The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Damnatio Memoriae in Silicon Valley. Is Helen Keller Next?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

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

Silicon Valley is, of course, built on cognitive elitism, but few seem to get the joke:

Jordan, Terman middle schools to be renamed
Palo Alto school district trustees unanimously support finding new names

by Elena Kadvany / Palo Alto Weekly

Uploaded: Fri, Mar 17, 2017, 3:51 pm

By the start of the 2018-19 school year, Palo Alto’s David Starr Jordan and Terman middle schools will be no more. The school board voted unanimously on Friday to rename both schools given their namesakes’ promotion of eugenics, a 20th century movement that believed in the superiority of particular races over others.

… Todd Collins, who previously said he supported finding a new name for Jordan but hesitated on Terman, said Friday that he recognizes how much names matter — particularly to the students, parents and community members who have testified about their experiences with racial exclusion or discrimination at school and the importance of protecting students against such harm.

Other trustees characterized renaming as a necessary decision, even if symbolic, particularly in today’s political climate.

“Given where we are as a community and as a nation right now, symbolism really does matter,” said Melissa Baten Caswell. …

Superintendent Max McGee said that the one-time costs of renaming — about $50,000, the committee estimated — could be funded through a school bond voters approved in 2008. (The bond covers facilities updates like new signage and painting.)

He said that renaming is not a “zero sum game” and that any cost associated with it will not mean taking funds from other programs or services.

Most board members expressed support for using the bond funds rather than district reserves, as had been previously suggested.

Collins urged against trivializing the expense. If there will be expenses outside the bond’s scope, he said, he hopes the community will step in to raise funds to defray those costs.

“Cost absolutely does matter, especially in our current budget deficit,” Collins said.

While both Jordan and Terman were renowned academic figures — Jordan as the founding president of Stanford University and Terman as a Stanford psychologist who created a prominent IQ test — they were also leaders in the eugenics movement. Those who support renaming argued their active promotion of eugenics made them unfit namesakes for public schools. …

The renaming of Terman is complicated by the fact that when the school reopened in 2001 it was named to honor both Lewis M. Terman and his son, Frederick, an accomplished electrical engineer often referred to as the “father of Silicon Valley.” The renaming committee said it found no evidence that Frederick was involved in eugenics.

They must not have looked too hard.

While some community members believe the name could be retained to honor only the son, others have argued that only a total name change will disavow the father’s legacy.

“Can we truly make a break with the name Lewis Terman if we retain Frederick? I think the answer to that is ‘no,’” said Board Vice President Ken Dauber.

Hereditary corruption of blood.

Sitting in the audience at the district office on Friday were Terrance and Jim Terman, the grandson and great-grandson, respectively, of Lewis M. Terman. They said in an interview with the Weekly after the meeting that they only heard of the renaming proposal recently, after a sermon at their local church on historical legacy.

They said that they don’t oppose renaming but hope the school will be formally renamed to honor Frederick.

“I feel like my grandfather is being thrown under the bus because no one has accused him of doing anything wrong, but there’s somehow the idea ‘because of his father he’s tainted,’” said Jim, whose middle name is Lewis. “That’s even more chilling — the idea that you’re not judged by your own actions or your own beliefs, but you’re being judged by your immediate relatives.”

Who is next?

Here’s a 2015 list by somebody named Rob Baker of once famous supporters of eugenics:

Marie Stopes

H.G. Wells

Helen Keller

George Bernard Shaw

Winston Churchill

William Beveridge

Theodore Roosevelt

Jacques Cousteau

John Maynard Keynes

Bertrand Russell

My view has long been that the engine of the current eugenics controversy is largely a proxy war between the two biggest winners of the 20th Century, Anglo-American WASPs and Jews, for historical bragging rights, with ethnocentric Jews such as Stephen Jay Gould retconning history to denigrate their chief ethnic rivals for honors. As I wrote in 2014:

Of course, an inevitable side effect of ethnic specialization was that each group didn’t have as much to brag about outside its specialty. For example, while Jews in the 20th-century United States could rightly boast of the accomplishments of physicists like Albert Einstein and Richard Feynman, they largely lacked role models among the great Darwinians in biology and psychology, who tended to be representatives of the WASP old elite.

