend to be left of center and promote victimhood.

    if you include organizational structures at the workplace

    I could easily see them getting ensconced in HR departments of major corporations and wreaking havoc.

    one of the original attractions was trying to separate from the bad influence of general black culture.

    Definitely a serious impetus. They still wear bow ties.

    a lot of their role models are sports or music stars or actors.

    The people you look up to and aspire to be makes a huge difference in one’s life and for a community.

    Peace.

  147. @Twinkie

    Asians seem to be, on the whole, far less moralistic – far less susceptible to feelings of disgust.
     
    Right now I am very susceptible to being disgusted by your stupidity.

    On a more serious note, you've never read Confucius, I gather.

    One thing to keep in mind is that "Asian" is a rather nebulous category. In terms of the population in the United States, its composition has varied wildly by region and time period. Korean evangelicals, on the one hand, and atheist (worse, pro-communist) Chinese, on the other, are going to have very different outlooks on social and moral philosophy (and they are neighboring populations "back home"!).

    It is true that eugenic tendencies and feelings are very strong in East Asia, and this was so long before the days of CRISPR. I suspect that much of this has to do with pronounced East Asian tendencies toward perfectionism and low fertility.

    Korean [and] Chinese … are going to have very different outlooks

    Ah, so, but at least they have exactly the same appearance.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    I can tell them apart. You can’t?
  148. @Trevor H.

    Honestly, I find this mind-boggling. Of course, some naysayer could come up with a list of potential drawbacks (as they could with any technology), but the potential benefits to human health and accomplishment seem so great as to easily overwhelm these concerns. Who wouldn’t want their child to be smarter, taller, healthier, and better looking? Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life – obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders? What gives?
     
    Simple. This is your society on Judaism.

    This is your society on Judaism.

    Especially Judaism v2.0

  149. @Ns
    Why would it be wrong to genocide everyone on this Earth below an IQ of 70?

    Why would it be wrong to genocide everyone on this Earth below an IQ of 70?

    Who says it would be wrong? But then old Stan, were he King, would order genocide of everyone who drives at or below the speed limit in the left lane, everyone who fails to use a turn indicator, everyone who rides their brakes, and everyone who texts while driving.

    Fortunately for shitheads, Stan will never be King. But if we ever get to vote for a pragmatist I’ll be first in line voting for the mandatory sterilization of everyone with an IQ below 70. And I’ll also be first to vote for a policy of sterilization of every applicant for public benefits (as well as revocation of voting privileges for their time on the dole).

    Our species is in a state of constant warfare against Nature. It’s bad enough that sexual reproduction creates accidental freaks and monsters, we are simply fools to encourage deliberate procreation of them.

  150. @YetAnotherAnon
    " I don’t want to spend my life looking after a drooling retard"

    Downs kids (and people) are generally friendly and affectionate. They are easy to love. The trouble is when their parents get old, and who'll care for them then.

    NS - what if the people with an IQ over 120 were to decide to genocide everyone under 120? Slippery slope.

    what if the people with an IQ over 120 were to decide to genocide everyone under 120?

    Given the track record of Utopian fantasies being implemented, I’d have to think it may not turn out so well.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  151. @Mr. Rational

    The average couple looking to have children will typically abort and try again rather than have 1 Down Syndrome child suck up all their time, energy and money. It’s not pretty, but it’s likely the principal explanation.
     
    Down's (perpetual) children often have serious circulatory and digestive malformations, too.  Back before modern surgery there was no problem with sustaining them because the majority simply died in infancy.  Arguably, they were never meant to live and what we are doing in the name of "pro-life" is anti-nature.

    Arguably, they were never meant to live and what we are doing in the name of “pro-life” is anti-nature.

    You won’t use antibiotics or have major surgery?

  152. @Stan d Mute

    Korean [and] Chinese ... are going to have very different outlooks
     
    Ah, so, but at least they have exactly the same appearance.

    I can tell them apart. You can’t?

  153. @MarkU

    I suppose the line is drawn in different places for different people. Attempting to breed what is essentially a more efficient human is not an immoral endeavor. The fewer children born with even minor birth defects, the better.
     
    If you are simply talking about screening for unequivocal defects then I am with you completely but I am uneasy about the "Attempting to breed what is essentially a more efficient human" part. That phrase summons up visions of a 'Brave New World' type society complete with genetically engineered soldiers and docile compliant workers. I doubt that the oligarchs that own most of the world would be interested in having a more intelligent population capable of critical thinking. I am fairly sure that is not what you meant btw, I'm just flagging up an unfortunate sounding phrase.

    I suppose my choice of words could lead one to think that, but I merely meant eliminating physical and mental defects. Ridding the world of things like Down’s, Cerebral Palsy, homosexuality, and even controlling for later onset afflictions like Schizophrenia and ALS would be beneficial outcomes of eugenics.

    I’m not speaking of behavior programming such as creating worker drones or conscious absent soldiers. Besides, the world has the Chinese so we’re close enough already. (that’s for you, T. 🙂 )

  154. @Audacious Epigone
    Reducing wealth inequality is one rhetorical approach for courting the left. If a poor couple has a net worth of $5k, if they have one child that child gets $5k worth of investment. If they have 5, each only get $1k. If an affluent couple with a net worth of $1m have a single child, it gets $1m. If they have 5, each 'only' get $200k. 'Eugenics' = child investment disparity of $195,000/child; 'dysgenics' = child investment disparity of $999,000.

    That is an interesting take on this.

    It is also a very useful way of looking at the effect differential fertility has on wealth inequality right now.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  155. @anon

    Attempting to breed what is essentially a more efficient human is not an immoral endeavor.
     
    except for this line^^ i agree with most of the rest of the post

    virtue signalling on how wonderful retards are has grown old. i wonder if it was started so that whites would more easily tolerate forced integration and invasion of low IQ black and brown

    See comment 154 for clarification on that sentence.

  156. res says:
    @Bardon Kaldian
    Yeah, but they don't anymore register father's race as they used to. I have some tables from 2007 or so where you can see, in percentages, which percentage of white, black, Asian....mothers had children with white, black, Asian.... fathers- which you cannot detect now. Of course, even then there was a category not stated, not recorded & similar, but you would basically get the data.

    Now, with this type of data- you cannot.

    https://i.imgur.com/mII5fcvl.png

    https://i.imgur.com/f3X5j0Jl.png

    https://i.imgur.com/Dnn9N5Zl.png

    My understanding (from silviosilver’s comment) is that the father’s race along with mother’s race is still in the data files but not the online data browser (or reports, it seems). Are your tables from a PDF, online, or where?

    Some notes from the user’s guide to the data.

    There are multiple race fields at varying levels of granularity.

    105-106 2 MRACE31 Mother’s Race Recode 31
    107 2 MRACE6 Mother’s Race Recode 6
    108-109 2 MRACE15 Mother’s Race Recode 15
    111 1 MRACEIMP Mother’s Race Imputed Flag Blank Mother’s race not imputed
    151-152 2 FRACE31 Father’s Race Recode 31
    153 1 FRACE6 Father’s Race Recode 6
    154-155 2 FRACE15 Father’s Race Recode 15

    I did not see how they handled missing father race data. Here is how they impute the mother’s race when necessary.

    Where race of the mother is not reported, if the race of the father is known, the race of the father is assigned to the mother. When information is not available for either parent, the race of the mother is imputed according to the specific race of the mother on the preceding record with a known race of mother. In 2017, race of mother was imputed for 6.1% of births (by occurrence).

    P.S. Any idea when the policy changed? You show tables from 2005 and 2011. Looks like another “gift” from Obama’s second term.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    It was easy to construct, a few years ago, a table from available data. I did it myself ca. 5-7 years ago, following simple instructions from government site & still have a few old +jpg or +png images on my hard drive. You could get either absolute numbers or percentages. Also, you could- I don't remember exactly- get data from 1970s to 2010s. It was doable for the US & all states (Georgia, Kansas,..); "not stated" category of father's race was, except for blacks, very small during 1980s or earlier.

    For instance, it shows that interracial mixing, at least when child-birth is concerned was virtually non-existent until late 1990s.

    I did not pay too much attention to it in past years, but yes: it seems that data had not been very reliable going back to Obama era; and even if father's race is recorded (which is debatable)- there is no simple way to ascertain the level of race mixing with regard to child birth. It seems that, as a rule of thumb, white-black mixing is 2-3% of white gene pool, with black male/white female combination something around 2.5/1 more numerous than the other way around; the most frequent combination is white-white Hispanic (both variants equal); white-white is somewhere around 95%, females being more "exclusive" than males.
    , @silviosilver
    In 2015 a colleague of mine commented on another site that there were no official intermixture statistics. I corrected him and alerted him to the CDC database. A few weeks ago, when I realized that the racefather/racemother queries were no longer possible online, I contacted him and asked him if he'd saved any of the data. He had, and he sent me screenshots he'd taken of 1990, 2000, 2010 and 2013 data. (If I knew how to post pics here, I'd post the screenshots.)

    According to 2013 statistics, there were 2,129,196 births to white mothers, 1,709,863 were to non-hispanic white fathers, and 403,283 were "not stated." The not-stated category allows us to calculate a minimum and maximum rate of intermixture If all the "not stated" were born to non-white fathers, then the maximum rate of intermixture would run at 19.7%. If all the "non stated" were born to non-hispanic white fathers, the minimum intermixture rate would run at 0.8%. Presumably, the true figure is somewhere in between.

    The old online tool permitted queries by county as well by years of education. The trend I noticed was that in the most diverse counties (LA, NY and the like), the minimum intermixture rate was typically over 20%. (In overwhelmingly hispanic south Texas counties, it was around 50%.) With respect to years of education, the stereotype was confirmed that the least educated (ie least intelligent) white women were most likely to mix with blacks. (Alas, I don't recall what the difference between least educated and most educated was.) Also, white women in 2013 were more likely to mix with hispanics than with blacks, which (iirc) was a reverse of the situation in 1990, and presumably an ongoing trend.

  157. @Achmed E. Newman
    I don't argue with your solution, Mr. Rational. My point was: how are you going to get something like that implemented? All those new votes (since the start of the Welfare State) are going to be against it, and we'd be outnumbered. This Socialist project has become too big a monster to kill easily. I don't think voting will do it at this point - may have worked if suggested by Bill Clinton in 1995...

    ... well, or if the states were left alone to do whatever they want to about it. In that case, I'd think you'd have a winner of a plan.

    how are you going to get something like that implemented?

    Never let a fiscal crisis go to waste.

  158. @res
    My understanding (from silviosilver's comment) is that the father's race along with mother's race is still in the data files but not the online data browser (or reports, it seems). Are your tables from a PDF, online, or where?

    Some notes from the user's guide to the data.

    There are multiple race fields at varying levels of granularity.

    105-106 2 MRACE31 Mother’s Race Recode 31
    107 2 MRACE6 Mother’s Race Recode 6
    108-109 2 MRACE15 Mother’s Race Recode 15
    111 1 MRACEIMP Mother’s Race Imputed Flag Blank Mother’s race not imputed
    151-152 2 FRACE31 Father’s Race Recode 31
    153 1 FRACE6 Father’s Race Recode 6
    154-155 2 FRACE15 Father’s Race Recode 15
     
    I did not see how they handled missing father race data. Here is how they impute the mother's race when necessary.

    Where race of the mother is not reported, if the race of the father is known, the race of the father is assigned to the mother. When information is not available for either parent, the race of the mother is imputed according to the specific race of the mother on the preceding record with a known race of mother. In 2017, race of mother was imputed for 6.1% of births (by occurrence).
     
    P.S. Any idea when the policy changed? You show tables from 2005 and 2011. Looks like another "gift" from Obama's second term.

    It was easy to construct, a few years ago, a table from available data. I did it myself ca. 5-7 years ago, following simple instructions from government site & still have a few old +jpg or +png images on my hard drive. You could get either absolute numbers or percentages. Also, you could- I don’t remember exactly- get data from 1970s to 2010s. It was doable for the US & all states (Georgia, Kansas,..); “not stated” category of father’s race was, except for blacks, very small during 1980s or earlier.

    For instance, it shows that interracial mixing, at least when child-birth is concerned was virtually non-existent until late 1990s.

    I did not pay too much attention to it in past years, but yes: it seems that data had not been very reliable going back to Obama era; and even if father’s race is recorded (which is debatable)- there is no simple way to ascertain the level of race mixing with regard to child birth. It seems that, as a rule of thumb, white-black mixing is 2-3% of white gene pool, with black male/white female combination something around 2.5/1 more numerous than the other way around; the most frequent combination is white-white Hispanic (both variants equal); white-white is somewhere around 95%, females being more “exclusive” than males.

  159. @Talha
    I've noticed that people with Down's Syndrome are very genuine and extremely loving. Sure, you can't hold a conversation about politics or technology with them, but if you are willing to talk to them at their level - it can be a very relaxing and pleasant experience, kind of like speaking with children when you let them lead. And again, that unabashed love:
    https://twitter.com/BirdsOfJannah/status/1108675267474673664

    For anyone interested, I've donated to this place before (in our great state of Illinois) that does good work for people with these kinds of mental handicaps in helping them become more productive members of society:
    https://www.lambsfarm.org/

    Peace.

    I’ve noticed that people with Down’s Syndrome are very genuine and extremely loving. Sure, you can’t hold a conversation about politics or technology with them, but if you are willing to talk to them at their level – it can be a very relaxing and pleasant experience, kind of like speaking with children when you let them lead. And again, that unabashed love:

    You’ve noticed eh? How closely? Because I have a bit more experience in this regard than most and I’ve noticed things too:

    First, there is a spectrum of behavior and disability, but having said that, like toddlers they tend to piss the bed – every night. After 53 years, that gets old. They’ll also shit themselves. That gets old even sooner. Imagine putting diaper creme on your 53 year old Downie and wiping his ass of the shit he’s too incompetent to remove – every day. They have no conception of germ theory and must be monitored incessantly for hygiene. They’re susceptible to diabetes but too stupid to self-regulate diet so must be fed and monitored constantly to prevent them eating themselves to death. They have no sense of self-consciousness as you note, not always a good thing.

    On the plus side, they don’t get cavities. Weird huh?

    The real problem with them is who pays? They will never be self-sufficient. If we can identify them in the womb and terminate the pregnancy, who pays when a mother chooses to deliver a trisomy 21 mutant? I know one couple that did just that, twice. Guess who’s paying?

    • Replies: @Talha

    Imagine putting diaper creme on your 53 year old Downie and wiping his ass of the shit he’s too incompetent to remove – every day.
     
    I have a son with Type-1 diabetes - my sleep cycle has never been the same since he was diagnosed. I literally save his life every other night by making sure he doesn't go into hypoglycemic shock and wakes up in the morning - this can sometimes be multiple times in a single night depending how his insulin is being absorbed.

    This is why the Divine has commanded multiple times:
    "And We have enjoined on man to be dutiful and kind to his parents."

    So parents will reap the rewards of this kind of test in the afterlife and (hopefully) the way they sacrificed for their children will be returned to them when their children have to help them out of bed and feed them and what not.

    The real problem with them is who pays?
     
    I'm not asking for government handouts nor am I asking for the government to take your money and give it to these parents. As I said before, I voluntarily give to an organization that helps these kinds of people. I encourage others to do the same, those that do will be rewarded by God for their investment.

    In absence of government, religious organizations would fill the role. Or some kind of an privatized insurance scheme could potentially be worked out. Would it be perfect? No - but this world was never meant to be perfect.

    They will never be self-sufficient.
     
    OK - so - that's the test of their parents. Parents take care of their children and then their siblings and so on. Again, I'm not asking to go in your wallet.

    If we can identify them in the womb and terminate the pregnancy
     
    The Islamic view on the morality of this subject is nuanced. If the pregnancy has a serious genetic problem and it can be detected before 120 days, there is leeway to abort for this kind of thing. After a 120 days, ensoulment occurs and the baby has a right just like any individual (unless the mother's life is in danger, in which case she gets precedence).

    We dealt with this very question in my family since my brother's first child had a trisomy disorder and died in the womb.

    Guess who’s paying?
     
    Insurance?

    Peace.
    , @res

    On the plus side, they don’t get cavities. Weird huh?
     
    Interesting. Some more from https://library.down-syndrome.org/en-us/research-practice/05/3/dental-care-patient-down-syndrome/

    Historically the incidence of dental decay in persons with Down syndrome has been reported to be extremely low. Recent studies however have shown that while the incidence is lower, it is not as rare as once thought and it certainly should not be taken for granted that "these patients won't get decay" (Barnett, Press, Friedman, & Sonnenburg, 1986). Older studies of caries in persons with Down syndrome used institutionalised populations whose diets were controlled. These groups may not have had the exposure to cariogenic foods at the rate of today's children with Down syndrome who are growing up at home. The incidence is lower however, and it is theorised that this may be due to delayed eruption of the teeth, increased spacing between teeth or possible differences in the chemical content of the saliva (Morinushi, Lopatin, & Tanaka, 1995).
     
    Your "who pays?" question is key. There are limited resources for taking care of non-productive people (and some large and growing groups eager for "their share"). Asking other people to pay for one's own discretionary choices seems a bit much.
  160. @Stan d Mute

    I’ve noticed that people with Down’s Syndrome are very genuine and extremely loving. Sure, you can’t hold a conversation about politics or technology with them, but if you are willing to talk to them at their level – it can be a very relaxing and pleasant experience, kind of like speaking with children when you let them lead. And again, that unabashed love:
     
    You’ve noticed eh? How closely? Because I have a bit more experience in this regard than most and I’ve noticed things too:

    First, there is a spectrum of behavior and disability, but having said that, like toddlers they tend to piss the bed - every night. After 53 years, that gets old. They’ll also shit themselves. That gets old even sooner. Imagine putting diaper creme on your 53 year old Downie and wiping his ass of the shit he’s too incompetent to remove - every day. They have no conception of germ theory and must be monitored incessantly for hygiene. They’re susceptible to diabetes but too stupid to self-regulate diet so must be fed and monitored constantly to prevent them eating themselves to death. They have no sense of self-consciousness as you note, not always a good thing.

    On the plus side, they don’t get cavities. Weird huh?

    The real problem with them is who pays? They will never be self-sufficient. If we can identify them in the womb and terminate the pregnancy, who pays when a mother chooses to deliver a trisomy 21 mutant? I know one couple that did just that, twice. Guess who’s paying?

    Imagine putting diaper creme on your 53 year old Downie and wiping his ass of the shit he’s too incompetent to remove – every day.

    I have a son with Type-1 diabetes – my sleep cycle has never been the same since he was diagnosed. I literally save his life every other night by making sure he doesn’t go into hypoglycemic shock and wakes up in the morning – this can sometimes be multiple times in a single night depending how his insulin is being absorbed.

    This is why the Divine has commanded multiple times:
    “And We have enjoined on man to be dutiful and kind to his parents.”

    So parents will reap the rewards of this kind of test in the afterlife and (hopefully) the way they sacrificed for their children will be returned to them when their children have to help them out of bed and feed them and what not.

    The real problem with them is who pays?

    I’m not asking for government handouts nor am I asking for the government to take your money and give it to these parents. As I said before, I voluntarily give to an organization that helps these kinds of people. I encourage others to do the same, those that do will be rewarded by God for their investment.

    In absence of government, religious organizations would fill the role. Or some kind of an privatized insurance scheme could potentially be worked out. Would it be perfect? No – but this world was never meant to be perfect.

    They will never be self-sufficient.