By the 1970s, this state of affairs was becoming less tolerable to rising scientists such as Stephen Jay Gould, Richard Lewontin, and Leon Kamin. While Darwin’s immense prestige made his memory almost unassailable, their envy was focused upon a suitable scapegoat, Darwin’s half-cousin Francis Galton. …

A century before, Galton had launched an immense campaign to raise awareness about what he called “eugenics.” It was a long-term goal, like space exploration was in the 1920s. Galton and his followers knew that to make scientific progress they’d have to come up with breakthroughs in statistics, genetics, evolutionary theory, psychology, and so forth. For instance, in late middle age, Galton made epochal advances in statistics, inventing the correlation coefficient and regression analysis. Many other scientists were inspired to make more discoveries. …

John Glad, retired director of the Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, wrote an important book in 2011, Jewish Eugenics, documenting the Jewish love-hate relationship with eugenics.

The most striking revelation is that, contrary to the current impression, Jews largely approved of eugenics until the end of the 1960s. (The most effective opponents tended to be Catholics, such as G.K Chesterton, author of 1922’s Eugenics and Other Evils.) Glad quotes endless Jewish spokesmen from the first seven decades of the 20th century to the effect that Jews had been practicing eugenic marriages for 3,000 years. The medical profession, which was largely secular and progressive, was enthusiastic about eugenics, and there was little evidence that the sizable number of Jewish doctors objected.

Rather, Jews didn’t contribute much scientifically to this quite productive movement because their city skills took them in other directions, such as becoming doctors rather than naturalists. To contribute to the Darwinian mainstream, it helped to be a smart country boy who grew up interested in plants, animals, and domestic animal breeding. Gould’s archrival Edward O. Wilson is a representative American version, an Alabama lad who couldn’t get enough of ants.

This is not to say that there weren’t important Jewish scientist contributors to the Darwinian / Galtonian tradition, but, just as Jews were in the forefront of the nuclear bomb and Germans of the ballistic missile (put them together and the world almost was blown up), Anglo-American WASPs dominated in the Darwin-Galton fields.

Using many hundreds of quotes from contemporary publications dating back to the 19th century, Glad traces the broad enthusiasm for eugenics among Jewish leaders, both progressive and conservative, assimilationist and Zionist, up through the 1960s.

Likewise, there were prominent Jewish intellectuals who intensely backed eugenics, such as Harold Laski, the British Labour Party’s leading intellectual between the wars (Laski had studied eugenics under Galton’s leftist protege Karl Pearson and had married a gentile lady who lectured on eugenics). But, in general, Jews tended to be leading polemicists more for things like Marxism, Freudianism, Structuralism, Randianism, etc. than for eugenics. They lacked a competitive advantage in the Darwin-Galton tradition, so they tended to concentrate on Marxism, Freudianism, and the like where they had home field advantage.

Then, following the rise of 1960s radicalism, Israel’s triumph in the 1967 Six-Day War, the UN’s 1975 vote to condemn Zionism as racism, and the subsequent Holocaust memorial movement, there emerged a new historical orthodoxy. Jewish intellectuals such as Gould systematically demonized eugenics as heavily responsible for the Nazis and much else that wasn’t good for the Jews. …

Meanwhile, Glad points out, Jews, both religious and secular, remain at the forefront of implementing eugenic techniques and technologies (although they don’t use the e-word anymore). For example, Dor Yeshorim, the Committee for Prevention of Jewish Genetic Diseases, was founded in the 1980s by Rabbi Eckstein after he lost four children to hereditary Tay-Sachs disease. Rabbi Eckstein’s system of premarital genetic testing has succeeded in largely eliminating this terrible tragedy from New York’s ultra-Orthodox community.

Likewise, Israel is a magnet for eugenics technology start-ups because Israel’s government and society are much more pro-eugenics—in part, to help win the War of the Cradle with the Palestinians—than are European regulators and cultures. For instance, in a 1993 survey of geneticists, 68 percent of the Israeli scientists agreed with the classic eugenic notion that “It is socially irresponsible knowingly to bring an infant with a serious genetic disorder into the world in an era of prenatal diagnosis” versus only 8 percent of German geneticists.

I’m thinking that of the list above, Churchill is presently off-limits and Teddy Roosevelt has too vivid an image today (although I would have said the same about Andrew Jackson 40 years ago).

Some of the others are too obscure, at least in the U.S.

Screenshot 2017-03-17 21.38.09There are, however, dozens of schools and parks named after Helen Keller, the amazing deaf-blind woman.

Demonizing Helen Keller over her support of eugenics would seem to be in bad taste, but who knows what the future will bring? Maybe in a decade Malcolm Gladwell will be telling Helen Keller jokes during sales convention keynote addresses and all the regional sales managers will be laughing uproariously as they feel morally superior to that … eugenicist.

But I suspect there will be a big push by neoconservatives to demonize the centrist economist John Maynard Keynes over his lifelong eugenics activism, from being founding treasurer of the Cambridge Eugenics Society to delivering a speech extolling eugenics in the last year of his life, 1946.

There is a lot of money available for anti-Keynesian efforts (of course, there is also a lot of money available for pro-Keynesian efforts). Keynes’ most prominent American acolyte, Paul Krugman, has so far avoided talking about that aspect of Keynes’ life. (Although Krugman is not a fan of Stephen Jay Gould.)

I wonder what the test case might be? Perhaps neocons will demand that the fifty-year-old British town of Milton Keynes be renamed Milton Friedman?

In case you’ve been as vaguely confused as I’ve been over the years, the name Milton Keynes was applied from an existing village to a new city founded outside of London in 1967. I always assumed it was named for some distinguished relative of J.M. Keynes (he had many — for example, his mother was Mayor of Cambridge). But it turns out that Milton Keynes an ancient village name, formerly Middleton Caynes in the 13th Century.

But, yeah, it’s Keynes’ family name, all right. The Keynes family started out as Normans named de Cahaines in the Domesday Book of 1086.

A commenter says:

The binomial name ‘Milton Keynes’ refers to the ancient Saxon village name, and the Norman lord of the manor as the suffix. It’s a quite a common usage in England.

Kind of like Cow Beef or Pig Pork: Loser Winner.

It’s audacious but not absurd to suggest that the two biggest winners in history are the Normans and the Jews, with JM Keynes as a representative of the Norman ascendancy even in the 20th Century.

So it’s not surprising that in this final round match-up of the two biggest winners, one side is waging a war of rhetoric on the other side.

At least it’s better than waging an actual war of nuclear bombs and missiles.

 
Hide 296 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    Forrest Gump Academy

    Read More
    • Replies: @pyrrhus
    Mike Judge Academy...
    , @Anon
    With help from Steven Jay Gould, the Bernie Madoff of Biology
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/damnatio-memoriae-in-silicon-valley-who-is-next/#comment-1804744
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. My view has long been that the engine of the current eugenics controversy is largely a proxy war between the two biggest winners of the 20th Century, Anglo-American WASPs and Jews

    “Anglo-Americam WASPs,” eh?

    In other words, “Anglo-American White Anglo-Saxon Protestants”?

    Is there a reason, Steve, that you can’t just call them “Anglo Americans”?

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    WASP is a well-known term, and has connotations beyond Anglo-American. For instance: America's ruling class.
    , @Anonym
    Given the redundancy in WASP, I immediately suspect that it has been engineered as an anti-White weapon. Let's see... WASP coined by Andrew Hacker in 1957 according to wikipedia. Google search "Andrew Hacker" Jewish... well whadaya know...

    http://mondoweiss.net/2007/07/the-implosion-o/

    I guess the pest of the so-called WASP has been if not eradicated, somewhat deinfested from power in the Anglosphere. Far be it for Anglos to be ascendent in the Anglosphere... the horror!

    There should be an equivalent term for anti-white Jews. It is important that it is not a general one for Jews, but only the Jews who push for the genocide of the Europeans. I'm pleasantly surprised at the number of married Jews voting for Trump for example, but Jewish-led anti-whiteness is definitely a thing.

    Maybe JIHAD- Jewish/Israeli Hardcore American Democrats? Or Jewish/Israeli Host Anglosphere Destroyers? I like the latter because it well encapsulates their own idiocy.

    JERKs? Jewish... uhhh Europe/Europa/Eurosphere wRecking Krew?

    How about JUDAS? Jewish Undeclared Destroyers of Anglo Society.

    Or JUNTA? Jewish Undermining Numbing Termites of the Anglosphere.

    I am not enamoured with any of them particularly, but at least those are probably the best 4-5 letter words containing J that have a similar flavor to WASP.
    , @Bill Jones
    Papists?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. eah says:

    Here’s a 2015 list by somebody named Rob Baker of once famous supporters of eugenics:…

    It must have been obvious back then — as it is even more so now — that civilization is dysgenic: modern dysgenic civilization + the Peter Principle + political correctness = doomsville.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    There certainly is a view that "civilization" is dysgenic, and that therefore every civilization automatically contains the seeds of its own destruction, but I don't see it.

    Plenty of civilizations--whether by design or default--do selectively breed for traits desirable to that civilization.