    OK – so – that’s the test of their parents. Parents take care of their children and then their siblings and so on. Again, I’m not asking to go in your wallet.

    If we can identify them in the womb and terminate the pregnancy

    The Islamic view on the morality of this subject is nuanced. If the pregnancy has a serious genetic problem and it can be detected before 120 days, there is leeway to abort for this kind of thing. After a 120 days, ensoulment occurs and the baby has a right just like any individual (unless the mother’s life is in danger, in which case she gets precedence).

    We dealt with this very question in my family since my brother’s first child had a trisomy disorder and died in the womb.

    Guess who’s paying?

    Insurance?

    Peace.

    • Replies: @silviosilver

    This is why the Divine has commanded multiple times:
    “And We have enjoined on man to be dutiful and kind to his parents.”

    So parents will reap the rewards of this kind of test in the afterlife and (hopefully) the way they sacrificed for their children will be returned to them when their children have to help them out of bed and feed them and what not.
     
    Well, that's quite the admission.

    It really puts everything else you've said about the whole "god" question into context.

    You're only human, so who can blame you. I guess if I was in your shoes I'd probably be saying similar sorts of things, since the alternative is too painful to contemplate.

    But screw it, I'll tell you what I really think. There obviously is no "god" resembling anything like the entity of "Abrahamic" (ptui, feel dirty even saying that word) fantasy. Life's a bitch and some people are born into misery and that's all there is to it. If we care about human well-being, then in the long run, eugenics and nothing but eugenics is the only way to improve things. I'd say to you: stop being so damn selfish and holding back progress just to feel better about your own personal predicament.
    , @anon

    The Islamic view on the morality...
     
    lol
  161. @res
    My understanding (from silviosilver's comment) is that the father's race along with mother's race is still in the data files but not the online data browser (or reports, it seems). Are your tables from a PDF, online, or where?

    Some notes from the user's guide to the data.

    There are multiple race fields at varying levels of granularity.

    105-106 2 MRACE31 Mother’s Race Recode 31
    107 2 MRACE6 Mother’s Race Recode 6
    108-109 2 MRACE15 Mother’s Race Recode 15
    111 1 MRACEIMP Mother’s Race Imputed Flag Blank Mother’s race not imputed
    151-152 2 FRACE31 Father’s Race Recode 31
    153 1 FRACE6 Father’s Race Recode 6
    154-155 2 FRACE15 Father’s Race Recode 15
     
    I did not see how they handled missing father race data. Here is how they impute the mother's race when necessary.

    Where race of the mother is not reported, if the race of the father is known, the race of the father is assigned to the mother. When information is not available for either parent, the race of the mother is imputed according to the specific race of the mother on the preceding record with a known race of mother. In 2017, race of mother was imputed for 6.1% of births (by occurrence).
     
    P.S. Any idea when the policy changed? You show tables from 2005 and 2011. Looks like another "gift" from Obama's second term.

    In 2015 a colleague of mine commented on another site that there were no official intermixture statistics. I corrected him and alerted him to the CDC database. A few weeks ago, when I realized that the racefather/racemother queries were no longer possible online, I contacted him and asked him if he’d saved any of the data. He had, and he sent me screenshots he’d taken of 1990, 2000, 2010 and 2013 data. (If I knew how to post pics here, I’d post the screenshots.)

    According to 2013 statistics, there were 2,129,196 births to white mothers, 1,709,863 were to non-hispanic white fathers, and 403,283 were “not stated.” The not-stated category allows us to calculate a minimum and maximum rate of intermixture If all the “not stated” were born to non-white fathers, then the maximum rate of intermixture would run at 19.7%. If all the “non stated” were born to non-hispanic white fathers, the minimum intermixture rate would run at 0.8%. Presumably, the true figure is somewhere in between.

    The old online tool permitted queries by county as well by years of education. The trend I noticed was that in the most diverse counties (LA, NY and the like), the minimum intermixture rate was typically over 20%. (In overwhelmingly hispanic south Texas counties, it was around 50%.) With respect to years of education, the stereotype was confirmed that the least educated (ie least intelligent) white women were most likely to mix with blacks. (Alas, I don’t recall what the difference between least educated and most educated was.) Also, white women in 2013 were more likely to mix with hispanics than with blacks, which (iirc) was a reverse of the situation in 1990, and presumably an ongoing trend.

    • Replies: @res
    Thanks!

    If I knew how to post pics here, I’d post the screenshots.
     
    If the images are available online all you have to do is post a link (ending in jpg, png, etc.) in your comment. If they are only on your hard drive you would have to upload them somewhere first. My understanding is you can use something like imgur to do that. https://imgur.com/upload

    The 2013 data gives an idea of when things changed.
  162. @Talha

    Imagine putting diaper creme on your 53 year old Downie and wiping his ass of the shit he’s too incompetent to remove – every day.
     
    I have a son with Type-1 diabetes - my sleep cycle has never been the same since he was diagnosed. I literally save his life every other night by making sure he doesn't go into hypoglycemic shock and wakes up in the morning - this can sometimes be multiple times in a single night depending how his insulin is being absorbed.

    This is why the Divine has commanded multiple times:
    "And We have enjoined on man to be dutiful and kind to his parents."

    So parents will reap the rewards of this kind of test in the afterlife and (hopefully) the way they sacrificed for their children will be returned to them when their children have to help them out of bed and feed them and what not.

    The real problem with them is who pays?
     
    I'm not asking for government handouts nor am I asking for the government to take your money and give it to these parents. As I said before, I voluntarily give to an organization that helps these kinds of people. I encourage others to do the same, those that do will be rewarded by God for their investment.

    In absence of government, religious organizations would fill the role. Or some kind of an privatized insurance scheme could potentially be worked out. Would it be perfect? No - but this world was never meant to be perfect.

    They will never be self-sufficient.
     
    OK - so - that's the test of their parents. Parents take care of their children and then their siblings and so on. Again, I'm not asking to go in your wallet.

    If we can identify them in the womb and terminate the pregnancy
     
    The Islamic view on the morality of this subject is nuanced. If the pregnancy has a serious genetic problem and it can be detected before 120 days, there is leeway to abort for this kind of thing. After a 120 days, ensoulment occurs and the baby has a right just like any individual (unless the mother's life is in danger, in which case she gets precedence).

    We dealt with this very question in my family since my brother's first child had a trisomy disorder and died in the womb.

    Guess who’s paying?
     
    Insurance?

    Peace.

    This is why the Divine has commanded multiple times:
    “And We have enjoined on man to be dutiful and kind to his parents.”

    So parents will reap the rewards of this kind of test in the afterlife and (hopefully) the way they sacrificed for their children will be returned to them when their children have to help them out of bed and feed them and what not.

    Well, that’s quite the admission.

    It really puts everything else you’ve said about the whole “god” question into context.

    You’re only human, so who can blame you. I guess if I was in your shoes I’d probably be saying similar sorts of things, since the alternative is too painful to contemplate.

    But screw it, I’ll tell you what I really think. There obviously is no “god” resembling anything like the entity of “Abrahamic” (ptui, feel dirty even saying that word) fantasy. Life’s a bitch and some people are born into misery and that’s all there is to it. If we care about human well-being, then in the long run, eugenics and nothing but eugenics is the only way to improve things. I’d say to you: stop being so damn selfish and holding back progress just to feel better about your own personal predicament.

    • Replies: @Talha

    since the alternative is too painful to contemplate.
     
    Yeah, a meaningless existence full of troubles in a universe ending ultimately in entropic heat death is pretty sucky, but here we are.

    Life’s a bitch and some people are born into misery and that’s all there is to it.
     
    Hmmm...your side seems to need better PR than:
    Do you have some hope in your life? Come this way, it’s even suckier on this side!

    There obviously is no “god”
     
    ...but Allah. See that’s what I like about atheists, they have the first have of the formula down.

    On a serious note; it’s good to have conviction in your beliefs and be willing to live up to their consequences.


    eugenics and nothing but eugenics is the only way to improve things
     
    Apart from that sounding like a religious statement, survival of the fittest has already been in play from time immemorial, it simply might not agree with your aesthetics - thems the breaks.

    But, I also support any policy in a proposed Whitekanda that strips even Whites of citizenship if they don’t meet certain genetic requirements or requires forcible abortions for certain genetic conditions. Again, since Islam will be outlawed there, you guys knock yourselves out.


    stop being so damn selfish
     
    I don’t know, from where I’m standing, it seems fairly selfish to abort a viable human being because they will inconvenience you.

    holding back progress
     
    The Left-liberals tell us the same thing.

    Why am I holding anyone back? Abort your way (in any trimester) to the master race (for whatever reason - skin tone too dark, not tall enough, missing a limb, etc.), no skin off my back. I don’t know why you think someone with my metaphysical perspective would come to any sort of agreement on this with someone with your perspective.

    Peace.

    , @Corvinus
    "If we care about human well-being, then in the long run, eugenics and nothing but eugenics is the only way to improve things. I’d say to you: stop being so damn selfish and holding back progress just to feel better about your own personal predicament."

    I would say the person who is being selfish is you with that attitude.

    Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others--Philippians 2:3-4
  163. There is nothing selfish about interjecting morality and sense to the matter of eugenics which is a very very broad spectrum of issues.

    We don’t have any idea how to breed human beings to a subjective better self. Almost everything we know helps to biology. We know next to nothing about how the interconnections and impacts of one gene to another in any unique combination to predict if then this along the a chain that would make reach the moon.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    We don’t have any idea how to breed human beings to a subjective better self.
     
    Isn’t the goal an objective better human? The population with the lowest IQ seems to have no issues with self-esteem and thus your subjective better self (they’re breeding superabundantly too).

    And haven’t we been breeding flora and fauna into objectively better plants and animals since before recorded history? One doesn’t need to even understand genes or DNA, just prohibit the breeding of defective stock (ie those unable or unwilling to feed themselves, unable to read/write, serious congenital diseases and deformities, etc) as a start.
  164. @silviosilver

    This is why the Divine has commanded multiple times:
    “And We have enjoined on man to be dutiful and kind to his parents.”

    So parents will reap the rewards of this kind of test in the afterlife and (hopefully) the way they sacrificed for their children will be returned to them when their children have to help them out of bed and feed them and what not.
     
    Well, that's quite the admission.

    It really puts everything else you've said about the whole "god" question into context.

    You're only human, so who can blame you. I guess if I was in your shoes I'd probably be saying similar sorts of things, since the alternative is too painful to contemplate.

    But screw it, I'll tell you what I really think. There obviously is no "god" resembling anything like the entity of "Abrahamic" (ptui, feel dirty even saying that word) fantasy. Life's a bitch and some people are born into misery and that's all there is to it. If we care about human well-being, then in the long run, eugenics and nothing but eugenics is the only way to improve things. I'd say to you: stop being so damn selfish and holding back progress just to feel better about your own personal predicament.

    since the alternative is too painful to contemplate.

    Yeah, a meaningless existence full of troubles in a universe ending ultimately in entropic heat death is pretty sucky, but here we are.

    Life’s a bitch and some people are born into misery and that’s all there is to it.

    Hmmm…your side seems to need better PR than:
    Do you have some hope in your life? Come this way, it’s even suckier on this side!

    There obviously is no “god”

    …but Allah. See that’s what I like about atheists, they have the first have of the formula down.

    On a serious note; it’s good to have conviction in your beliefs and be willing to live up to their consequences.

    eugenics and nothing but eugenics is the only way to improve things

    Apart from that sounding like a religious statement, survival of the fittest has already been in play from time immemorial, it simply might not agree with your aesthetics – thems the breaks.

    But, I also support any policy in a proposed Whitekanda that strips even Whites of citizenship if they don’t meet certain genetic requirements or requires forcible abortions for certain genetic conditions. Again, since Islam will be outlawed there, you guys knock yourselves out.

    stop being so damn selfish

    I don’t know, from where I’m standing, it seems fairly selfish to abort a viable human being because they will inconvenience you.

    holding back progress

    The Left-liberals tell us the same thing.

    Why am I holding anyone back? Abort your way (in any trimester) to the master race (for whatever reason – skin tone too dark, not tall enough, missing a limb, etc.), no skin off my back. I don’t know why you think someone with my metaphysical perspective would come to any sort of agreement on this with someone with your perspective.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @silviosilver

    Yeah, a meaningless existence full of troubles in a universe ending ultimately in entropic heat death is pretty sucky, but here we are.
     
    Sucky to you, you mean.

    That's because you're yet to experience the power of acceptance. Accepting hard truths - about yourself, about loved ones, about life, the universe, etc - does not mean liking those truths. It just means ceasing to struggle against their truth, ceasing to live in denial of them.

    A strange thing then happens: the pain those truths cause you evaporates.

    "God" is too big a step to practice this technique on from the outset (although it could be done), so I recommend you start with some unpleasant truth about yourself, something that you may "deep down" know is true, but it's painful to think about it, so you ignore it or evade it or make up self-serving fictions related to it. (A good choice here is some physical imperfection, because one very simple way to make yourself confront it is to simply look in the mirror.)

    You could say to yourself something like, "I don't have to like this fact about myself, but am I able to accept that it's true?" Then gauge your reaction. If you feel you're unable to accept that difficult truth about yourself, then one way to ease yourself towards is to accept your resistance to accepting that truth. "It hurts too much to accept this truth, but I can accept that I am resistant to accepting it." Over time, you'll probably find that resistance weakens, and you can finally accept the difficult truth.

    Eventually, you can get your trembling core to accept even the hardest truths about human existence (nihilism and that sort of thing).

    Contrary to what you think now, your life won't necessarily feel meaningless.

    I remember a book titled "Man, the Tool-maker" by a physical anthropologist (perhaps that phrase predates this book, not sure). I found the title memorable because it seemed to nicely capture a fundamental quality of what makes man man. But he could have equally titled the book "Man, the Meaning-maker," which to me captures an even more fundamental aspect of our being. It's just what we do.

    So you can find new meanings to replace the old ones. Your experience of reality will certainly change, but you can be just as happy as you were before. (Or even happier, if you're one of those unfortunates who only believes in "God" out of fear of punishment.)

    And btw, re the heat death of the universe. Kardashev Type III civilizations man. Maybe by that point there will be a feasible way to prevent it. It's a pretty ennobling striving, you'd surely agree. And we've certainly got a looooong time to work on it.

  165. @Anon
    Americans oppose sensible eugenic policies, even to prevent inheritance of serious disease. A whopping 83% oppose genetic enhancements for intelligence and looks:

    https://www.statnews.com/2016/02/11/stat-harvard-poll-gene-editing/

    Honestly, I find this mind-boggling. Of course, some naysayer could come up with a list of potential drawbacks (as they could with any technology), but the potential benefits to human health and accomplishment seem so great as to easily overwhelm these concerns. Who wouldn't want their child to be smarter, taller, healthier, and better looking? Who wants to curse their child with low ability and low quality of life - obesity, physical unattractiveness, mental disorders? What gives?

    My vague impression on the subject relates to personality differences between Asians and other racial groups. Asians seem to be, on the whole, far less moralistic - far less susceptible to feelings of disgust. You see this in their cuisine: many Japanese have no problems eating barely dead frog sashimi and grilling live octopus; the Koreans eat live octopus; some Chinese restaurants serve live fish; many South East Asians eat live shrimp meals. You don't see that in Western cultures nearly at all.

    Frog Sashimi: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_NW2A9D-tw

    Dancing Shrimp salad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PX3NNmtRyI

    Chinese live fish: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPp1HmUe9Mw

    Korean live octopus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYDkzqCfJzg

    You additionally see this difference in personality in their entertainment industries, but to a more limited degree: Asians (not all but a large number) seem far less concerned with the subtle emotional and social aspects of many Western-type movies and books of yesteryear, before the fall in quality of Western entertainment that is; Asian entertainment revolves around broad-topic "things" over "feels" - the analytical side of romantic partnerships over pure feelings of love, science fiction robots, world-building over character building (which is why Japanese anime feels so different to Westerners - imaginative worlds with fantastical creatures and concepts but more limited character nuance), ...

    As an aside, perhaps someone should conduct a poll asking what percentage of Western people would support germline enhancements if other people were already doing it; that might tell you the potential for adoption in the West as the Chinese are certain to go down that route at some point.

    Asians are almost entirely driven by the question “what is in it for me and my family?” That applies to food (e.g., tastes great and cheap!) and eugenics (e.g., higher status kids who will make more money!).

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    Why do you keep making me link this?

    https://youtu.be/kWW4xzlrOWQ
  166. @Priss Factor
    What a crock. How many couples like that do you actually see? Beautiful white woman with strong black man.

    I suppose it depends on where you live.

    I see more and more, and I hear it's very common in integrated high schools.

    Also, I've seen so much of it in the South.

    Black/white miscegenation is increasingly common. Unquestionably. And this trend is no accident.

    Here’s a very insightful video on the subject:

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Black/white miscegenation is increasingly common."

    Exactly. And it is none of our personal business. In fact, it appears to have benefits.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3146070/Mixed-race-relationships-making-taller-smarter-Children-born-genetically-diverse-parents-intelligent-ancestors.html

    Of course the video that you linked is propaganda in its own right. The fact of the matter is that companies sell both a product and an image reflective of their audience. It just happens to be the audience are Americans, which historically consists of difference races and ethnicities.
  167. @EliteCommInc.
    There is nothing selfish about interjecting morality and sense to the matter of eugenics which is a very very broad spectrum of issues.


    We don't have any idea how to breed human beings to a subjective better self. Almost everything we know helps to biology. We know next to nothing about how the interconnections and impacts of one gene to another in any unique combination to predict if then this along the a chain that would make reach the moon.

    We don’t have any idea how to breed human beings to a subjective better self.

    Isn’t the goal an objective better human? The population with the lowest IQ seems to have no issues with self-esteem and thus your subjective better self (they’re breeding superabundantly too).

    And haven’t we been breeding flora and fauna into objectively better plants and animals since before recorded history? One doesn’t need to even understand genes or DNA, just prohibit the breeding of defective stock (ie those unable or unwilling to feed themselves, unable to read/write, serious congenital diseases and deformities, etc) as a start.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Isn’t the goal an objective better human?"

    Depends upon the qualities that one deems "best" or "better".

    The population with the lowest IQ seems to have no issues with self-esteem and thus your subjective better self (they’re breeding superabundantly too).

    "And haven’t we been breeding flora and fauna into objectively better plants and animals since before recorded history?"

    With the exclusive purpose to benefit human beings and their existence.

    "just prohibit the breeding of defective stock (ie those unable or unwilling to feed themselves, unable to read/write, serious congenital diseases and deformities, etc) as a start."

    And where does it end? It doesn't matter what you, a Secret King, desires. The fact of the matter is that your idea is a dead end to most normies, and for good reason.
    , @EliteCommInc.
    Hmmmmm . . . that's an interesting posit. But if one is talking objective existence or meaning, they are talking about definitive data. IQ is not definitive, at least not yet. Two people with an IQ of 167 get married and have children --- we don't have any idea what their IQ of that child will be.


    However, we can with a pretty good certainty know male or female, some potential for birth defects, and while environment can radically impact even objective biology -- the line to cause and effect is far more definitive than something such as temperment.

    Sex is objective verses temperment which is far more malleable.
  168. @mark green
    Black/white miscegenation is increasingly common. Unquestionably. And this trend is no accident.

    Here's a very insightful video on the subject:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2_K5koFGRY

    “Black/white miscegenation is increasingly common.”

    Exactly. And it is none of our personal business. In fact, it appears to have benefits.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3146070/Mixed-race-relationships-making-taller-smarter-Children-born-genetically-diverse-parents-intelligent-ancestors.html

    Of course the video that you linked is propaganda in its own right. The fact of the matter is that companies sell both a product and an image reflective of their audience. It just happens to be the audience are Americans, which historically consists of difference races and ethnicities.

    • Replies: @anon
    pretty sure that article you link was debunked and laughed out of town

    its been brought up several times on various forums

  169. @Stan d Mute

    We don’t have any idea how to breed human beings to a subjective better self.
     
    Isn’t the goal an objective better human? The population with the lowest IQ seems to have no issues with self-esteem and thus your subjective better self (they’re breeding superabundantly too).

    And haven’t we been breeding flora and fauna into objectively better plants and animals since before recorded history? One doesn’t need to even understand genes or DNA, just prohibit the breeding of defective stock (ie those unable or unwilling to feed themselves, unable to read/write, serious congenital diseases and deformities, etc) as a start.

    “Isn’t the goal an objective better human?”

    Depends upon the qualities that one deems “best” or “better”.

    The population with the lowest IQ seems to have no issues with self-esteem and thus your subjective better self (they’re breeding superabundantly too).

    “And haven’t we been breeding flora and fauna into objectively better plants and animals since before recorded history?”

    With the exclusive purpose to benefit human beings and their existence.

    “just prohibit the breeding of defective stock (ie those unable or unwilling to feed themselves, unable to read/write, serious congenital diseases and deformities, etc) as a start.”

    And where does it end? It doesn’t matter what you, a Secret King, desires. The fact of the matter is that your idea is a dead end to most normies, and for good reason.

  170. @silviosilver

    This is why the Divine has commanded multiple times:
    “And We have enjoined on man to be dutiful and kind to his parents.”

    So parents will reap the rewards of this kind of test in the afterlife and (hopefully) the way they sacrificed for their children will be returned to them when their children have to help them out of bed and feed them and what not.
     
    Well, that's quite the admission.

    It really puts everything else you've said about the whole "god" question into context.

    You're only human, so who can blame you. I guess if I was in your shoes I'd probably be saying similar sorts of things, since the alternative is too painful to contemplate.

    But screw it, I'll tell you what I really think. There obviously is no "god" resembling anything like the entity of "Abrahamic" (ptui, feel dirty even saying that word) fantasy. Life's a bitch and some people are born into misery and that's all there is to it. If we care about human well-being, then in the long run, eugenics and nothing but eugenics is the only way to improve things. I'd say to you: stop being so damn selfish and holding back progress just to feel better about your own personal predicament.

    “If we care about human well-being, then in the long run, eugenics and nothing but eugenics is the only way to improve things. I’d say to you: stop being so damn selfish and holding back progress just to feel better about your own personal predicament.”

    I would say the person who is being selfish is you with that attitude.

    Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others–Philippians 2:3-4

    • Replies: @anon
    have some integrity and adopt several downies, show us what your word is worth
  171. res says:
    @Stan d Mute

    I’ve noticed that people with Down’s Syndrome are very genuine and extremely loving. Sure, you can’t hold a conversation about politics or technology with them, but if you are willing to talk to them at their level – it can be a very relaxing and pleasant experience, kind of like speaking with children when you let them lead. And again, that unabashed love:
     
    You’ve noticed eh? How closely? Because I have a bit more experience in this regard than most and I’ve noticed things too:

    First, there is a spectrum of behavior and disability, but having said that, like toddlers they tend to piss the bed - every night. After 53 years, that gets old. They’ll also shit themselves. That gets old even sooner. Imagine putting diaper creme on your 53 year old Downie and wiping his ass of the shit he’s too incompetent to remove - every day. They have no conception of germ theory and must be monitored incessantly for hygiene. They’re susceptible to diabetes but too stupid to self-regulate diet so must be fed and monitored constantly to prevent them eating themselves to death. They have no sense of self-consciousness as you note, not always a good thing.

    On the plus side, they don’t get cavities. Weird huh?

    The real problem with them is who pays? They will never be self-sufficient. If we can identify them in the womb and terminate the pregnancy, who pays when a mother chooses to deliver a trisomy 21 mutant? I know one couple that did just that, twice. Guess who’s paying?

    On the plus side, they don’t get cavities. Weird huh?

    Interesting. Some more from https://library.down-syndrome.org/en-us/research-practice/05/3/dental-care-patient-down-syndrome/

    Historically the incidence of dental decay in persons with Down syndrome has been reported to be extremely low. Recent studies however have shown that while the incidence is lower, it is not as rare as once thought and it certainly should not be taken for granted that “these patients won’t get decay” (Barnett, Press, Friedman, & Sonnenburg, 1986). Older studies of caries in persons with Down syndrome used institutionalised populations whose diets were controlled. These groups may not have had the exposure to cariogenic foods at the rate of today’s children with Down syndrome who are growing up at home. The incidence is lower however, and it is theorised that this may be due to delayed eruption of the teeth, increased spacing between teeth or possible differences in the chemical content of the saliva (Morinushi, Lopatin, & Tanaka, 1995).

    Your “who pays?” question is key. There are limited resources for taking care of non-productive people (and some large and growing groups eager for “their share”). Asking other people to pay for one’s own discretionary choices seems a bit much.

  172. res says:
    @silviosilver
    In 2015 a colleague of mine commented on another site that there were no official intermixture statistics. I corrected him and alerted him to the CDC database. A few weeks ago, when I realized that the racefather/racemother queries were no longer possible online, I contacted him and asked him if he'd saved any of the data. He had, and he sent me screenshots he'd taken of 1990, 2000, 2010 and 2013 data. (If I knew how to post pics here, I'd post the screenshots.)

    According to 2013 statistics, there were 2,129,196 births to white mothers, 1,709,863 were to non-hispanic white fathers, and 403,283 were "not stated." The not-stated category allows us to calculate a minimum and maximum rate of intermixture If all the "not stated" were born to non-white fathers, then the maximum rate of intermixture would run at 19.7%. If all the "non stated" were born to non-hispanic white fathers, the minimum intermixture rate would run at 0.8%. Presumably, the true figure is somewhere in between.

    The old online tool permitted queries by county as well by years of education. The trend I noticed was that in the most diverse counties (LA, NY and the like), the minimum intermixture rate was typically over 20%. (In overwhelmingly hispanic south Texas counties, it was around 50%.) With respect to years of education, the stereotype was confirmed that the least educated (ie least intelligent) white women were most likely to mix with blacks. (Alas, I don't recall what the difference between least educated and most educated was.) Also, white women in 2013 were more likely to mix with hispanics than with blacks, which (iirc) was a reverse of the situation in 1990, and presumably an ongoing trend.

    Thanks!

    If I knew how to post pics here, I’d post the screenshots.

    If the images are available online all you have to do is post a link (ending in jpg, png, etc.) in your comment. If they are only on your hard drive you would have to upload them somewhere first. My understanding is you can use something like imgur to do that. https://imgur.com/upload

    The 2013 data gives an idea of when things changed.

  173. @Talha

    Imagine putting diaper creme on your 53 year old Downie and wiping his ass of the shit he’s too incompetent to remove – every day.
     
    I have a son with Type-1 diabetes - my sleep cycle has never been the same since he was diagnosed. I literally save his life every other night by making sure he doesn't go into hypoglycemic shock and wakes up in the morning - this can sometimes be multiple times in a single night depending how his insulin is being absorbed.

    This is why the Divine has commanded multiple times:
    "And We have enjoined on man to be dutiful and kind to his parents."

    So parents will reap the rewards of this kind of test in the afterlife and (hopefully) the way they sacrificed for their children will be returned to them when their children have to help them out of bed and feed them and what not.

    The real problem with them is who pays?
     
    I'm not asking for government handouts nor am I asking for the government to take your money and give it to these parents. As I said before, I voluntarily give to an organization that helps these kinds of people. I encourage others to do the same, those that do will be rewarded by God for their investment.

    In absence of government, religious organizations would fill the role. Or some kind of an privatized insurance scheme could potentially be worked out. Would it be perfect? No - but this world was never meant to be perfect.

    They will never be self-sufficient.
     
    OK - so - that's the test of their parents. Parents take care of their children and then their siblings and so on. Again, I'm not asking to go in your wallet.

    If we can identify them in the womb and terminate the pregnancy
     
    The Islamic view on the morality of this subject is nuanced. If the pregnancy has a serious genetic problem and it can be detected before 120 days, there is leeway to abort for this kind of thing. After a 120 days, ensoulment occurs and the baby has a right just like any individual (unless the mother's life is in danger, in which case she gets precedence).

    We dealt with this very question in my family since my brother's first child had a trisomy disorder and died in the womb.

    Guess who’s paying?
     
    Insurance?

    Peace.

    The Islamic view on the morality…

    lol

  174. @Corvinus
    "If we care about human well-being, then in the long run, eugenics and nothing but eugenics is the only way to improve things. I’d say to you: stop being so damn selfish and holding back progress just to feel better about your own personal predicament."

    I would say the person who is being selfish is you with that attitude.

    Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others--Philippians 2:3-4

    have some integrity and adopt several downies, show us what your word is worth

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "have some integrity and adopt several downies, show us what your word is worth"

    I show integrity every year by helping out with Special Olympics. You ought to know.

    "pretty sure that article you link was debunked and laughed out of town"

    Pretty sure compared to absolutely certain, huh. How about you show us your intellectual chops by debunking it yourself. Can you muster up more than a few sentences and provide a cogent counter argument?

    Or are you just here for the snacks?
  175. @Corvinus
    "Black/white miscegenation is increasingly common."

    Exactly. And it is none of our personal business. In fact, it appears to have benefits.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3146070/Mixed-race-relationships-making-taller-smarter-Children-born-genetically-diverse-parents-intelligent-ancestors.html

    Of course the video that you linked is propaganda in its own right. The fact of the matter is that companies sell both a product and an image reflective of their audience. It just happens to be the audience are Americans, which historically consists of difference races and ethnicities.

    pretty sure that article you link was debunked and laughed out of town

    its been brought up several times on various forums

  176. @anon
    have some integrity and adopt several downies, show us what your word is worth

    “have some integrity and adopt several downies, show us what your word is worth”

    I show integrity every year by helping out with Special Olympics. You ought to know.

    “pretty sure that article you link was debunked and laughed out of town”

    Pretty sure compared to absolutely certain, huh. How about you show us your intellectual chops by debunking it yourself. Can you muster up more than a few sentences and provide a cogent counter argument?

    Or are you just here for the snacks?

    • Replies: @Talha

    I show integrity every year by helping out with Special Olympics. You ought to know.
     
    LOOOL! Ok, that was a good one. Glad I wasn’t mid-sip on my Fanta.

    Peace.
    , @anon

    I show integrity every year by helping out with Special Olympics.
     
    competing in them isn't "helping out"

    How about you show us your intellectual chops by debunking it yourself.
     
    nah, you can do it
    , @res

    Pretty sure compared to absolutely certain, huh. How about you show us your intellectual chops by debunking it yourself. Can you muster up more than a few sentences and provide a cogent counter argument?
     
    Here is the paper itself: https://www.nature.com/articles/nature14618

    Looks to me like it is more about inbreeding. Not about mixed race children.

    In each case, increased homozygosity was associated with decreased trait value, equivalent to the offspring of first cousins being 1.2 cm shorter and having 10 months’ less education.
     
    In fact, they made an effort to look at uniform ethnic groups.

    Where a cohort had multiple ethnicities, sub-cohorts for each separate ethnicity were created and analysed separately. In all cases individuals of European, African, South or Central Asian, East Asian and Hispanic heritage individuals were separated.
     
    Pro tip: With controversial topics don't trust the way popular articles frame research paper results.
  177. @Corvinus
    "have some integrity and adopt several downies, show us what your word is worth"

    I show integrity every year by helping out with Special Olympics. You ought to know.

    "pretty sure that article you link was debunked and laughed out of town"

    Pretty sure compared to absolutely certain, huh. How about you show us your intellectual chops by debunking it yourself. Can you muster up more than a few sentences and provide a cogent counter argument?

    Or are you just here for the snacks?

    I show integrity every year by helping out with Special Olympics. You ought to know.

    LOOOL! Ok, that was a good one. Glad I wasn’t mid-sip on my Fanta.

    Peace.

  178. @Corvinus
    "have some integrity and adopt several downies, show us what your word is worth"

    I show integrity every year by helping out with Special Olympics. You ought to know.

    "pretty sure that article you link was debunked and laughed out of town"

    Pretty sure compared to absolutely certain, huh. How about you show us your intellectual chops by debunking it yourself. Can you muster up more than a few sentences and provide a cogent counter argument?

    Or are you just here for the snacks?

    I show integrity every year by helping out with Special Olympics.

    competing in them isn’t “helping out”

    How about you show us your intellectual chops by debunking it yourself.

    nah, you can do it

    • LOL: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "competing in them isn’t “helping out”"

    You are still sore at losing in the 100 meter dash to a mentally challenged girl, as you thought I had started the stop watch a tic too late. Your mother, however, thanked me for donating my time to help out in a worthy cause.

    "nah, you can do it"

    In other words, you've got little to offer to further debate. That is your m.o.
  179. Why do you guys still respond to Corvinus? He makes dishonest arguments and adds nothing of value. He seeks to derail. The only reason he’s still here is because you idiots always engage.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
    I blocked him many moons ago.
    , @Corvinus
    "Why do you guys still respond to Corvinus? He makes dishonest arguments and adds nothing of value. He seeks to derail."

    I will admit that projection is one of your strong suits.
    , @res
    I think it's good to show how wrong he is now and then. Otherwise some people might get the idea he has a clue. Regulars realize your assessment is spot on.
  180. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Why do you guys still respond to Corvinus? He makes dishonest arguments and adds nothing of value. He seeks to derail. The only reason he's still here is because you idiots always engage.

    I blocked him many moons ago.

  181. @TheBoom
    Asians are almost entirely driven by the question "what is in it for me and my family?" That applies to food (e.g., tastes great and cheap!) and eugenics (e.g., higher status kids who will make more money!).

    Why do you keep making me link this?

    • Replies: @TheBoom
    It would help if you better understood Asian culture. On small issues Asians can be some of the most honest people on the planet. On all major issues it is what is in it for me and my family.

    The plus is practical self interest will keep Asian countries from committing cultural suicide while chanting diversity is our strength.

    The negative is that most Asian countries are very corrupt and many Asians will play a long game con of befriending outsiders until they have an opportunity to gain some type of advantage for the family.

    There is no shame in be being a corrupt official in much of Asia as long as the money goes to the family like a nice car for the wife. In most of Eastern Asia (which is more honest than Southern Asia) bribes take place at all levels of society. You see that in the US as Chinese students merrily cheat. In sales contracts you just factor in a percentage of sales costs going to paying off the persons making the purchase decision.

    Being honest at the expense of your family's financial welfare brings shame on the family in large parts of Asia and is often considered immoral
  182. @Stan d Mute

    We don’t have any idea how to breed human beings to a subjective better self.
     
    Isn’t the goal an objective better human? The population with the lowest IQ seems to have no issues with self-esteem and thus your subjective better self (they’re breeding superabundantly too).

    And haven’t we been breeding flora and fauna into objectively better plants and animals since before recorded history? One doesn’t need to even understand genes or DNA, just prohibit the breeding of defective stock (ie those unable or unwilling to feed themselves, unable to read/write, serious congenital diseases and deformities, etc) as a start.

    Hmmmmm . . . that’s an interesting posit. But if one is talking objective existence or meaning, they are talking about definitive data. IQ is not definitive, at least not yet. Two people with an IQ of 167 get married and have children — we don’t have any idea what their IQ of that child will be.

    However, we can with a pretty good certainty know male or female, some potential for birth defects, and while environment can radically impact even objective biology — the line to cause and effect is far more definitive than something such as temperment.

    Sex is objective verses temperment which is far more malleable.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    IQ is not definitive, at least not yet. Two people with an IQ of 167 get married and have children — we don’t have any idea what their IQ of that child will be.
     
    You have no idea what you're talking about.  You don't know what the height of that child is going to be either, but you do know that the distribution of heights of children of tall people is going to have a higher center than the distribution of heights of children of short people.  The children of smart people average smarter than the children of dumb people.  Not always, but on average.

    But more importantly, IQ is a very good measure of the general mental capability of the individual.  You can get a solid idea of what kind of mental tasks someone will be able to handle using little more than their IQ score.  Further data like chronic mental errors (e.g. failing to grasp the difference between nouns and verbs) can tell you if someone is fit for even the simplest thinking or writing tasks.
  183. We are no where near “Gatacca” child reproduction.

    Sidenote: Those of who claim that the IQ test is not in any manner biased are simply wrong and wrong completely. The very purpose was to test for the French population. The test has been repeatedly modified to western thought and and practice ever since. The veracity of testing it against any population has a lot to with the exposure to western thought, including education, which in and itself is biased, because intelligence testing should have little or nothing to do with learned knowledge.

    I only know this a another read through the origins and development of the test. Even the founders understood its limits and implications societal thinking modalities.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    Sidenote: Those of who claim that the IQ test is not in any manner biased are simply wrong and wrong completely. The very purpose was to test for the French population. The test has been repeatedly modified to western thought and and practice ever since.
     
    NE Asians out-score White Europeans on IQ tests, which totally debunks the "European bias" claim.

    Both IQ and the SAT fail to explain some salient factors like out-of-the-box thinking, but I think what bothers you is that tests like the SAT overpredict the academic performance of blacks; college grades for blacks are generally lower than Whites with the same SAT score.  The black dysfunction can be summarized as use of magical rather than logical thinking.  This is why you flail around using words you obviously don't understand even after they're explained to you; you treat them as magic spells because you saw someone else use them once, without understanding the underlying logic of that use.  Well... all I can say is get used to "disrespect", because you're certainly not earning anything else.
  184. @Audacious Epigone
    3x as many white women are interested in black men as white men are interested in black women. With whites/Asians, it is virtually the reverse.

    most white women interested in black men are proles, fat and stupid

  185. @EliteCommInc.
    Hmmmmm . . . that's an interesting posit. But if one is talking objective existence or meaning, they are talking about definitive data. IQ is not definitive, at least not yet. Two people with an IQ of 167 get married and have children --- we don't have any idea what their IQ of that child will be.


    However, we can with a pretty good certainty know male or female, some potential for birth defects, and while environment can radically impact even objective biology -- the line to cause and effect is far more definitive than something such as temperment.

    Sex is objective verses temperment which is far more malleable.

    IQ is not definitive, at least not yet. Two people with an IQ of 167 get married and have children — we don’t have any idea what their IQ of that child will be.

    You have no idea what you’re talking about.  You don’t know what the height of that child is going to be either, but you do know that the distribution of heights of children of tall people is going to have a higher center than the distribution of heights of children of short people.  The children of smart people average smarter than the children of dumb people.  Not always, but on average.

    But more importantly, IQ is a very good measure of the general mental capability of the individual.  You can get a solid idea of what kind of mental tasks someone will be able to handle using little more than their IQ score.  Further data like chronic mental errors (e.g. failing to grasp the difference between nouns and verbs) can tell you if someone is fit for even the simplest thinking or writing tasks.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    But height is static. The genetic coding is rooted strictly in biology. You are correct as I have already noted, even with biology, there are aspects we cannot predict. However, the coding for that is static. Like eye color, static, like can actually in many instances locate the coding and the connections. That simply is not the case with IQ . . . the shape of the nose static. Color of hair static. We can trace the biological markers for biology. IQ is not a biological trait. And absolutely, if we cannot predict height based on what we know about the genetics, then IQ is worse. So when talking about eugenics to IQ, you are really dancing in unknowns. With height one is much an area that is grounded to biology -- personality traits, IQ and the like . . . it's more than guessing.