    Ancient Republicans Rome's traits were so deeply bred into its youth that even after the effective decapitation of society at the catastrophic Battle of Cannae, the demographically truncated population that was left rallied, not only to recover, but to win decisively the Second Punic War. Roman civilization was predicated on citizen-soldiers, and their breeding and culture was for citizen-soldiers.

    The Carolingians were defined by their warrior-nobles and they bred and raised ... warrior-nobles.

    The Sultan of the long-reigning Ottomans was a ruthless autocrat, who was the fruit of a breeding program for ruthless autocrats.

    Elizabethan England thrived on trade and exploration and bred and raised merchant-adventurers.

    Etc.

    The trouble starts not with civilization itself, but with hypocrisy: when a civilization that works in a certain way pretends that it works in a different way. It is then that dysgenics activate, whether by design or default.

    Needless to say, The Current Year entails world-historical levels of hypocrisy...

    , @AnotherDad

    It must have been obvious back then — as it is even more so now — that civilization is dysgenic: modern dysgenic civilization + the Peter Principle + political correctness = doomsville.
     
    Civilization is not dysgenic.

    Gregory Clark demonstrated this--I believe conclusively--in "Farewell to Alms". The prosperous, responsible, conscientious middle classes left more--smarter more conscientious--descendants. And he proposes this is what prepared England for industrial lift off. England isn't "the world" or "civilization", but it's the case were we have the best data. Surveying other civilized nations, it appears pretty clear to me that they tend to throw up smarter more conscientious peoples.

    What does seem to be the case is that "modern civilization"--industrial or post-industrial, tends to become dysgenic. This starts with creating a surplus, then medical advances providing more protection for disease (keeping around the weaker and more sickly). (We all however like prosperity over scarcity and like avoiding disease!) What then seems to flip the script into dysgenics is the welfare state and then finally feminism--encouraging educated (correlated with smart) women to pursue career over babies.

    These seems like eminently solvable problems. Example: the condition of welfare for people unable to take care of themselves is no more children. And setting incentives--tax wise and culturally in terms of status--for smart women to have more children. But to *solve* it you have to be able to *talk* about it. And that is what the powers that be work mightily to prevent and suppress.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. syonredux says:

    This is not to say that there weren’t important Jewish scientist contributors to the Darwinian / Galtonian tradition, but, just as Jews were in the forefront of the nuclear bomb and Germans of the ballistic missile (put them together and the world almost was blown up), Anglo-American WASPs dominated in the Darwin-Galton fields.

    Indeed. From the WIKIPEDIA article on the Modern Synthesis:

    The 19th century ideas of natural selection by Darwin and Mendelian genetics were united by Ronald Fisher, one of the three founders of population genetics, along with J. B. S. Haldane and Sewall Wright, between 1918 and 1932. The modern synthesis solved difficulties and confusions caused by the specialisation and poor communication between biologists in the early years of the 20th century. At its heart was the question of whether Mendelian genetics could be reconciled with gradual evolution by means of natural selection. A second issue was whether the broad-scale changes of macroevolution seen by palaeontologists could be explained by changes seen in the microevolution of local populations.

    Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher: Not Jewish:

    Fisher was born in East Finchley in London, England, one of twins with the other being still-born[7] and grew up the youngest with three sisters and one brother.[8] From 1896 until 1904 they lived at Inverforth House in London, where English Heritage installed a blue plaque in 2002, before moving to Streatham.[9] His mother, Kate, died from acute peritonitis when he was 14, and his father, George, then lost his business as a successful partner in Robinson & Fisher,[10] auctioneers and fine art dealers, 18 months later.

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

    Sewall Green Wright:Not Jewish:

    Sewall Wright was born in Melrose, Massachusetts to Philip Green Wright and Elizabeth Quincy Sewall Wright. His parents were first cousins[citation needed], an interesting fact in light of Wright’s later research on inbreeding. The family moved three years later after Philip accepted a teaching job at Lombard College, a Universalist college in Galesburg, Illinois.
    As a child, Wright helped his father and brother print and publish an early book of poems by his father’s student Carl Sandburg.
    He was the oldest of three gifted brothers—the others being the aeronautical engineer Theodore Paul Wright and the political scientist Quincy Wright. From an early age Wright had a love and talent for mathematics and biology. Wright attended Galesburg High School and graduated in 1906. He then enrolled in Lombard College where his father taught, to study mathematics. He was influenced greatly by Professor Wilhelmine Entemann Key, one of the first women to receive a Ph.D. in biology. Wright received his Ph.D. from Harvard University, where he worked at the Bussey Institute with the pioneering mammalian geneticist William Ernest Castle investigating the inheritance of coat colors in mammals. He worked for the U.S. Department of Agriculture until 1925, when he joined the Department of Zoology at the University of Chicago. He remained there until his retirement in 1955, when he moved to the University of Wisconsin–Madison. He received many honors in his long career, including the National Medal of Science (1966), the Balzan Prize (1984), and the Darwin Medal of the Royal Society (1980). He was a member of the National Academy of Sciences and a Foreign Member of the Royal Society.[3] The American Mathematical Society selected him as the Josiah Willards Gibbs lecturer for 1941.[7][8] For his work on genetics of evolutionary processes, Wright was awarded the Daniel Giraud Elliot Medal from the National Academy of Sciences in 1945.

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

    John Burdon Sanderson Haldane: not Jewish:

    Haldane was born in Oxford to John Scott Haldane, a physiologist, scientist, a philosopher and a Liberal, and Louisa Kathleen Trotter, a Conservative. His younger sister, Naomi Mitchison, became a writer, and his uncle was Viscount Haldane and his aunt the author Elizabeth Haldane. Descended from an aristocratic and secular family[8] of the Clan Haldane, he would later claim that his Y chromosome could be traced back to Robert the Bruce

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._B._S._Haldane

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

    Hereditary corruption of blood.

    It’s so twisted — according to Official State Theology every Dindu must be given the benefit of the doubt. Gosh we can’t stereotype, that would be badfeelz.

    But I’m on the hook for (to pull some examples out of the air) Emit Till AND the Belgian Congo.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. Todd Collins, who previously said he supported finding a new name for Jordan but hesitated on Terman, said Friday that he recognizes how much names matter — particularly to the students, parents and community members who have testified about their experiences with racial exclusion or discrimination..

    History shows to Every People a choice between Nationalism and Tribalism.

    Our fearless leaders have thrown aside the Nationalism which held this once-great country together, and henceforth America will be nothing more than polyglot, tribal warfare among the many warring factions, currently united only by their hatred of Whitey. Everything remotely redolent of the people who made America the greatest nation in the world will be rent asunder.

    The same people who currently rule over these warring factions, using Divide and Conquer as their mantra, just coincidentally conceive of Nationalism as the worst of all evils. They are never happier when everyone else is at one another’s throats. Control of the flow of information continues to protect them. 24/7/365.

    Read More
    • Agree: CCZ
    • Replies: @Abe

    History shows to Every People a choice between Nationalism and Tribalism.

    Our fearless leaders have thrown aside the Nationalism which held this once-great country together, and henceforth America will be nothing more than polyglot, tribal warfare
     
    And yet are not Blacks effectively a tribe within America right now? I'm only half-joking when I say things would go a lot smoother if we acknowledged that and gave Blacks the same sort of tribal dispensation we give the Sioux and Apache. The Michael Brown case was handled through the norms of Roman-Anglo jurisprudence, which correctly found officer Darren Wilson legally not at fault and let him off without punishment or compensation to the family. Well, we all know how well that turned out! But what if instead of the cold logic of individual rights-based Western jurisprudence, we had acknowledged the Michael Brown case was largely a tribal honor-based one, and that whatever the rights or wrongs of Darren Wilson and Michael Brown's deadly altercation, one of Black America's own had indubitably been killed, and therefore it was owed weregild (blood money) as both compensation to the family and a face-saving gesture to the injured tribe?
    , @Jake
    Divide and conquer, because the process causes chaos.

    That is what the English historically did with amazing success long before Jews had any real power. In fact, I think it rather obvious that without the English Elites embracing Jews, Jews never would have come to wiled the power they have increasingly over the past half century and more.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. guest says:
    @Opinionator

    My view has long been that the engine of the current eugenics controversy is largely a proxy war between the two biggest winners of the 20th Century, Anglo-American WASPs and Jews
     
    "Anglo-Americam WASPs," eh?

    In other words, "Anglo-American White Anglo-Saxon Protestants"?

    Is there a reason, Steve, that you can't just call them "Anglo Americans"?