    Here's the point,


    https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg20095

  186. @EliteCommInc.
    We are no where near "Gatacca" child reproduction.

    Sidenote: Those of who claim that the IQ test is not in any manner biased are simply wrong and wrong completely. The very purpose was to test for the French population. The test has been repeatedly modified to western thought and and practice ever since. The veracity of testing it against any population has a lot to with the exposure to western thought, including education, which in and itself is biased, because intelligence testing should have little or nothing to do with learned knowledge.


    I only know this a another read through the origins and development of the test. Even the founders understood its limits and implications societal thinking modalities.

    Sidenote: Those of who claim that the IQ test is not in any manner biased are simply wrong and wrong completely. The very purpose was to test for the French population. The test has been repeatedly modified to western thought and and practice ever since.

    NE Asians out-score White Europeans on IQ tests, which totally debunks the “European bias” claim.

    Both IQ and the SAT fail to explain some salient factors like out-of-the-box thinking, but I think what bothers you is that tests like the SAT overpredict the academic performance of blacks; college grades for blacks are generally lower than Whites with the same SAT score.  The black dysfunction can be summarized as use of magical rather than logical thinking.  This is why you flail around using words you obviously don’t understand even after they’re explained to you; you treat them as magic spells because you saw someone else use them once, without understanding the underlying logic of that use.  Well… all I can say is get used to “disrespect”, because you’re certainly not earning anything else.

    • Replies: @anon

    Sidenote: Those of who claim that the IQ test is not in any manner biased are simply wrong and wrong completely. The very purpose was to test for the French population. The test has been repeatedly modified to western thought and and practice ever since.

    NE Asians out-score White Europeans on IQ tests, which totally debunks the “European bias” claim.
     

     
    lol, BTFO'd with one sentence

    so much for "Elite"

    , @EliteCommInc.
    I think you had better read what I said again. Your jumping to a conclusion about which I made a specific reference. I made room for this and knew based on IQ results I had to do so. Your choice to ignore to jump to some standard -- "there's no bias claim", misses what I said.

    And I stand by my comment in full, not your dissection in an attempt to make points.

    Your issue is not so much with me, but with the creators of the exam.
  187. anon[424] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mr. Rational

    Sidenote: Those of who claim that the IQ test is not in any manner biased are simply wrong and wrong completely. The very purpose was to test for the French population. The test has been repeatedly modified to western thought and and practice ever since.
     
    NE Asians out-score White Europeans on IQ tests, which totally debunks the "European bias" claim.

    Both IQ and the SAT fail to explain some salient factors like out-of-the-box thinking, but I think what bothers you is that tests like the SAT overpredict the academic performance of blacks; college grades for blacks are generally lower than Whites with the same SAT score.  The black dysfunction can be summarized as use of magical rather than logical thinking.  This is why you flail around using words you obviously don't understand even after they're explained to you; you treat them as magic spells because you saw someone else use them once, without understanding the underlying logic of that use.  Well... all I can say is get used to "disrespect", because you're certainly not earning anything else.

    Sidenote: Those of who claim that the IQ test is not in any manner biased are simply wrong and wrong completely. The very purpose was to test for the French population. The test has been repeatedly modified to western thought and and practice ever since.

    NE Asians out-score White Europeans on IQ tests, which totally debunks the “European bias” claim.

    lol, BTFO’d with one sentence

    so much for “Elite”

  188. @anon

    I show integrity every year by helping out with Special Olympics.
     
    competing in them isn't "helping out"

    How about you show us your intellectual chops by debunking it yourself.
     
    nah, you can do it

    “competing in them isn’t “helping out””

    You are still sore at losing in the 100 meter dash to a mentally challenged girl, as you thought I had started the stop watch a tic too late. Your mother, however, thanked me for donating my time to help out in a worthy cause.

    “nah, you can do it”

    In other words, you’ve got little to offer to further debate. That is your m.o.

    • Replies: @anon

    In other words, you’ve got little to offer to further debate. That is your m.o.
     
    no, its that i don't take seriously some British rag that acts as a cheerleader for the multi-culti invasion

    if you want to trot out their garbage you prove it
  189. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Why do you guys still respond to Corvinus? He makes dishonest arguments and adds nothing of value. He seeks to derail. The only reason he's still here is because you idiots always engage.

    “Why do you guys still respond to Corvinus? He makes dishonest arguments and adds nothing of value. He seeks to derail.”

    I will admit that projection is one of your strong suits.

  190. @Corvinus
    "competing in them isn’t “helping out”"

    You are still sore at losing in the 100 meter dash to a mentally challenged girl, as you thought I had started the stop watch a tic too late. Your mother, however, thanked me for donating my time to help out in a worthy cause.

    "nah, you can do it"

    In other words, you've got little to offer to further debate. That is your m.o.

    In other words, you’ve got little to offer to further debate. That is your m.o.

    no, its that i don’t take seriously some British rag that acts as a cheerleader for the multi-culti invasion

    if you want to trot out their garbage you prove it

  191. res says:
    @Corvinus
    "have some integrity and adopt several downies, show us what your word is worth"

    I show integrity every year by helping out with Special Olympics. You ought to know.

    "pretty sure that article you link was debunked and laughed out of town"

    Pretty sure compared to absolutely certain, huh. How about you show us your intellectual chops by debunking it yourself. Can you muster up more than a few sentences and provide a cogent counter argument?

    Or are you just here for the snacks?

    Pretty sure compared to absolutely certain, huh. How about you show us your intellectual chops by debunking it yourself. Can you muster up more than a few sentences and provide a cogent counter argument?

    Here is the paper itself: https://www.nature.com/articles/nature14618

    Looks to me like it is more about inbreeding. Not about mixed race children.

    In each case, increased homozygosity was associated with decreased trait value, equivalent to the offspring of first cousins being 1.2 cm shorter and having 10 months’ less education.

    In fact, they made an effort to look at uniform ethnic groups.

    Where a cohort had multiple ethnicities, sub-cohorts for each separate ethnicity were created and analysed separately. In all cases individuals of European, African, South or Central Asian, East Asian and Hispanic heritage individuals were separated.

    Pro tip: With controversial topics don’t trust the way popular articles frame research paper results.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Looks to me like it is more about inbreeding. Not about mixed race children."

    Except that the sample sizes were from different races, so race is playing an important role here. Of course, the scientists did look at whether people had any pairs of genes which were exact, meaning their mother and father passed it on to their offspring. IF this was the case, then the parents COULD be distantly related. Regardless, the research "does imply that people who come from very different ancestry would be a bit taller and a bit more cognitively able” according to one of the researchers (James Wilson). He also noted that “[O]f course cognition depends on a lot of environmental factors as well".

    The conclusions of the research do support the notion that increased height and greater intellect are positive components of evolution from around the globe, with the results positive value on genetic diversity. According to Wilson, "[t]his study highlights the power of large-scale genetic analyses to uncover fundamental information about our evolutionary history".

    "Pro tip: With controversial topics don’t trust the way popular articles frame research paper results."

    Be skeptical, sure. But that does not automatically mean that the article is other than accurate. Of course, we ought not necessarily believe those on the Alt Right who take similar research and put their own spin on it, correct?
  192. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Why do you guys still respond to Corvinus? He makes dishonest arguments and adds nothing of value. He seeks to derail. The only reason he's still here is because you idiots always engage.

    I think it’s good to show how wrong he is now and then. Otherwise some people might get the idea he has a clue. Regulars realize your assessment is spot on.

  193. @Mr. Rational

    Sidenote: Those of who claim that the IQ test is not in any manner biased are simply wrong and wrong completely. The very purpose was to test for the French population. The test has been repeatedly modified to western thought and and practice ever since.
     
    NE Asians out-score White Europeans on IQ tests, which totally debunks the "European bias" claim.

    Both IQ and the SAT fail to explain some salient factors like out-of-the-box thinking, but I think what bothers you is that tests like the SAT overpredict the academic performance of blacks; college grades for blacks are generally lower than Whites with the same SAT score.  The black dysfunction can be summarized as use of magical rather than logical thinking.  This is why you flail around using words you obviously don't understand even after they're explained to you; you treat them as magic spells because you saw someone else use them once, without understanding the underlying logic of that use.  Well... all I can say is get used to "disrespect", because you're certainly not earning anything else.

    I think you had better read what I said again. Your jumping to a conclusion about which I made a specific reference. I made room for this and knew based on IQ results I had to do so. Your choice to ignore to jump to some standard — “there’s no bias claim”, misses what I said.

    And I stand by my comment in full, not your dissection in an attempt to make points.

    Your issue is not so much with me, but with the creators of the exam.

  194. @Mr. Rational

    IQ is not definitive, at least not yet. Two people with an IQ of 167 get married and have children — we don’t have any idea what their IQ of that child will be.
     
    You have no idea what you're talking about.  You don't know what the height of that child is going to be either, but you do know that the distribution of heights of children of tall people is going to have a higher center than the distribution of heights of children of short people.  The children of smart people average smarter than the children of dumb people.  Not always, but on average.

    But more importantly, IQ is a very good measure of the general mental capability of the individual.  You can get a solid idea of what kind of mental tasks someone will be able to handle using little more than their IQ score.  Further data like chronic mental errors (e.g. failing to grasp the difference between nouns and verbs) can tell you if someone is fit for even the simplest thinking or writing tasks.

    But height is static. The genetic coding is rooted strictly in biology. You are correct as I have already noted, even with biology, there are aspects we cannot predict. However, the coding for that is static. Like eye color, static, like can actually in many instances locate the coding and the connections. That simply is not the case with IQ . . . the shape of the nose static. Color of hair static. We can trace the biological markers for biology. IQ is not a biological trait. And absolutely, if we cannot predict height based on what we know about the genetics, then IQ is worse. So when talking about eugenics to IQ, you are really dancing in unknowns. With height one is much an area that is grounded to biology — personality traits, IQ and the like . . . it’s more than guessing.

    Here’s the point,

    https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg20095

  195. “NE Asians out-score White Europeans on IQ tests, which totally debunks the “European bias” claim.”

    My comment addresses this very succinctly.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    My comment addresses this very succinctly.
     
    So succinctly that nobody else can discern it. Perhaps by “succinct” you mean “invisible”?

    My Rational friend appears to have made the same deduction about you that I have. I wonder how many others have noticed.
  196. Furthermore my comment makes a heavier indictment than bias.

    As opposed to getting into debate about the foundations, purposes and construction of IQ tests. I suggest taking a look at its origins and developments for yourself. And no one has to be a historian in social history to grasp very quickly why some non-western societies have adapted to the testing process and expectations.

  197. @EliteCommInc.
    I simply don't get the analysis here. I didn't get when it was introduced here severeal months back in an article on the cite. And I certainly don't get it whenever it was raised in the past or now.

    The K strategy only makes sense it has nonthreatening environments -- nonstressful. But under the stress which many are complaining is here or is on its way -- the R strategy will beat out K strategy without so much as a blink.

    There's a reason there's more Tuna than whales.


    " [Search domain www.bioexpedition.com/yellowfin-tuna/] https://www.bioexpedition.com/yellowfin-tuna/
    Yellowfin Tuna Reproduction. Spawning can occur at various times of the year depending on the locations. The Yellowfin Tuna may travel long distances to take part in such efforts for mating. They are ready for mating when they are from 2 to 3 years of age. A female can release up to 10 million eggs per season."

    I find little utility in applying the theory to humans, especially by political orientation. Generally the argument is that lefties are more r-oriented but that flies in the face of actual fertility rates. Maybe it has some utility by race, but American blacks are less fecund than Amerindians and way less so than sub-Saharan Africans despite broadly sharing ~80% of their genes, so if it has any utility, it’s limited.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    I understand It certainly hard to comprehend as it is applied as a survival strategy.
  198. @Twinkie

    3x as many white women are interested in black men as white men are interested in black women. With whites/Asians, it is virtually the reverse.
     
    1. Marriage numbers are different.

    2. With Asians, you have to look at the American-born numbers.

    These figures are a couple of decades old now, but the ratio pretty much holds by marriage and by cohabitation.

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    ratio pretty much holds by marriage and by cohabitation.
     
    It does not, especially when you compare American-born populations.

    https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/02/16/chapter-1-overview/

    Among Asian newlyweds, the intermarriage gap between native and the foreign born is much bigger for Asian men than for Asian women. In 2010, native-born Asian male newlyweds were about three times as likely as the foreign born to marry out (32% vs. 11%). Among newlywed Asian women, the gap between native and foreign born is much smaller (43% vs.34%).
     
    The 1-to-3 ratio only holds for the foreign-born Asians. Among the American-born the ratio is 3-to-4. Not quite parity, but much closer to it.

    What this says is that foreign-born Asian males have a particularly low intermarriage rate compared to foreign-born Asian females. Likely reasons are several-fold such as, yes, lower "market value" of foreign-born Asian males vs. females, cultural-family reasons (parents are more tolerant of daughters' outmarriages and not so for sons who carry out family names), etc.

    One speculation I have as to why foreign-born Asian males have reduced value, compared to, say, Hispanic males (whose intermarriage rates are similar to those of Hispanic females), is market segmentation by income.

    https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/02/16/chapter-2-characteristics-of-intermarried-newlyweds/

    When you look at the "Ranking the Newlyweds by Husband and Wife’s Race/Ethnicity," you see that Asian (husband)-white (wife)/white (husband)-Asian (wife) categories have the highest combined incomes while Hispanic-white and black-white categories have the lowest incomes except black-black and Hispanic-Hispanic couplings. What this suggests to me is that in the higher income/education segment of the marriage market, there is a particular penalty for being an un-acculturated male, with the language barrier being likely the greatest component.

    Also, it should be understood that among various sub-groups, "Asians" have drastically different outmarrige rates, with Indians (esp. males) having the lowest and the Koreans/Japanese (depending on age cohorts) having the highest.

    Using "Asian" category as a whole tends to mislead in many cases, because the component groups often have wildly different tendencies.
  199. @Talha
    Are they Swedish? I married into a branch of this (originally German) house:
    https://www.houseofnames.com/troye-family-crest

    Apparently the ones my wife’s family descends from were sell-swords that ended up in Scandinavia.

    Peace.
    • Replies: @Talha
    Ah OK - for the record, it was brown hair and brown eyes that made this girl stand out. My mother in law didn’t mention the skin, which I presume would have been White like most Swedes.

    There is a higher market value given to what is rare - this is simply basic supply and demand. I knew a Black brother who was into skateboarding and in the skater crowd before he converted. He told me he was the only Black kid in his high school (I think this was in Oregon or something) and got tons of attention from the girls. This was early nineties, well before the inter-racial advertising onslaught. I discussed this with him and that was his take on it; he didn’t think he was super-fly or some great catch, he just thought the chicks dug him because he was different.

    I also knew a Black guy in my high school around the same timeframe - there were maybe five guys total in our school - also got tons of attention.

    Peace.
  200. @anon
    similarly from the chart if blacks were to be believed they are the least likely to abort a child with genetic defects but aren't blacks the most likely to abort overall?

    seems like people are lying

    They’re aborting for different reasons, presumably.

  201. @Talha

    That is, I would seek to ensure a fertility differential favoring the latter.
     
    Is that through government intervention?

    If so, how would that work exactly? Socialism for the rich? Tax breaks depending on IQ testing and facial symmetry? Feel free to ignore if you don't mean through government-mandated programs.

    I would only attempt to ensure that the numbers of intelligent, healthy and beautiful people grew at a faster rate.
     
    It is the way of the world that this would only move the goal post. These assessments are all relative and subjective. In a future society in which beauty and intelligence is ubiquitous; a woman considered an 8 now would be a 4 or a 5 and a generally intelligent man might be the equivalent of the village idiot.

    I remember my mother-in-law telling me once about her childhood in Sweden (around WW2). She said the most beautiful girl in her class had brown hair and brown eyes. Since all the other kids had blonde hair and blue/green eyes, they had little value for beauty to offer in that market environment.

    Peace.

    There are times I read your posts and a stray thought about what conversion would look like for my family comes across my mind.

    • Replies: @Talha
    Water’s fine...and plenty of room in the pool.

    Peace.
  202. @Audacious Epigone

    Ah OK – for the record, it was brown hair and brown eyes that made this girl stand out. My mother in law didn’t mention the skin, which I presume would have been White like most Swedes.

    There is a higher market value given to what is rare – this is simply basic supply and demand. I knew a Black brother who was into skateboarding and in the skater crowd before he converted. He told me he was the only Black kid in his high school (I think this was in Oregon or something) and got tons of attention from the girls. This was early nineties, well before the inter-racial advertising onslaught. I discussed this with him and that was his take on it; he didn’t think he was super-fly or some great catch, he just thought the chicks dug him because he was different.

    I also knew a Black guy in my high school around the same timeframe – there were maybe five guys total in our school – also got tons of attention.

    Peace.

  203. @Audacious Epigone
    There are times I read your posts and a stray thought about what conversion would look like for my family comes across my mind.

    Water’s fine…and plenty of room in the pool.

    Peace.

  204. @Talha

    since the alternative is too painful to contemplate.
     
    Yeah, a meaningless existence full of troubles in a universe ending ultimately in entropic heat death is pretty sucky, but here we are.

    Life’s a bitch and some people are born into misery and that’s all there is to it.
     
    Hmmm...your side seems to need better PR than:
    Do you have some hope in your life? Come this way, it’s even suckier on this side!

    There obviously is no “god”
     
    ...but Allah. See that’s what I like about atheists, they have the first have of the formula down.

    On a serious note; it’s good to have conviction in your beliefs and be willing to live up to their consequences.


    eugenics and nothing but eugenics is the only way to improve things
     
    Apart from that sounding like a religious statement, survival of the fittest has already been in play from time immemorial, it simply might not agree with your aesthetics - thems the breaks.

    But, I also support any policy in a proposed Whitekanda that strips even Whites of citizenship if they don’t meet certain genetic requirements or requires forcible abortions for certain genetic conditions. Again, since Islam will be outlawed there, you guys knock yourselves out.


    stop being so damn selfish
     
    I don’t know, from where I’m standing, it seems fairly selfish to abort a viable human being because they will inconvenience you.

    holding back progress
     
    The Left-liberals tell us the same thing.

    Why am I holding anyone back? Abort your way (in any trimester) to the master race (for whatever reason - skin tone too dark, not tall enough, missing a limb, etc.), no skin off my back. I don’t know why you think someone with my metaphysical perspective would come to any sort of agreement on this with someone with your perspective.

    Peace.

    Yeah, a meaningless existence full of troubles in a universe ending ultimately in entropic heat death is pretty sucky, but here we are.

    Sucky to you, you mean.

    That’s because you’re yet to experience the power of acceptance. Accepting hard truths – about yourself, about loved ones, about life, the universe, etc – does not mean liking those truths. It just means ceasing to struggle against their truth, ceasing to live in denial of them.

    A strange thing then happens: the pain those truths cause you evaporates.

    “God” is too big a step to practice this technique on from the outset (although it could be done), so I recommend you start with some unpleasant truth about yourself, something that you may “deep down” know is true, but it’s painful to think about it, so you ignore it or evade it or make up self-serving fictions related to it. (A good choice here is some physical imperfection, because one very simple way to make yourself confront it is to simply look in the mirror.)

    You could say to yourself something like, “I don’t have to like this fact about myself, but am I able to accept that it’s true?” Then gauge your reaction. If you feel you’re unable to accept that difficult truth about yourself, then one way to ease yourself towards is to accept your resistance to accepting that truth. “It hurts too much to accept this truth, but I can accept that I am resistant to accepting it.” Over time, you’ll probably find that resistance weakens, and you can finally accept the difficult truth.

    Eventually, you can get your trembling core to accept even the hardest truths about human existence (nihilism and that sort of thing).

    Contrary to what you think now, your life won’t necessarily feel meaningless.

    I remember a book titled “Man, the Tool-maker” by a physical anthropologist (perhaps that phrase predates this book, not sure). I found the title memorable because it seemed to nicely capture a fundamental quality of what makes man man. But he could have equally titled the book “Man, the Meaning-maker,” which to me captures an even more fundamental aspect of our being. It’s just what we do.

    So you can find new meanings to replace the old ones. Your experience of reality will certainly change, but you can be just as happy as you were before. (Or even happier, if you’re one of those unfortunates who only believes in “God” out of fear of punishment.)

    And btw, re the heat death of the universe. Kardashev Type III civilizations man. Maybe by that point there will be a feasible way to prevent it. It’s a pretty ennobling striving, you’d surely agree. And we’ve certainly got a looooong time to work on it.

    • Replies: @Talha

    Sucky to you, you mean.
     
    No, sucks to most atheists too. Which is why they hold the gold in suicide rates a a bunch of other self-destructive patterns. The poz is a gift that atheism has given the world (practically every Muslim apostate I've ever come across that becomes atheist goes hyper-homo-globo). Any society that takes on atheism can pretty much count on taking a demographic nosedive.

    And then there's the aesthetics of nihilism like post-modern art (barf).

    something that you may “deep down” know is true
     
    That I have no soul? That I am a meat-robot? Why?

    A good choice
     
    There is no choice. Without a soul you are simply an evolved biological machine running a series of genetically coded algorithms of input/output. You have no choice in how to interpret the very same input I do and come to the very different conclusions we both do. There is no freewill according to your framework - just an elaborate facade that the brain tricks itself into for the illusion of consioucness. You did not choose to become atheist any more than I can choose to become non-Muslim.

    Contrary to what you think now, your life won’t necessarily feel meaningless.
     
    Well, it feels fairly meaningful now, so why would I want to replace it with something where I simply stop thinking about a good answer to existential questions and ignore them (aka "accept the hard truth")?

    a fundamental quality of what makes man man...an even more fundamental aspect of our being. It’s just what we do.
     
    OK - but so is religion and worship of a Higher Being:
    https://www.nature.com/articles/4551038a

    As the article states, breaking with that primordial disposition requires "deliberate, effortful work against our natural cognitive dispositions"...which would explain why atheists (as Prof. Edward Dutton has pointed out in his studies) are at the vanguard of the golobo-homo poz which breaks with so many other natural dispositions that tend toward survival.

    Maybe by that point there will be a feasible way to prevent it.
     
    Now that is a kind of faith that I find enviable!

    Everyone has that innate predisposition toward desiring immortality and escaping the meaninglessness of one's material existence - they just abstract it in a different way.

    It’s a pretty ennobling striving, you’d surely agree.
     
    Look, I'm glad that kind of project gives you meaning (even though you believe you will no longer exist). To me, with your framework, it's just ultimately differing arrangements of molecules - whether man gets to stick around or not, it'll just be a different arrangement of molecules with no intrinsic lesser value than before. And ultimately that's what it comes down to; what one finds more coherence and meaning in - which is fairly subjective. I find meaning elsewhere:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziYl2U4mCGA

    " O Man! What has seduced you from your Lord, the Most Generous?" (82:6)

    Peace.
  205. @Twinkie
    Why do you keep making me link this?

    https://youtu.be/kWW4xzlrOWQ

    It would help if you better understood Asian culture. On small issues Asians can be some of the most honest people on the planet. On all major issues it is what is in it for me and my family.

    The plus is practical self interest will keep Asian countries from committing cultural suicide while chanting diversity is our strength.

    The negative is that most Asian countries are very corrupt and many Asians will play a long game con of befriending outsiders until they have an opportunity to gain some type of advantage for the family.

    There is no shame in be being a corrupt official in much of Asia as long as the money goes to the family like a nice car for the wife. In most of Eastern Asia (which is more honest than Southern Asia) bribes take place at all levels of society. You see that in the US as Chinese students merrily cheat. In sales contracts you just factor in a percentage of sales costs going to paying off the persons making the purchase decision.

    Being honest at the expense of your family’s financial welfare brings shame on the family in large parts of Asia and is often considered immoral

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    It would help if you better understood Asian culture.
     
    I am ethnically East Asian and grew up there until the early teen years. Later as an adult I also worked extensively with East Asian gov/mil.

    On small issues Asians can be some of the most honest people on the planet. On all major issues it is what is in it for me and my family.
     
    Now you are making progress. I expect further refinement in your assertions as I present more data.

    The negative is that most Asian countries are very corrupt and many Asians will play a long game con of befriending outsiders until they have an opportunity to gain some type of advantage for the family.
     
    "Most"? You are getting better still.

    As for "befriending outsiders," you seem not to realize that, outside their own families, East Asians often form intense, long-term friendships with people who went to school together, especially high school and college. This is not "a long game con." Some of them become "blood-brothers" and closer than family. For example, when my father was afflicted with terminal cancer, his best friend - a high school classmate of his - drove him to the hospital every week (often several times a week) for close to a year. And when he was on his deathbed, several of his friends kept turns keeping him company 24-7 for weeks. This kind of intense friendship is common especially among the older generation unaffected by social media. (On the other hand, it is true that the orientation toward the primary social group is much stronger with the older cohorts, which also means that their orientation toward society at large is weaker compared to the younger cohorts; see below.)

    See this study which compares the friendship qualities, respectively, in South Korea vs. the United States: https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=psych_honproj

    There is no shame in be being a corrupt official in much of Asia as long as the money goes to the family like a nice car for the wife. In most of Eastern Asia (which is more honest than Southern Asia) bribes take place at all levels of society. You see that in the US as Chinese students merrily cheat.
     
    China is still a very poor country, especially on a per capita basis and has emerged from Maoism only a few decades ago. And it is still a highly authoritarian country. See below my earlier comment about corruption in East Asia: http://www.unz.com/isteve/college-admissions-advice-from-a-former-employee-of-rick-singer/#comment-3094016

    I mentioned this several times over the years, but a good proxy for cheating is probably society-wide corruption perceived or experienced by outsiders. There are many ways to measure this, but Transparency International has a survey-based index of long history. Here are the rankings (best to worst) of Asian countries compared to the U.S. and their closest-ranked European countries in 2018: https://www.transparency.org/cpi2018

    3. Singapore (3. Finland, 3. Sweden, 3. Switzerland)
    14. Hong Kong (14. Austria, 14. Iceland)
    18. Japan (18. Estonia, 18. Iceland)
    21. USA (20. France)
    31. Taiwan (30. Portugal, 36. Poland)
    45. South Korea (41. Spain, 53. Italy)
    78. India (77. Bulgaria, 78. Turkey)
    87. China (87. Serbia)
    176. North Korea (no Europeans nearby; tied with 176. Yemen and only better than 178. South Sudan, 178. Syria, 180. Somalia).

    You can guess from this that Singapore, Hong Kong, and Japan probably have somewhat-to-slightly less cheating than the U.S. while Taiwan and South Korea have somewhat more. Meanwhile India and China likely have substantially more. Some of this is ingrained in the cultures, to be sure, but economic development also seems to play a strong role (ranks of those that have undergone recent – and dramatic – economic development, such as Taiwan and South Korea*, have gone up), as demonstrated by the incredible gap between South Korea and North Korea.

    *I saw an interesting social-trust study done in South Korea. It was about leaving out free gifts on an unmonitored table and asking for a donation. The interesting part was that the older Koreans were more likely to take the gifts without donating while the younger ones almost uniformly left donations. In other words, the Korean civic sense seems to have increased quite a bit along with economic development.
     
  206. @Audacious Epigone
    I find little utility in applying the theory to humans, especially by political orientation. Generally the argument is that lefties are more r-oriented but that flies in the face of actual fertility rates. Maybe it has some utility by race, but American blacks are less fecund than Amerindians and way less so than sub-Saharan Africans despite broadly sharing ~80% of their genes, so if it has any utility, it's limited.

    I understand It certainly hard to comprehend as it is applied as a survival strategy.

  207. @silviosilver

    Yeah, a meaningless existence full of troubles in a universe ending ultimately in entropic heat death is pretty sucky, but here we are.
     
    Sucky to you, you mean.

    That's because you're yet to experience the power of acceptance. Accepting hard truths - about yourself, about loved ones, about life, the universe, etc - does not mean liking those truths. It just means ceasing to struggle against their truth, ceasing to live in denial of them.

    A strange thing then happens: the pain those truths cause you evaporates.

    "God" is too big a step to practice this technique on from the outset (although it could be done), so I recommend you start with some unpleasant truth about yourself, something that you may "deep down" know is true, but it's painful to think about it, so you ignore it or evade it or make up self-serving fictions related to it. (A good choice here is some physical imperfection, because one very simple way to make yourself confront it is to simply look in the mirror.)

    You could say to yourself something like, "I don't have to like this fact about myself, but am I able to accept that it's true?" Then gauge your reaction. If you feel you're unable to accept that difficult truth about yourself, then one way to ease yourself towards is to accept your resistance to accepting that truth. "It hurts too much to accept this truth, but I can accept that I am resistant to accepting it." Over time, you'll probably find that resistance weakens, and you can finally accept the difficult truth.

    Eventually, you can get your trembling core to accept even the hardest truths about human existence (nihilism and that sort of thing).

    Contrary to what you think now, your life won't necessarily feel meaningless.

    I remember a book titled "Man, the Tool-maker" by a physical anthropologist (perhaps that phrase predates this book, not sure). I found the title memorable because it seemed to nicely capture a fundamental quality of what makes man man. But he could have equally titled the book "Man, the Meaning-maker," which to me captures an even more fundamental aspect of our being. It's just what we do.

    So you can find new meanings to replace the old ones. Your experience of reality will certainly change, but you can be just as happy as you were before. (Or even happier, if you're one of those unfortunates who only believes in "God" out of fear of punishment.)

    And btw, re the heat death of the universe. Kardashev Type III civilizations man. Maybe by that point there will be a feasible way to prevent it. It's a pretty ennobling striving, you'd surely agree. And we've certainly got a looooong time to work on it.

    Sucky to you, you mean.

    No, sucks to most atheists too. Which is why they hold the gold in suicide rates a a bunch of other self-destructive patterns. The poz is a gift that atheism has given the world (practically every Muslim apostate I’ve ever come across that becomes atheist goes hyper-homo-globo). Any society that takes on atheism can pretty much count on taking a demographic nosedive.

    And then there’s the aesthetics of nihilism like post-modern art (barf).

    something that you may “deep down” know is true

    That I have no soul? That I am a meat-robot? Why?

    A good choice

    There is no choice. Without a soul you are simply an evolved biological machine running a series of genetically coded algorithms of input/output. You have no choice in how to interpret the very same input I do and come to the very different conclusions we both do. There is no freewill according to your framework – just an elaborate facade that the brain tricks itself into for the illusion of consioucness. You did not choose to become atheist any more than I can choose to become non-Muslim.

    Contrary to what you think now, your life won’t necessarily feel meaningless.

    Well, it feels fairly meaningful now, so why would I want to replace it with something where I simply stop thinking about a good answer to existential questions and ignore them (aka “accept the hard truth”)?

    a fundamental quality of what makes man man…an even more fundamental aspect of our being. It’s just what we do.

    OK – but so is religion and worship of a Higher Being:
    https://www.nature.com/articles/4551038a

    As the article states, breaking with that primordial disposition requires “deliberate, effortful work against our natural cognitive dispositions”…which would explain why atheists (as Prof. Edward Dutton has pointed out in his studies) are at the vanguard of the golobo-homo poz which breaks with so many other natural dispositions that tend toward survival.

    Maybe by that point there will be a feasible way to prevent it.

    Now that is a kind of faith that I find enviable!

    Everyone has that innate predisposition toward desiring immortality and escaping the meaninglessness of one’s material existence – they just abstract it in a different way.

    It’s a pretty ennobling striving, you’d surely agree.

    Look, I’m glad that kind of project gives you meaning (even though you believe you will no longer exist). To me, with your framework, it’s just ultimately differing arrangements of molecules – whether man gets to stick around or not, it’ll just be a different arrangement of molecules with no intrinsic lesser value than before. And ultimately that’s what it comes down to; what one finds more coherence and meaning in – which is fairly subjective. I find meaning elsewhere:

    ” O Man! What has seduced you from your Lord, the Most Generous?” (82:6)

    Peace.

    • Replies: @silviosilver

    The poz is a gift that atheism has given the world (practically every Muslim apostate I’ve ever come across that becomes atheist goes hyper-homo-globo). Any society that takes on atheism can pretty much count on taking a demographic nosedive.
     
    That's because poz beats the pants off Islam. It's no contest.

    Now, despite not being a huge fan of the poz, it's important to note that it comes about as a result of wanting to heal people's pain. It comes from asking the right questions, such as "What do humans need?", rather than idiotic questions like "What does God want?" I disagree with leftards' answers to these questions, but if they're providing the wrong answers to the right questions today, then at least there's hope they'll one day start providing the right answers. With religious fuckwits (Islamic ones, above all), there is no hope of getting the right answers.

    As for a demographic nosedive, a secular global population of 50 million with an average IQ 150 would be infinitely more pleasant to live in than a global population of 10 billion 70 IQ religious retards.

    Who's to say we won't get there, either? The short-term picture looks grim. But we've got a lot of time to play with. Even if we only raise IQ by 1 point per millennium, in a million years... you do the math. (We're not going to get there by worrying what "Allah" thinks about it, lol.) Population reductions can occur even more rapidly.

    There is no choice. Without a soul you are simply an evolved biological machine running a series of genetically coded algorithms of input/output. You have no choice in how to interpret the very same input I do and come to the very different conclusions we both do. There is no freewill according to your framework – just an elaborate facade that the brain tricks itself into for the illusion of consioucness.
     
    I find most traditional and religious soul-talk incoherent, but I'm not opposed to the existence of "souls" (whatever they are). Indeed, I've recently read some pretty interesting speculation about souls from mind-body dualists (or "neo-dualists," let's say). The existence of souls doesn't imply the existence of "God" however, and certainly not the creepy totalitarian entity named "Allah". Soul hypotheses that exclude "God" are much more interesting than those that include him.

    But even if souls don't exist, it's possible that free will is an emergent property of certain combinations of matter. You have faith that only a "God" could explain free will, and I have faith that a "God" is unnecessary; we're both just making things up to suit our preferred view of the world.

    Well, it feels fairly meaningful now, so why would I want to replace it with something where I simply stop thinking about a good answer to existential questions and ignore them (aka “accept the hard truth”)?
     
    Because there are better brands of bullshit than islam. Brands that don't require mentally torturing millions of innocents with threats of divine punishment. Brands that don't leave societies mired in primitive sand fable mythology and morality.
  208. @res

    Pretty sure compared to absolutely certain, huh. How about you show us your intellectual chops by debunking it yourself. Can you muster up more than a few sentences and provide a cogent counter argument?
     
    Here is the paper itself: https://www.nature.com/articles/nature14618

    Looks to me like it is more about inbreeding. Not about mixed race children.

    In each case, increased homozygosity was associated with decreased trait value, equivalent to the offspring of first cousins being 1.2 cm shorter and having 10 months’ less education.
     
    In fact, they made an effort to look at uniform ethnic groups.

    Where a cohort had multiple ethnicities, sub-cohorts for each separate ethnicity were created and analysed separately. In all cases individuals of European, African, South or Central Asian, East Asian and Hispanic heritage individuals were separated.
     
    Pro tip: With controversial topics don't trust the way popular articles frame research paper results.

    “Looks to me like it is more about inbreeding. Not about mixed race children.”

    Except that the sample sizes were from different races, so race is playing an important role here. Of course, the scientists did look at whether people had any pairs of genes which were exact, meaning their mother and father passed it on to their offspring. IF this was the case, then the parents COULD be distantly related. Regardless, the research “does imply that people who come from very different ancestry would be a bit taller and a bit more cognitively able” according to one of the researchers (James Wilson). He also noted that “[O]f course cognition depends on a lot of environmental factors as well”.

    The conclusions of the research do support the notion that increased height and greater intellect are positive components of evolution from around the globe, with the results positive value on genetic diversity. According to Wilson, “[t]his study highlights the power of large-scale genetic analyses to uncover fundamental information about our evolutionary history”.

    “Pro tip: With controversial topics don’t trust the way popular articles frame research paper results.”

    Be skeptical, sure. But that does not automatically mean that the article is other than accurate. Of course, we ought not necessarily believe those on the Alt Right who take similar research and put their own spin on it, correct?

    • Replies: @res

    so race is playing an important role here.
     
    You did read my second quote, which showed the efforts they went to to eliminate the effect of race from the analysis, right? In case not, here is the most important part again.

    Where a cohort had multiple ethnicities, sub-cohorts for each separate ethnicity were created and analysed separately.
     
    Regarding:

    The conclusions of the research do support the notion that increased height and greater intellect are positive components of evolution from around the globe,
     
    Yes. That is rather unsurprising, but when it comes to human differences many people seem unwilling to admit the sky is blue so I guess that is progress. The bonus question is: "do you think evolution occurred to the same degree for all groups with respect to all traits?"

    But then you continue with:

    with the results positive value on genetic diversity.
     
    Not sure this means what you think it means. They found homozygosity was a benefit, but did not look at all into whether different groups might have different mean attributes. If there are different means then there will also be an effect where the lower value pulls the combination down.

    Be skeptical, sure. But that does not automatically mean that the article is other than accurate.
     
    Right. Which is why one should read the paper underlying the article (you did that before posting, right?) and decide for oneself the merits of each. Which is why I posted excerpts from the paper which contradict the framing of the article.

    Of course, we ought not necessarily believe those on the Alt Right who take similar research and put their own spin on it, correct?
     
    Right. One should look at the arguments on their merits. But comparing the few times that happens (how many alt-right outlets are there? how many readers do they have?) with the continual message most people are getting from the MSM is just another typical Corvinus false equivalency.

    But then again, this is Corvinus, so I am just wasting my time. But hopefully this will help someone understand just how pathetic your rhetoric and the underlying arguments you offer are.

    Carry on.
  209. @Audacious Epigone
    These figures are a couple of decades old now, but the ratio pretty much holds by marriage and by cohabitation.

    ratio pretty much holds by marriage and by cohabitation.

    It does not, especially when you compare American-born populations.

    https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/02/16/chapter-1-overview/

    Among Asian newlyweds, the intermarriage gap between native and the foreign born is much bigger for Asian men than for Asian women. In 2010, native-born Asian male newlyweds were about three times as likely as the foreign born to marry out (32% vs. 11%). Among newlywed Asian women, the gap between native and foreign born is much smaller (43% vs.34%).

    The 1-to-3 ratio only holds for the foreign-born Asians. Among the American-born the ratio is 3-to-4. Not quite parity, but much closer to it.

    What this says is that foreign-born Asian males have a particularly low intermarriage rate compared to foreign-born Asian females. Likely reasons are several-fold such as, yes, lower “market value” of foreign-born Asian males vs. females, cultural-family reasons (parents are more tolerant of daughters’ outmarriages and not so for sons who carry out family names), etc.

    One speculation I have as to why foreign-born Asian males have reduced value, compared to, say, Hispanic males (whose intermarriage rates are similar to those of Hispanic females), is market segmentation by income.

    https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/02/16/chapter-2-characteristics-of-intermarried-newlyweds/

    When you look at the “Ranking the Newlyweds by Husband and Wife’s Race/Ethnicity,” you see that Asian (husband)-white (wife)/white (husband)-Asian (wife) categories have the highest combined incomes while Hispanic-white and black-white categories have the lowest incomes except black-black and Hispanic-Hispanic couplings. What this suggests to me is that in the higher income/education segment of the marriage market, there is a particular penalty for being an un-acculturated male, with the language barrier being likely the greatest component.

    Also, it should be understood that among various sub-groups, “Asians” have drastically different outmarrige rates, with Indians (esp. males) having the lowest and the Koreans/Japanese (depending on age cohorts) having the highest.

    Using “Asian” category as a whole tends to mislead in many cases, because the component groups often have wildly different tendencies.

    • Replies: @Johann Ricke

    What this says is that foreign-born Asian males have a particularly low intermarriage rate compared to foreign-born Asian females. Likely reasons are several-fold such as, yes, lower “market value” of foreign-born Asian males vs. females, cultural-family reasons (parents are more tolerant of daughters’ outmarriages and not so for sons who carry out family names), etc.
     
    The underlying assumption here seems to be that white women are viewed as superior marriage partners by foreign-born Oriental men. The corollary assumption seems to be that they view Oriental women as inferior marriage partners. Are these assumptions necessarily true? Ultimately, the question is why foreign-born Oriental men would settle for white women when there's a vast pool of foreign-born Oriental women to choose from.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    I don't dispute this. I thought the first objection was wrt cohabitation rates, not native- vs foreign-born.
  210. @TheBoom
    It would help if you better understood Asian culture. On small issues Asians can be some of the most honest people on the planet. On all major issues it is what is in it for me and my family.

    The plus is practical self interest will keep Asian countries from committing cultural suicide while chanting diversity is our strength.

    The negative is that most Asian countries are very corrupt and many Asians will play a long game con of befriending outsiders until they have an opportunity to gain some type of advantage for the family.

    There is no shame in be being a corrupt official in much of Asia as long as the money goes to the family like a nice car for the wife. In most of Eastern Asia (which is more honest than Southern Asia) bribes take place at all levels of society. You see that in the US as Chinese students merrily cheat. In sales contracts you just factor in a percentage of sales costs going to paying off the persons making the purchase decision.

    Being honest at the expense of your family's financial welfare brings shame on the family in large parts of Asia and is often considered immoral

    It would help if you better understood Asian culture.

    I am ethnically East Asian and grew up there until the early teen years. Later as an adult I also worked extensively with East Asian gov/mil.

    On small issues Asians can be some of the most honest people on the planet. On all major issues it is what is in it for me and my family.

    Now you are making progress. I expect further refinement in your assertions as I present more data.

    The negative is that most Asian countries are very corrupt and many Asians will play a long game con of befriending outsiders until they have an opportunity to gain some type of advantage for the family.

    “Most”? You are getting better still.

    As for “befriending outsiders,” you seem not to realize that, outside their own families, East Asians often form intense, long-term friendships with people who went to school together, especially high school and college. This is not “a long game con.” Some of them become “blood-brothers” and closer than family. For example, when my father was afflicted with terminal cancer, his best friend – a high school classmate of his – drove him to the hospital every week (often several times a week) for close to a year. And when he was on his deathbed, several of his friends kept turns keeping him company 24-7 for weeks. This kind of intense friendship is common especially among the older generation unaffected by social media. (On the other hand, it is true that the orientation toward the primary social group is much stronger with the older cohorts, which also means that their orientation toward society at large is weaker compared to the younger cohorts; see below.)

    See this study which compares the friendship qualities, respectively, in South Korea vs. the United States: https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=psych_honproj

    There is no shame in be being a corrupt official in much of Asia as long as the money goes to the family like a nice car for the wife. In most of Eastern Asia (which is more honest than Southern Asia) bribes take place at all levels of society. You see that in the US as Chinese students merrily cheat.

    China is still a very poor country, especially on a per capita basis and has emerged from Maoism only a few decades ago. And it is still a highly authoritarian country. See below my earlier comment about corruption in East Asia: http://www.unz.com/isteve/college-admissions-advice-from-a-former-employee-of-rick-singer/#comment-3094016

    I mentioned this several times over the years, but a good proxy for cheating is probably society-wide corruption perceived or experienced by outsiders. There are many ways to measure this, but Transparency International has a survey-based index of long history. Here are the rankings (best to worst) of Asian countries compared to the U.S. and their closest-ranked European countries in 2018: https://www.transparency.org/cpi2018

    3. Singapore (3. Finland, 3. Sweden, 3. Switzerland)
    14. Hong Kong (14. Austria, 14. Iceland)
    18. Japan (18. Estonia, 18. Iceland)
    21. USA (20. France)
    31. Taiwan (30. Portugal, 36. Poland)
    45. South Korea (41. Spain, 53. Italy)
    78. India (77. Bulgaria, 78. Turkey)
    87. China (87. Serbia)
    176. North Korea (no Europeans nearby; tied with 176. Yemen and only better than 178. South Sudan, 178. Syria, 180. Somalia).

    You can guess from this that Singapore, Hong Kong, and Japan probably have somewhat-to-slightly less cheating than the U.S. while Taiwan and South Korea have somewhat more. Meanwhile India and China likely have substantially more. Some of this is ingrained in the cultures, to be sure, but economic development also seems to play a strong role (ranks of those that have undergone recent – and dramatic – economic development, such as Taiwan and South Korea*, have gone up), as demonstrated by the incredible gap between South Korea and North Korea.

    *I saw an interesting social-trust study done in South Korea. It was about leaving out free gifts on an unmonitored table and asking for a donation. The interesting part was that the older Koreans were more likely to take the gifts without donating while the younger ones almost uniformly left donations. In other words, the Korean civic sense seems to have increased quite a bit along with economic development.

    • Agree: tamo
    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    it is true that the orientation
     
    Oh come on, you know the correct term is asianation.

    Is this now like enward? Where I’m not permitted to say it but @Truth can use it twenty times in the same rap with impunity?

    Like they’ve done with Mexicans, America’s white liberals are turning you people into quasi-enwards. Back home you’re okay with your rice bowls and dog barbecue, but come to America and within a generation you’re doing gangster math rap and flaunting your power to use the ohward.
  211. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    TFR For 2018 by Selected Asian regions

    South Korea - 0.97
    Hong Kong - < 1.1
    Taiwan - < 1.1
    Japan - 1.4
    China - Official is 1.6, but probably lower (some estimates are 1.2)
    Thailand - 1.38

    Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Myanmar, India (many provinces are below), Bangladesh are now floating right around replacement, and will soon plunge below.

    The population pyramids of some of these East Asian countries are absolutely horrific. Something will have to be done, because I don't see the countries surviving with such a sudden demographic contraction. Asians I know have no interest in having children. No East Asians are interested in family, and South Asians by the 2nd generation are engrossed in the rap/thug culture, also in no place to start a family.

    Anyways, the neo-liberal order is actually doing quite a good job at ethnically cleansing the world of Asians. White fertility seems to stick somewhere around 1.6, while Asians seems to be around 1?? or lower. Just keep the Muslims and Africans out of Europe and we're good to go.

    Sounds to me like we are in the middle of very strong selection for people who have genes for wanting to have children. Or perhaps just selecting for people that are not too smart to have children.

    Previously we were just selecting for people with genes for wanting to have sex.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  212. @Twinkie

    ratio pretty much holds by marriage and by cohabitation.
     
    It does not, especially when you compare American-born populations.

    https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/02/16/chapter-1-overview/

    Among Asian newlyweds, the intermarriage gap between native and the foreign born is much bigger for Asian men than for Asian women. In 2010, native-born Asian male newlyweds were about three times as likely as the foreign born to marry out (32% vs. 11%). Among newlywed Asian women, the gap between native and foreign born is much smaller (43% vs.34%).
     
    The 1-to-3 ratio only holds for the foreign-born Asians. Among the American-born the ratio is 3-to-4. Not quite parity, but much closer to it.

    What this says is that foreign-born Asian males have a particularly low intermarriage rate compared to foreign-born Asian females. Likely reasons are several-fold such as, yes, lower "market value" of foreign-born Asian males vs. females, cultural-family reasons (parents are more tolerant of daughters' outmarriages and not so for sons who carry out family names), etc.

    One speculation I have as to why foreign-born Asian males have reduced value, compared to, say, Hispanic males (whose intermarriage rates are similar to those of Hispanic females), is market segmentation by income.

    https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/02/16/chapter-2-characteristics-of-intermarried-newlyweds/

    When you look at the "Ranking the Newlyweds by Husband and Wife’s Race/Ethnicity," you see that Asian (husband)-white (wife)/white (husband)-Asian (wife) categories have the highest combined incomes while Hispanic-white and black-white categories have the lowest incomes except black-black and Hispanic-Hispanic couplings. What this suggests to me is that in the higher income/education segment of the marriage market, there is a particular penalty for being an un-acculturated male, with the language barrier being likely the greatest component.

    Also, it should be understood that among various sub-groups, "Asians" have drastically different outmarrige rates, with Indians (esp. males) having the lowest and the Koreans/Japanese (depending on age cohorts) having the highest.

    Using "Asian" category as a whole tends to mislead in many cases, because the component groups often have wildly different tendencies.

    What this says is that foreign-born Asian males have a particularly low intermarriage rate compared to foreign-born Asian females. Likely reasons are several-fold such as, yes, lower “market value” of foreign-born Asian males vs. females, cultural-family reasons (parents are more tolerant of daughters’ outmarriages and not so for sons who carry out family names), etc.

    The underlying assumption here seems to be that white women are viewed as superior marriage partners by foreign-born Oriental men. The corollary assumption seems to be that they view Oriental women as inferior marriage partners. Are these assumptions necessarily true? Ultimately, the question is why foreign-born Oriental men would settle for white women when there’s a vast pool of foreign-born Oriental women to choose from.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    I wouldn’t quite put it that way - it’s more that natives - esp. affluent and educated - tend to be viewed as desirable marriage partners by immigrants who typically crave acceptance by the native population. And in this context foreign-born females have an advantage over foreign-born males.

    To put simply, at the higher SES segment of the marriage market, native males are much more willing to marry non-native, presumably unacculturated females than are native females to marry unacculturated males.

    Makes perfect sense when you think about the implications. Female value is in physical attractiveness and suitability as a wife and a mother, regardless of acculturation (indeed many men might see foreign Asian values as a plus in women). Male value, on the other hand, is in socio-economic status, and lack of acculturation is a serious drag on it, hence the large gap between foreign-born vs American-born Asian men in outmarriage rates.

    , @Truth

    Ultimately, the question is why foreign-born Oriental men would settle for white women when there’s a vast pool of foreign-born Oriental women to choose from.
     
    Spoken like a true WhiteMan. Where'sTillie?
    , @Twinkie
    I forgot to mention, by the way, that intermarriage rates have been dropping significantly for Asians in the U.S., esp. for the American-born:

    The slight decline of intermarriage rates among Asian newlyweds between 2008 and 2010 is on a similar scale for both Asian males and females (about a 3-percentage-point drop for each).
     

    Intermarriage rates for both native- and foreign-born Asians declined between 2008 and 2010, but the drop is much more significant for native-born Asians (from 47% to 38%) than for foreign-born Asian newlyweds (from 26% to 24%).
     
    My suspicion is that the reasons are three-fold: first, there is a much greater pool of Asians to marry and, second, I think the relentless "Asian-consciousness" and anti-assimilation indoctrination in the society, including in academia, are taking a toll. Finally, the composition of "Asians" has changed - more South Asian immigrants = fewer intermarriages (though that probably doesn't account for why the American-born rates have dropped so significantly and suddenly).
  213. @EliteCommInc.
    "NE Asians out-score White Europeans on IQ tests, which totally debunks the “European bias” claim."


    My comment addresses this very succinctly.

    My comment addresses this very succinctly.

    So succinctly that nobody else can discern it. Perhaps by “succinct” you mean “invisible”?

    My Rational friend appears to have made the same deduction about you that I have. I wonder how many others have noticed.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    I wonder how many others have noticed.
     
    We all know who won't notice.  Dunning-Kruger is like that.
    , @EliteCommInc.
    Here's a trick. When someone makes a comment that is unclear to me, I engage in the custom of noting what is

    unclear

    why it is unclear to me and

    suggest some further explanation.

    I don't whine about their possible skin color, nationality, where they live, their education, make personal suggestions about their integrity . . . nor prognosticate about what others think of said individual

    just a simple comment to explain.
    ----------------------


    Or let the matter rest and think about it or not.

    , @EliteCommInc.
    In your haste to make an argument, you 'shortcutted' the meaning leaving out the relevant content that addresses your complaint.
  214. @Twinkie

    It would help if you better understood Asian culture.
     
    I am ethnically East Asian and grew up there until the early teen years. Later as an adult I also worked extensively with East Asian gov/mil.

    On small issues Asians can be some of the most honest people on the planet. On all major issues it is what is in it for me and my family.
     
    Now you are making progress. I expect further refinement in your assertions as I present more data.

    The negative is that most Asian countries are very corrupt and many Asians will play a long game con of befriending outsiders until they have an opportunity to gain some type of advantage for the family.
     
    "Most"? You are getting better still.

    As for "befriending outsiders," you seem not to realize that, outside their own families, East Asians often form intense, long-term friendships with people who went to school together, especially high school and college. This is not "a long game con." Some of them become "blood-brothers" and closer than family. For example, when my father was afflicted with terminal cancer, his best friend - a high school classmate of his - drove him to the hospital every week (often several times a week) for close to a year. And when he was on his deathbed, several of his friends kept turns keeping him company 24-7 for weeks. This kind of intense friendship is common especially among the older generation unaffected by social media. (On the other hand, it is true that the orientation toward the primary social group is much stronger with the older cohorts, which also means that their orientation toward society at large is weaker compared to the younger cohorts; see below.)

    See this study which compares the friendship qualities, respectively, in South Korea vs. the United States: https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=psych_honproj

    There is no shame in be being a corrupt official in much of Asia as long as the money goes to the family like a nice car for the wife. In most of Eastern Asia (which is more honest than Southern Asia) bribes take place at all levels of society. You see that in the US as Chinese students merrily cheat.
     
    China is still a very poor country, especially on a per capita basis and has emerged from Maoism only a few decades ago. And it is still a highly authoritarian country. See below my earlier comment about corruption in East Asia: http://www.unz.com/isteve/college-admissions-advice-from-a-former-employee-of-rick-singer/#comment-3094016

    I mentioned this several times over the years, but a good proxy for cheating is probably society-wide corruption perceived or experienced by outsiders. There are many ways to measure this, but Transparency International has a survey-based index of long history. Here are the rankings (best to worst) of Asian countries compared to the U.S. and their closest-ranked European countries in 2018: https://www.transparency.org/cpi2018

    3. Singapore (3. Finland, 3. Sweden, 3. Switzerland)
    14. Hong Kong (14. Austria, 14. Iceland)
    18. Japan (18. Estonia, 18. Iceland)
    21. USA (20. France)
    31. Taiwan (30. Portugal, 36. Poland)
    45. South Korea (41. Spain, 53. Italy)
    78. India (77. Bulgaria, 78. Turkey)
    87. China (87. Serbia)
    176. North Korea (no Europeans nearby; tied with 176. Yemen and only better than 178. South Sudan, 178. Syria, 180. Somalia).

    You can guess from this that Singapore, Hong Kong, and Japan probably have somewhat-to-slightly less cheating than the U.S. while Taiwan and South Korea have somewhat more. Meanwhile India and China likely have substantially more. Some of this is ingrained in the cultures, to be sure, but economic development also seems to play a strong role (ranks of those that have undergone recent – and dramatic – economic development, such as Taiwan and South Korea*, have gone up), as demonstrated by the incredible gap between South Korea and North Korea.

    *I saw an interesting social-trust study done in South Korea. It was about leaving out free gifts on an unmonitored table and asking for a donation. The interesting part was that the older Koreans were more likely to take the gifts without donating while the younger ones almost uniformly left donations. In other words, the Korean civic sense seems to have increased quite a bit along with economic development.
     

    it is true that the orientation

    Oh come on, you know the correct term is asianation.

    Is this now like enward? Where I’m not permitted to say it but can use it twenty times in the same rap with impunity?

    Like they’ve done with Mexicans, America’s white liberals are turning you people into quasi-enwards. Back home you’re okay with your rice bowls and dog barbecue, but come to America and within a generation you’re doing gangster math rap and flaunting your power to use the ohward.

    • LOL: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Back home you’re okay with your rice bowls and dog barbecue
     
    This isn’t the 1950’s. East Asia, especially places such as Seoul and Tokyo, are SWPL heaven:
    https://youtu.be/_0ZLvFWhyyY
    , @tamo
    If I were you, I would worry about your horny wife longing for BBCs while you are out, instead of being obsessed with East Asians with rice bowls and eating dog meat, LOL !!!
    , @Truth

    Is this now like enward? Where I’m not permitted to say it but @Truth can use it twenty times in the same rap with impunity?
     
    LOL, don't make no difference to me. You can N-Bomb until your heart's content. You don't say it because of societal pressures that make it unfomfortable for you to say it.
    , @Truth
    Well Twinkle Toes, Stanley does have a point there...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcSIurVQcRs

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFg66BJO2w4
  215. @Johann Ricke

    What this says is that foreign-born Asian males have a particularly low intermarriage rate compared to foreign-born Asian females. Likely reasons are several-fold such as, yes, lower “market value” of foreign-born Asian males vs. females, cultural-family reasons (parents are more tolerant of daughters’ outmarriages and not so for sons who carry out family names), etc.
     
    The underlying assumption here seems to be that white women are viewed as superior marriage partners by foreign-born Oriental men. The corollary assumption seems to be that they view Oriental women as inferior marriage partners. Are these assumptions necessarily true? Ultimately, the question is why foreign-born Oriental men would settle for white women when there's a vast pool of foreign-born Oriental women to choose from.

    I wouldn’t quite put it that way – it’s more that natives – esp. affluent and educated – tend to be viewed as desirable marriage partners by immigrants who typically crave acceptance by the native population. And in this context foreign-born females have an advantage over foreign-born males.

    To put simply, at the higher SES segment of the marriage market, native males are much more willing to marry non-native, presumably unacculturated females than are native females to marry unacculturated males.

    Makes perfect sense when you think about the implications. Female value is in physical attractiveness and suitability as a wife and a mother, regardless of acculturation (indeed many men might see foreign Asian values as a plus in women). Male value, on the other hand, is in socio-economic status, and lack of acculturation is a serious drag on it, hence the large gap between foreign-born vs American-born Asian men in outmarriage rates.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  216. @Stan d Mute

    it is true that the orientation
     
    Oh come on, you know the correct term is asianation.

    Is this now like enward? Where I’m not permitted to say it but @Truth can use it twenty times in the same rap with impunity?

    Like they’ve done with Mexicans, America’s white liberals are turning you people into quasi-enwards. Back home you’re okay with your rice bowls and dog barbecue, but come to America and within a generation you’re doing gangster math rap and flaunting your power to use the ohward.

    Back home you’re okay with your rice bowls and dog barbecue

    This isn’t the 1950’s. East Asia, especially places such as Seoul and Tokyo, are SWPL heaven:

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    Seoul and Tokyo, are SWPL heaven
     
    Oh come now, the greatest aspiration of any SWPL type is to have a real African friend all their own. If they’re extraordinarily lucky, their African friend will have young children the SWPL can borrow to exhibit in public. And neither Seoul nor Tokyo has remotely enough holy Africans to go around. I think America’s biggest public policy priority must be transporting the maximum number of Africans to east Asia in the shortest time possible. It’s the right thing to do. It is who we are.
  217. @Talha

    Sucky to you, you mean.
     
    No, sucks to most atheists too. Which is why they hold the gold in suicide rates a a bunch of other self-destructive patterns. The poz is a gift that atheism has given the world (practically every Muslim apostate I've ever come across that becomes atheist goes hyper-homo-globo). Any society that takes on atheism can pretty much count on taking a demographic nosedive.

    And then there's the aesthetics of nihilism like post-modern art (barf).

    something that you may “deep down” know is true
     
    That I have no soul? That I am a meat-robot? Why?

    A good choice
     
    There is no choice. Without a soul you are simply an evolved biological machine running a series of genetically coded algorithms of input/output. You have no choice in how to interpret the very same input I do and come to the very different conclusions we both do. There is no freewill according to your framework - just an elaborate facade that the brain tricks itself into for the illusion of consioucness. You did not choose to become atheist any more than I can choose to become non-Muslim.

    Contrary to what you think now, your life won’t necessarily feel meaningless.
     
    Well, it feels fairly meaningful now, so why would I want to replace it with something where I simply stop thinking about a good answer to existential questions and ignore them (aka "accept the hard truth")?

    a fundamental quality of what makes man man...an even more fundamental aspect of our being. It’s just what we do.
     
    OK - but so is religion and worship of a Higher Being:
    https://www.nature.com/articles/4551038a

    As the article states, breaking with that primordial disposition requires "deliberate, effortful work against our natural cognitive dispositions"...which would explain why atheists (as Prof. Edward Dutton has pointed out in his studies) are at the vanguard of the golobo-homo poz which breaks with so many other natural dispositions that tend toward survival.

    Maybe by that point there will be a feasible way to prevent it.
     
    Now that is a kind of faith that I find enviable!

    Everyone has that innate predisposition toward desiring immortality and escaping the meaninglessness of one's material existence - they just abstract it in a different way.

    It’s a pretty ennobling striving, you’d surely agree.
     
    Look, I'm glad that kind of project gives you meaning (even though you believe you will no longer exist). To me, with your framework, it's just ultimately differing arrangements of molecules - whether man gets to stick around or not, it'll just be a different arrangement of molecules with no intrinsic lesser value than before. And ultimately that's what it comes down to; what one finds more coherence and meaning in - which is fairly subjective. I find meaning elsewhere:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziYl2U4mCGA

    " O Man! What has seduced you from your Lord, the Most Generous?" (82:6)

    Peace.

    The poz is a gift that atheism has given the world (practically every Muslim apostate I’ve ever come across that becomes atheist goes hyper-homo-globo). Any society that takes on atheism can pretty much count on taking a demographic nosedive.

    That’s because poz beats the pants off Islam. It’s no contest.

    Now, despite not being a huge fan of the poz, it’s important to note that it comes about as a result of wanting to heal people’s pain. It comes from asking the right questions, such as “What do humans need?”, rather than idiotic questions like “What does God want?” I disagree with leftards’ answers to these questions, but if they’re providing the wrong answers to the right questions today, then at least there’s hope they’ll one day start providing the right answers. With religious fuckwits (Islamic ones, above all), there is no hope of getting the right answers.

    As for a demographic nosedive, a secular global population of 50 million with an average IQ 150 would be infinitely more pleasant to live in than a global population of 10 billion 70 IQ religious retards.

    Who’s to say we won’t get there, either? The short-term picture looks grim. But we’ve got a lot of time to play with. Even if we only raise IQ by 1 point per millennium, in a million years… you do the math. (We’re not going to get there by worrying what “Allah” thinks about it, lol.) Population reductions can occur even more rapidly.

    There is no choice. Without a soul you are simply an evolved biological machine running a series of genetically coded algorithms of input/output. You have no choice in how to interpret the very same input I do and come to the very different conclusions we both do. There is no freewill according to your framework – just an elaborate facade that the brain tricks itself into for the illusion of consioucness.

    I find most traditional and religious soul-talk incoherent, but I’m not opposed to the existence of “souls” (whatever they are). Indeed, I’ve recently read some pretty interesting speculation about souls from mind-body dualists (or “neo-dualists,” let’s say). The existence of souls doesn’t imply the existence of “God” however, and certainly not the creepy totalitarian entity named “Allah”. Soul hypotheses that exclude “God” are much more interesting than those that include him.

    But even if souls don’t exist, it’s possible that free will is an emergent property of certain combinations of matter. You have faith that only a “God” could explain free will, and I have faith that a “God” is unnecessary; we’re both just making things up to suit our preferred view of the world.

    Well, it feels fairly meaningful now, so why would I want to replace it with something where I simply stop thinking about a good answer to existential questions and ignore them (aka “accept the hard truth”)?

    Because there are better brands of bullshit than islam. Brands that don’t require mentally torturing millions of innocents with threats of divine punishment. Brands that don’t leave societies mired in primitive sand fable mythology and morality.

    • Replies: @Talha

    That’s because poz beats the pants off
     
    Well, that's really the problem - the butt-sex-enthusiast crowd is really helping everyone take off their pants; I'm sure people have a lot of fun.

    As for a demographic nosedive, a secular global population of 50 million with an average IQ 150 would be infinitely more pleasant to live in
     
    Well, that's the problem. What you want simply isn't happening - which is why I have said survival-of-the-fittest doesn't really care for anyone's aesthetics. The Hi-IQ, secular people are the most likely to exit the game without a consolation prize.

    With religious fuckwits (Islamic ones, above all)
     
    This honestly is the best thing. It is a badge of honor for our religion to be considered absolutely the worst option by people with a secular-atheistic outlook. The other religions being "patted on the head" by (post)modernity (as Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad put it) are really the ones that need to be re-evaluating their legitimacy:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=In9Mx2OmJMo

    The existence of souls doesn’t imply the existence of “God” however
     
    No - it simply implies the reality of the unseen, beyond the empirical.

    and certainly not the creepy totalitarian entity
     
    A man can only have one master after all:
    "Have you seen the one who has taken his [own] desires as his god?..." (45:23)

    it’s possible that free will is an emergent property of certain combinations of matter.
     
    Name me a single serious atheist scientist that takes this route. All your internal biological functions (including any reactions happening in the brain) are simply a subset of organic chemistry which is a subset of physics.

    and I have faith that a “God” is unnecessary
     
    I agree, it is a faith, which is why is why I applauded you on having such strong convictions and be willing to face any concomitant consequences.

    Because there are better brands of bullshit than islam.
     
    This is opinion posited as fact. It's fine if you feel that way. We call your stuff BS, you call our stuff BS...only one of us is right.

    Now, as far as people among the broader population; right now, not only are we growing more than all other religions, even in the West we are holding our ground just fine - the same amount of people leave the religion as come into it. So it obviously appeals to plenty of people (even in the West):
    "Like Americans in many other religious groups, a substantial share of adults who were raised Muslim no longer identify as members of the faith. But, unlike some other faiths, Islam gains about as many converts as it loses."
    https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/01/26/the-share-of-americans-who-leave-islam-is-offset-by-those-who-become-muslim/

    "EVERY year, thousands of British people convert to Islam. Estimates of how many vary a lot, but in 2011 a study concluded that the total number of converts in the United Kingdom might exceed 100,000 and that about 5,000 had made that choice the previous year, with women exceeding men and the 'white British' share of fresh converts amounting to around half."
    https://www.economist.com/erasmus/2016/02/12/why-some-brits-choose-islamic-prayer-over-partying

    I love the trade-off; you guys get our pozzed brown people, we get your traditional-minded white people. I can live with this.

    Brands that don’t require mentally torturing millions of innocents with threats of divine punishment.
     
    There is threat of punishment and promise of reward - and of course the best reward:
    "Verily, Allah will say to the people of Paradise: 'O people of Paradise!' They will say: 'We are at your service, our Lord, all goodness is in your hand!' Allah will say: 'Are you satisfied?' They will say: 'Why should we not be satisfied when you have given us what you have not given to any other creation?' Allah will say: 'Shall I not give you something better than that?' They will say: 'O Lord, what could be better than that?' Allah will say: 'I will grant you My pleasure, such that I will never be displeased with you ever again.'" -reported in Bukhari and Muslim

    All details aside, this is a path of lovers. Crazy, mad lovers:
    "And [yet], among the people are those who take other than Allah as equals [to Him]. They love them as they [should] love Allah. But those who believe are intense in their love for Allah..." (2:165)
    https://www.birthdaywishes.expert/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Soul-if-you-want-to-learn-secrets-your-heart-must-forget-about-shame-and-dignity.-You-are-Gods-lover-yet-you-worry-what-people-are-saying..jpg

    Brands that don’t leave societies mired in primitive sand fable mythology and morality.
     
    I get it (this, of course, is boiler-plate Left-liberal-progressive [Bill Maher bumper-sticker] criticism of Islam), if we win, no more Gay Pride Parades - I understand the frustration and why some people would just like us to go away.

    Peace.
  218. Twinkles, if you ever get the impression that no one’s really interested in your endless asian promotion, you’re probably right, and it’s because your interests aren’t as aligned with most people’s here as you delude yourself into believing.

    • Disagree: iffen
    • Replies: @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Asians only look out for themselves. They are a subversive and dangerous race. They aren't our friends.
  219. @Stan d Mute

    My comment addresses this very succinctly.
     
    So succinctly that nobody else can discern it. Perhaps by “succinct” you mean “invisible”?

    My Rational friend appears to have made the same deduction about you that I have. I wonder how many others have noticed.

    I wonder how many others have noticed.

    We all know who won’t notice.  Dunning-Kruger is like that.

  220. @Stan d Mute

    it is true that the orientation
     
    Oh come on, you know the correct term is asianation.

    Is this now like enward? Where I’m not permitted to say it but @Truth can use it twenty times in the same rap with impunity?

    Like they’ve done with Mexicans, America’s white liberals are turning you people into quasi-enwards. Back home you’re okay with your rice bowls and dog barbecue, but come to America and within a generation you’re doing gangster math rap and flaunting your power to use the ohward.

    If I were you, I would worry about your horny wife longing for BBCs while you are out, instead of being obsessed with East Asians with rice bowls and eating dog meat, LOL !!!

    • LOL: Truth
    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
    Amos? Dat beez you agin? You done mispeled yo name agin.
  221. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    I would abort my baby if it had down syndrome or other mental handicaps. I don't want to spend my life looking after a drooling retard, and I don't think it's ethical to even bring a child into this world who cannot be self sufficient.

    Abortion because "I was sleeping around and an accident happened" is not acceptable. But abortion due to genetic defects is.

    I'm assuming the 29% who wouldn't are Filipinos, Korean Evangelicals and Muslim South-East Asians.

    British Columbia, Toronto, and Brampton (Chinese/Brown) have the highest abortion rates in Canada. About 1/3 (or as of 10 years ago more) of pregnancies are terminated. In the White rural areas, it's more like 1/10. So it doesn't seem like abortion, for any reason, presents any moral dilemma for the majority of Asians.

    It's not hard to imagine a future, where North America becomes Asian-dominated. Strong eugenic pressure will be forced upon blacks and the bottom 75% of latins, and probably the bottom 50% of whites. People don't realize how *alien* Asians are to us. To be honest, an ideal situation would have all of America (North and South) fighting against *all* Asian immigration. Because believe it or not, we have alot more in common with Mexicans and even blacks than we do with Asians. I'm meeting Spanish speaking Asians from South America now even.

    I have a deal for you.

    1. All Northeast Asians will leave white majority countries and be resettled in Southeast Asia and non-white Oceania.

    2. The territories mentioned above in Southeast Asia and non-white Oceania should become a lot of independent states allied with the West and controlled by Japan, Taiwan or Singapore. Western military bases in the region will be preserved indefinitely.

    3, Europe, the entire Americas, Australia, New Zealand and Southern Africa (defined as South Africa, South-West Africa and Rhodesia) should be exclusively white.

    4. The area between Sahara Desert and white Africa should be turned over to us to be our racial colony for NE Asia is absurdly overcrowded. We will take care of everyone and everything in the region and will not allow even one refugee to bother white or other countries.

    Deal?

    I believe you guys and we guys should have separate racial spheres and not harm each other. Maybe in the future if you don’t want to live with us on the same planet we can have separate planets too.

    • Replies: @tamo
    You are too f--king generous to the undeserving, sissy, whiny, emasculated, stupid euro-whites who are doing an excellent job of committing their own RACIAL SUICIDE, LOL !!!!
    , @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Sure, that works for me.

    I don't really have anything against other races and peoples, as long as they don't bother me. I don't care what Africans do in Africa. They can live their life. What I don't want is Africans being imported to Canada and bringing their ghetto and backwards ways with them. I also strongly oppose bombing or regime changes in foreign countries. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. None of my business.

    Same with Asians. I have met many East Asians who I like and get along with. In fact, I'm not even so concerned about the FOB, first generation Asians. Sadly, by the 2nd generation they "assimilate" and adopt the vehement anti-white, anti-male, feminist, and pro-open borders agenda pushed on them by the white liberals. It gets so bad in Toronto that I see many young Asian kids dressing like negro thugs, listening to rap music and acting like general retards. Acting like a respectable young man is "white". Is this what Asians want? Their children to be indoctrinated into rootless degeneracy?

    It's almost like they make up for losing the connection with their homeland by hating their new one. You'll never hear an FOB Chinese guy saying "fuck white people, I love that Canada is turning brown" (at least not publicly lol). But you will hear 2nd generation Asian kids, with no real connection to Asia, spouting these lines. I suspect it comes from a feeling of not fitting in, helped along by a healthy dose of liberal brainwashing.

    Closed borders is better for everybody. It lets whites keep to ourselves and not have to deal with hostile racists. It lets Asians keep their culture and not be brainwashed into the left-wing death cult. There won't be generations of young people with no sense of belonging to their adopted country. Everyone wins.
    , @silviosilver

    3, Europe, the entire Americas, Australia, New Zealand and Southern Africa (defined as South Africa, South-West Africa and Rhodesia) should be exclusively white.
     
    If you're asking me pal, I'd happily throw half of Australia into the deal.
  222. res says:
    @Corvinus
    "Looks to me like it is more about inbreeding. Not about mixed race children."

    Except that the sample sizes were from different races, so race is playing an important role here. Of course, the scientists did look at whether people had any pairs of genes which were exact, meaning their mother and father passed it on to their offspring. IF this was the case, then the parents COULD be distantly related. Regardless, the research "does imply that people who come from very different ancestry would be a bit taller and a bit more cognitively able” according to one of the researchers (James Wilson). He also noted that “[O]f course cognition depends on a lot of environmental factors as well".

    The conclusions of the research do support the notion that increased height and greater intellect are positive components of evolution from around the globe, with the results positive value on genetic diversity. According to Wilson, "[t]his study highlights the power of large-scale genetic analyses to uncover fundamental information about our evolutionary history".

    "Pro tip: With controversial topics don’t trust the way popular articles frame research paper results."

    Be skeptical, sure. But that does not automatically mean that the article is other than accurate. Of course, we ought not necessarily believe those on the Alt Right who take similar research and put their own spin on it, correct?

    so race is playing an important role here.

    You did read my second quote, which showed the efforts they went to to eliminate the effect of race from the analysis, right? In case not, here is the most important part again.

    Where a cohort had multiple ethnicities, sub-cohorts for each separate ethnicity were created and analysed separately.

    Regarding:

    The conclusions of the research do support the notion that increased height and greater intellect are positive components of evolution from around the globe,

    Yes. That is rather unsurprising, but when it comes to human differences many people seem unwilling to admit the sky is blue so I guess that is progress. The bonus question is: “do you think evolution occurred to the same degree for all groups with respect to all traits?”

    But then you continue with:

    with the results positive value on genetic diversity.

    Not sure this means what you think it means. They found homozygosity was a benefit, but did not look at all into whether different groups might have different mean attributes. If there are different means then there will also be an effect where the lower value pulls the combination down.

    Be skeptical, sure. But that does not automatically mean that the article is other than accurate.

    Right. Which is why one should read the paper underlying the article (you did that before posting, right?) and decide for oneself the merits of each. Which is why I posted excerpts from the paper which contradict the framing of the article.

    Of course, we ought not necessarily believe those on the Alt Right who take similar research and put their own spin on it, correct?

    Right. One should look at the arguments on their merits. But comparing the few times that happens (how many alt-right outlets are there? how many readers do they have?) with the continual message most people are getting from the MSM is just another typical Corvinus false equivalency.

    But then again, this is Corvinus, so I am just wasting my time. But hopefully this will help someone understand just how pathetic your rhetoric and the underlying arguments you offer are.

    Carry on.

  223. @EastKekistani
    I have a deal for you.

    1. All Northeast Asians will leave white majority countries and be resettled in Southeast Asia and non-white Oceania.

    2. The territories mentioned above in Southeast Asia and non-white Oceania should become a lot of independent states allied with the West and controlled by Japan, Taiwan or Singapore. Western military bases in the region will be preserved indefinitely.

    3, Europe, the entire Americas, Australia, New Zealand and Southern Africa (defined as South Africa, South-West Africa and Rhodesia) should be exclusively white.

    4. The area between Sahara Desert and white Africa should be turned over to us to be our racial colony for NE Asia is absurdly overcrowded. We will take care of everyone and everything in the region and will not allow even one refugee to bother white or other countries.

    Deal?

    I believe you guys and we guys should have separate racial spheres and not harm each other. Maybe in the future if you don't want to live with us on the same planet we can have separate planets too.

    You are too f–king generous to the undeserving, sissy, whiny, emasculated, stupid euro-whites who are doing an excellent job of committing their own RACIAL SUICIDE, LOL !!!!

    • Replies: @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Nothing is a better example of racial suicide than your own people, the Koreans. TFR in South Korea was 0.97 for 2018.

    As I said in my first comment, white fertility seems to stick around 1.6. That's not really racial suicide. In fact those are remarkable numbers given the amount of brainwashing and genocidal propaganda we are exposed to.
  224. @silviosilver
    Twinkles, if you ever get the impression that no one's really interested in your endless asian promotion, you're probably right, and it's because your interests aren't as aligned with most people's here as you delude yourself into believing.

    Asians only look out for themselves. They are a subversive and dangerous race. They aren’t our friends.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
    Of course we NE Asians only look out for ourselves. However right now in the age of black & brown demographic expansion our racial interests are fairly aligned. If we try to destroy each other we will leave the world to blacks and it will be the end of human civilization. Do you want that? No? Nor do I.
    , @silviosilver

    Asians only look out for themselves. They are a subversive and dangerous race. They aren’t our friends.
     
    I wish I could force white libtards to read the comments by asian supremacists here. "B-b-but how can you guys be racial supremacists when you're not even white?!?"
  225. @Stan d Mute

    My comment addresses this very succinctly.
     
    So succinctly that nobody else can discern it. Perhaps by “succinct” you mean “invisible”?

    My Rational friend appears to have made the same deduction about you that I have. I wonder how many others have noticed.

    Here’s a trick. When someone makes a comment that is unclear to me, I engage in the custom of noting what is

    unclear

    why it is unclear to me and

    suggest some further explanation.

    I don’t whine about their possible skin color, nationality, where they live, their education, make personal suggestions about their integrity . . . nor prognosticate about what others think of said individual

    just a simple comment to explain.
    ———————-

    Or let the matter rest and think about it or not.

  226. @Stan d Mute

    My comment addresses this very succinctly.
     
    So succinctly that nobody else can discern it. Perhaps by “succinct” you mean “invisible”?

    My Rational friend appears to have made the same deduction about you that I have. I wonder how many others have noticed.

    In your haste to make an argument, you ‘shortcutted’ the meaning leaving out the relevant content that addresses your complaint.

  227. @tamo
    You are too f--king generous to the undeserving, sissy, whiny, emasculated, stupid euro-whites who are doing an excellent job of committing their own RACIAL SUICIDE, LOL !!!!

    Nothing is a better example of racial suicide than your own people, the Koreans. TFR in South Korea was 0.97 for 2018.

    As I said in my first comment, white fertility seems to stick around 1.6. That’s not really racial suicide. In fact those are remarkable numbers given the amount of brainwashing and genocidal propaganda we are exposed to.

    • Replies: @tamo
    I'm going to repeat my previous reply to you for your own benefit "You are full of wishful thinking. According to Anatoly Carlin, China’s TFR is about 1.6 and maybe as high as 1.75. Meanwhile the U.S. WHITE TFR is 1.64, Russia 1.5, EU 1.45. Read RUSSIAN DEMOGRAPHICS IN 2019 and EMPEROR XI TRIES TO CORRECT DEMOGRAPHIC COURSE by Anatoly Carlin on this site." You just don't get it, do you? In the grand scheme of things, the low Korean fertility rates don't mean much. The much BIGGER CHINA will be still standing here whose TFR is somewhere between 1.6 and 1.75 (according to Anatoly Carlin) is higher than the TFR of about 1.5 for whites in America, Europe, Russia. Specially the whites in the U.S. will DISAPPEAR long BEFORE the negative results of their low TFR set in, due to a lot of your LOVELY white girls screwing black shitbags. According to the U.S. Census, America will be a NON-WHITE MAJORITY country by 2043. The U.S. will be a BRAZIL of North America. Also there is a good chance the same thing will happen to Europe by the late 21st century because of miscegenation by European whites. I think you WN people should realize that race-mixing is far worse than your low TFR for your own survival. You know what? In a way I sympathize with you guys, LO,L !!!
  228. “which showed the efforts they went to to eliminate the effect of race from the analysis, right?”

    How are certain that was the intention of the researchers? Could it not be that you are assuming that was their purpose?

    “but did not look at all into whether different groups might have different mean attributes.”

    Could it not be that there was not their goal, that the study had a narrow focus? Perhaps YOU are chastising them for not doing something that was other than their actual goal.

    “Which is why I posted excerpts from the paper which contradict the framing of the article.”

    Assuming there is a contradiction. Why would the scientists be wiling to be interviewed believing or knowing that their results would be framed differently? Would they not insist a correction or retraction?

    “But comparing the few times that happens (how many alt-right outlets are there? how many readers do they have?) with the continual message most people are getting from the MSM is just another typical Corvinus false equivalency.”

    LOL, with this comment, it would appear that you are of the mentality that the MSM mostly or generally is other than being accurate or telling the truth. Given this apparent mindset, you are predisposed to say that MSM narrative must always receive a higher level of scrutiny compared to the Alt Right. Sir, you are the one displaying the false equivalency.

    “just how pathetic your rhetoric and the underlying arguments you offer are.”

    That would be a false characterization.

    • LOL: res
  229. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Asians only look out for themselves. They are a subversive and dangerous race. They aren't our friends.

    Of course we NE Asians only look out for ourselves. However right now in the age of black & brown demographic expansion our racial interests are fairly aligned. If we try to destroy each other we will leave the world to blacks and it will be the end of human civilization. Do you want that? No? Nor do I.

    • Replies: @BengaliCanadianDude
    Hey hey hey, us Browns arent your problem
  230. @silviosilver

    The poz is a gift that atheism has given the world (practically every Muslim apostate I’ve ever come across that becomes atheist goes hyper-homo-globo). Any society that takes on atheism can pretty much count on taking a demographic nosedive.
     
    That's because poz beats the pants off Islam. It's no contest.

    Now, despite not being a huge fan of the poz, it's important to note that it comes about as a result of wanting to heal people's pain. It comes from asking the right questions, such as "What do humans need?", rather than idiotic questions like "What does God want?" I disagree with leftards' answers to these questions, but if they're providing the wrong answers to the right questions today, then at least there's hope they'll one day start providing the right answers. With religious fuckwits (Islamic ones, above all), there is no hope of getting the right answers.

    As for a demographic nosedive, a secular global population of 50 million with an average IQ 150 would be infinitely more pleasant to live in than a global population of 10 billion 70 IQ religious retards.

    Who's to say we won't get there, either? The short-term picture looks grim. But we've got a lot of time to play with. Even if we only raise IQ by 1 point per millennium, in a million years... you do the math. (We're not going to get there by worrying what "Allah" thinks about it, lol.) Population reductions can occur even more rapidly.

    There is no choice. Without a soul you are simply an evolved biological machine running a series of genetically coded algorithms of input/output. You have no choice in how to interpret the very same input I do and come to the very different conclusions we both do. There is no freewill according to your framework – just an elaborate facade that the brain tricks itself into for the illusion of consioucness.
     
    I find most traditional and religious soul-talk incoherent, but I'm not opposed to the existence of "souls" (whatever they are). Indeed, I've recently read some pretty interesting speculation about souls from mind-body dualists (or "neo-dualists," let's say). The existence of souls doesn't imply the existence of "God" however, and certainly not the creepy totalitarian entity named "Allah". Soul hypotheses that exclude "God" are much more interesting than those that include him.

    But even if souls don't exist, it's possible that free will is an emergent property of certain combinations of matter. You have faith that only a "God" could explain free will, and I have faith that a "God" is unnecessary; we're both just making things up to suit our preferred view of the world.

    Well, it feels fairly meaningful now, so why would I want to replace it with something where I simply stop thinking about a good answer to existential questions and ignore them (aka “accept the hard truth”)?
     
    Because there are better brands of bullshit than islam. Brands that don't require mentally torturing millions of innocents with threats of divine punishment. Brands that don't leave societies mired in primitive sand fable mythology and morality.

    That’s because poz beats the pants off

    Well, that’s really the problem – the butt-sex-enthusiast crowd is really helping everyone take off their pants; I’m sure people have a lot of fun.

    As for a demographic nosedive, a secular global population of 50 million with an average IQ 150 would be infinitely more pleasant to live in

    Well, that’s the problem. What you want simply isn’t happening – which is why I have said survival-of-the-fittest doesn’t really care for anyone’s aesthetics. The Hi-IQ, secular people are the most likely to exit the game without a consolation prize.

    With religious fuckwits (Islamic ones, above all)

    This honestly is the best thing. It is a badge of honor for our religion to be considered absolutely the worst option by people with a secular-atheistic outlook. The other religions being “patted on the head” by (post)modernity (as Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad put it) are really the ones that need to be re-evaluating their legitimacy:

    The existence of souls doesn’t imply the existence of “God” however

    No – it simply implies the reality of the unseen, beyond the empirical.

    and certainly not the creepy totalitarian entity

    A man can only have one master after all:
    “Have you seen the one who has taken his [own] desires as his god?…” (45:23)

    it’s possible that free will is an emergent property of certain combinations of matter.

    Name me a single serious atheist scientist that takes this route. All your internal biological functions (including any reactions happening in the brain) are simply a subset of organic chemistry which is a subset of physics.

    and I have faith that a “God” is unnecessary

    I agree, it is a faith, which is why is why I applauded you on having such strong convictions and be willing to face any concomitant consequences.

    Because there are better brands of bullshit than islam.

    This is opinion posited as fact. It’s fine if you feel that way. We call your stuff BS, you call our stuff BS…only one of us is right.

    Now, as far as people among the broader population; right now, not only are we growing more than all other religions, even in the West we are holding our ground just fine – the same amount of people leave the religion as come into it. So it obviously appeals to plenty of people (even in the West):
    “Like Americans in many other religious groups, a substantial share of adults who were raised Muslim no longer identify as members of the faith. But, unlike some other faiths, Islam gains about as many converts as it loses.”
    https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/01/26/the-share-of-americans-who-leave-islam-is-offset-by-those-who-become-muslim/

    “EVERY year, thousands of British people convert to Islam. Estimates of how many vary a lot, but in 2011 a study concluded that the total number of converts in the United Kingdom might exceed 100,000 and that about 5,000 had made that choice the previous year, with women exceeding men and the ‘white British’ share of fresh converts amounting to around half.”
    https://www.economist.com/erasmus/2016/02/12/why-some-brits-choose-islamic-prayer-over-partying

    I love the trade-off; you guys get our pozzed brown people, we get your traditional-minded white people. I can live with this.

    Brands that don’t require mentally torturing millions of innocents with threats of divine punishment.

    There is threat of punishment and promise of reward – and of course the best reward:
    “Verily, Allah will say to the people of Paradise: ‘O people of Paradise!’ They will say: ‘We are at your service, our Lord, all goodness is in your hand!’ Allah will say: ‘Are you satisfied?’ They will say: ‘Why should we not be satisfied when you have given us what you have not given to any other creation?’ Allah will say: ‘Shall I not give you something better than that?’ They will say: ‘O Lord, what could be better than that?’ Allah will say: ‘I will grant you My pleasure, such that I will never be displeased with you ever again.’” -reported in Bukhari and Muslim

    All details aside, this is a path of lovers. Crazy, mad lovers:
    “And [yet], among the people are those who take other than Allah as equals [to Him]. They love them as they [should] love Allah. But those who believe are intense in their love for Allah…” (2:165)

    Brands that don’t leave societies mired in primitive sand fable mythology and morality.

    I get it (this, of course, is boiler-plate Left-liberal-progressive [Bill Maher bumper-sticker] criticism of Islam), if we win, no more Gay Pride Parades – I understand the frustration and why some people would just like us to go away.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @silviosilver

    Allah will say: ‘Shall I not give you something better than that?’ They will say: ‘O Lord, what could be better than that?’ Allah will say: ‘I will grant you My pleasure, such that I will never be displeased with you ever again.’” -reported in Bukhari and Muslim
     
    "Son, I'm gonna give you the best present any kid ever got."

    "Wow, really? What's that, a brand new Ferrari? A week in the Playboy mansion?"

    "Nope. I'm never gonna hate you again!"

    "Aww gee, thanks dad! You're the greatest!"


    How can anyone not consider this guy a complete POS?

    Do you think he really means it though? He's never gonna be displeased again? That to me suggests I can do anything I want. Supposedly, I could say to him, "Hey yo, Allah, fuck you punk" and he wouldn't get upset. Do you really believe that?
  231. When Byzantines fought against Sassanians in the 7th Century it resulted in the destruction of both in the hands of high-social unity Arabs. Right now whites are like Byzantines and NE Asians are like Sassanians. We don’t need a war especially since both sides have nukes & very low fertility rates & very low levels of social unity. This type of conflict can only cause the world to be closer and closer to Worldwide Haiti (WWH). If WWH takes place thousands of years of civilization will be no more.

  232. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Nothing is a better example of racial suicide than your own people, the Koreans. TFR in South Korea was 0.97 for 2018.

    As I said in my first comment, white fertility seems to stick around 1.6. That's not really racial suicide. In fact those are remarkable numbers given the amount of brainwashing and genocidal propaganda we are exposed to.

    I’m going to repeat my previous reply to you for your own benefit “You are full of wishful thinking. According to Anatoly Carlin, China’s TFR is about 1.6 and maybe as high as 1.75. Meanwhile the U.S. WHITE TFR is 1.64, Russia 1.5, EU 1.45. Read RUSSIAN DEMOGRAPHICS IN 2019 and EMPEROR XI TRIES TO CORRECT DEMOGRAPHIC COURSE by Anatoly Carlin on this site.” You just don’t get it, do you? In the grand scheme of things, the low Korean fertility rates don’t mean much. The much BIGGER CHINA will be still standing here whose TFR is somewhere between 1.6 and 1.75 (according to Anatoly Carlin) is higher than the TFR of about 1.5 for whites in America, Europe, Russia. Specially the whites in the U.S. will DISAPPEAR long BEFORE the negative results of their low TFR set in, due to a lot of your LOVELY white girls screwing black shitbags. According to the U.S. Census, America will be a NON-WHITE MAJORITY country by 2043. The U.S. will be a BRAZIL of North America. Also there is a good chance the same thing will happen to Europe by the late 21st century because of miscegenation by European whites. I think you WN people should realize that race-mixing is far worse than your low TFR for your own survival. You know what? In a way I sympathize with you guys, LO,L !!!

    • Replies: @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Yikes...

    According to Anatoly Carlin, China’s TFR is about 1.6

     

    Firstly, why do you use Chinese/Koreans as if they are interchangeable peoples? The extinction-level fertility of South Koreans doesn't matter because... China has slightly higher fertility? Do you not care about your own people?

    Even then, we can argue about high or low Chinese fertility, but it has already peaked post-one child policy and is now dropping rapidly. Not to mention they have a much higher replacement TFR due to sex-selective abortion.

    LOVELY white girls screwing black shitbags.
     
    This is generally a meme. 90% of marriages in the USA are whites marrying whites, and much of the remaining 10% is white men marrying Asians and white women marrying latinos (who could be up to 100% European).

    NON-WHITE MAJORITY country by 2043.
     
    Yes, due to immigration. However Asian and Native American birth rates are already below NH-Whites in the USA. Blacks are stable below replacement and Hispanics are dropping rapidly (below replacement in Mexico now). America will become a non-white majority country due to mass immigration, not due to fertility differences or race-mixing.
  233. @Stan d Mute

    it is true that the orientation
     
    Oh come on, you know the correct term is asianation.

    Is this now like enward? Where I’m not permitted to say it but @Truth can use it twenty times in the same rap with impunity?

    Like they’ve done with Mexicans, America’s white liberals are turning you people into quasi-enwards. Back home you’re okay with your rice bowls and dog barbecue, but come to America and within a generation you’re doing gangster math rap and flaunting your power to use the ohward.

    Is this now like enward? Where I’m not permitted to say it but can use it twenty times in the same rap with impunity?

    LOL, don’t make no difference to me. You can N-Bomb until your heart’s content. You don’t say it because of societal pressures that make it unfomfortable for you to say it.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    You don’t say it because of societal pressures that make it unfomfortable for you to say it.
     
    HaHa, you is my enward Troof! But the read I don’t say the magic word isn’t “societal pressures” ... it’s the damn schoolmarm here and her nasty ruler. MikeatdotMikeMike has scars from that ruler..
  234. @Stan d Mute

    it is true that the orientation
     
    Oh come on, you know the correct term is asianation.

    Is this now like enward? Where I’m not permitted to say it but @Truth can use it twenty times in the same rap with impunity?

    Like they’ve done with Mexicans, America’s white liberals are turning you people into quasi-enwards. Back home you’re okay with your rice bowls and dog barbecue, but come to America and within a generation you’re doing gangster math rap and flaunting your power to use the ohward.

    Well Twinkle Toes, Stanley does have a point there…

    • Agree: Stan d Mute
    • Replies: @Talha
    Wow - if I close my eyes when I listen to that interview, I could swear I'm hearing Monster Kody speaking (with just a little less jive).

    Amazing!

    Peace.
    , @EastKekistani
    Yep. This is why all NE Asians should be saved from tropical corruption in America.

    Speaking of tropical corruption let's talk about Latin America. My racial brethren in Latin America are economically doing well. However their lack of intellectual output and higher crime rate compared to NE Asians in NE Asia & Singapore is very concerning. They might be lost to tropical degeneracy through miscegnation and cultural corruption in the long run. The "Chinese" in Peru are already too contaminated by tropical genes to be functional. I don't want more people to be ruined in this manner.

  235. @Johann Ricke

    What this says is that foreign-born Asian males have a particularly low intermarriage rate compared to foreign-born Asian females. Likely reasons are several-fold such as, yes, lower “market value” of foreign-born Asian males vs. females, cultural-family reasons (parents are more tolerant of daughters’ outmarriages and not so for sons who carry out family names), etc.
     
    The underlying assumption here seems to be that white women are viewed as superior marriage partners by foreign-born Oriental men. The corollary assumption seems to be that they view Oriental women as inferior marriage partners. Are these assumptions necessarily true? Ultimately, the question is why foreign-born Oriental men would settle for white women when there's a vast pool of foreign-born Oriental women to choose from.

    Ultimately, the question is why foreign-born Oriental men would settle for white women when there’s a vast pool of foreign-born Oriental women to choose from.

    Spoken like a true WhiteMan. Where’sTillie?

  236. 3141222

    Chinese civilization was born independently of the Mesopotamian civilization while the ancient Greek civilization that is supposedly the cradle of the western civilization, was heavily influenced by Babylonian and Egyptian civilizations. China has a long tradition of creativity. Europe copied a lot of technologies from China before the Industrial Revolution. According to Robert Temple, a well-known sinologist, more than half of the inventions that laid foundations for the modern world BEFORE the Industrial Revolution, came out of China. China fell behind with the coming of the Industrial Revolution. But things will change in this century. There is a good chance China will become the creative technological power AGAIN by 2040.

    • Replies: @Talha

    Chinese civilization was born independently of the Mesopotamian civilization
     
    I agree here, but I do recall that the Chinese were often inviting Persians (scientists and what not) into their court. I believe this happened even before Persia became Muslim, no?

    There is a good chance China will become the creative technological power AGAIN by 2040.
     
    Wouldn't surprise me.

    Peace.
    , @Mark G.
    The Chinese did achieve an early civilization along with the Egyptians, Babylonians and Greeks. Per capita income and average life expectancy, though, remained relatively constant for thousands of years. It was only with the Enlightenment era that this changed. It changed largely because of the belief by Locke and others that individuals are important and have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This whole idea of considering the individual more important than the group had never occurred before in any previous societies and is still largely alien to nonwhite societies even today. Even now Asians and blacks usually think in terms of their group versus another group. Some whites have retrogressed and no longer believe in the importance of individual freedom and individual rights but to the extent that these beliefs still exist it's mostly in white societies. Asians are an intelligent race but since these Enlightenment beliefs are the precondition of progress and they have never really spread into and permeated Asian culture, I'm not so sure that Asians will leap ahead of whites in the future unless Asians are able to change their way of thinking.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    On the genomics front this seems like a near-certainty to me.
  237. @Truth
    Well Twinkle Toes, Stanley does have a point there...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcSIurVQcRs

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFg66BJO2w4

    Wow – if I close my eyes when I listen to that interview, I could swear I’m hearing Monster Kody speaking (with just a little less jive).

    Amazing!

    Peace.

  238. 3141392

    Oops

    >We should never be full of ourselves and underestimate the ability of our people.

    *other people.

  239. @tamo
    Chinese civilization was born independently of the Mesopotamian civilization while the ancient Greek civilization that is supposedly the cradle of the western civilization, was heavily influenced by Babylonian and Egyptian civilizations. China has a long tradition of creativity. Europe copied a lot of technologies from China before the Industrial Revolution. According to Robert Temple, a w