    WASP is a well-known term, and has connotations beyond Anglo-American. For instance: America’s ruling class.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jtgw
    "Anglo-American WASP" is still redundant, though, since the "Anglo" is already contained in the acronym WASP.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. guest says:

    Regarding bragging rights, couldn’t WASPs play the “we invented America” card? Or is the competition restricted to science?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Emma Lazarus invented "the American idea."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. @guest
    Regarding bragging rights, couldn't WASPs play the "we invented America" card? Or is the competition restricted to science?

    Emma Lazarus invented “the American idea.”

    Read More
    • LOL: ic1000
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Emma Lazarus invented “the American idea.”
     
    No, her grandfather did. He co-founded the NYSE, and, as we all know, the business of America is business.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. syonredux says:

    I’m thinking that of the list above, Churchill is presently off-limits and Teddy Roosevelt has too vivid an image today (although I would have said the same about Andrew Jackson 40 years ago). Some of the others are too obscure.

    Yeah, the Churchill Cult is still going strong…….but, that being said, I’ve noticed that quite a few POC academics seem quite eager to take him down….I’ve a South Asian colleague who blurts out “1943 Bengal Famine!” whenever his name is mentioned……

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    Syonredux:

    Churchill has a lot of other sins to answer for. Everyone is aware of his role as the architect of the Gallipoli debacle. Since this is St Patrick's Day, my own personal favorite was his having a major role in instigating the Irish Civil War following the Irish War of Independence. (Michael Collins was up against the A Team of Churchill, Lloyd George and Chamberlain in the initial peace negotiations.)

    , @dfordoom

    Yeah, the Churchill Cult is still going strong…….but, that being said, I’ve noticed that quite a few POC academics seem quite eager to take him down
     
    Taking Churchill down is actually a very positive thing. One of the most evil men of the 20th century. Unfortunately he's often attacked for the wrong things but he was a crazed warmonger.
    , @J1234

    Yeah, the Churchill Cult is still going strong…….but, that being said, I’ve noticed that quite a few POC academics seem quite eager to take him down
     
    And just a few years ago, British white advocate Paul Weston was arrested for publicly reading a quote from a book by Winston Churchill.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hampshire-27186573
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. …eugenics, a 20th century movement that believed in the superiority of particular races over others.

    eugenics yoo-jen-iks noun

    the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics)

    I see what she did there….

    Read More
    • Replies: @David
    It interesting that the name Eugene's popularity in the US grows, peaks, and declines right along side of the popularity of eugenics as a subject.

    https://www.behindthename.com/name/eugene/top
    , @ThreeCranes
    Exactly. Why is eugenics, which is improvement of specific traits through selective breeding, necessarily linked to the notion of a belief in the superiority of a particular race?

    Evidently Gresham's Law applies to Logic as well.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. syonredux says:

    RE: Demonizing WASPs for the sin of Eugenics,

    There’s a good show on Cinemax called The Knick . Steven Soderbergh directs all the episodes :

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

    It’s set in a New York hospital circa 1900, and Clive Owen stars as a cocaine-addicted surgeon (with his period clothes and moustache, he looks oddly like Edgar Allan Poe; perhaps he should try to get a Poe biopic off the ground), although his Yank accent is only so-so.

    The show is quite PC. A running sub-plot involves one of the characters becoming a pro-eugenics zealot.As you might expect, that character (Dr Everett Gallinger) is a blond WASP. There’s even a scene where he sterilizes an explicitly Jewish boy (Gallinger actually asks him if he is a “Yid” before commencing the procedure).

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux
    And then there's British Jewish journalist Jonathan Freedland's 2012 novel Pantheon:

    Its hero, James Zennor, is a junior fellow in an Oxford college, despairing as war wages on the Continent. An injured veteran of the Spanish Civil War he is unwanted by the army, and when he returns home to find his wife and young son missing, fears the same of his own kin. However, he is soon on their trail, one which takes him first to Liverpool and then to the US, specifically Yale University, to uncover the machinations of a covert Allied eugenics programme. Throw in a sub-plot involving a US diplomat with ties to the British far-right, and the result is a barrelling page-turner.
     

    However, he didn't see the city of spires as a potential setting for his own fiction until he fell upon the story of the Oxford evacuees. This true story saw 125 children and 25 mothers sent to the safe climes of Yale, on the latter's invitation. It was one of these children, now a woman in her seventies, who told Freedland of her suspicions as to the motives behind this seemingly altruistic act by academics. "There's a line in the correspondence between Oxford and Yale," he explains, "in which one of the people at Yale says words to the effect that 'through doing this, perhaps we should save some of the children of the intellectual classes for the next generation'. He doesn't simply say 'save some lives', he specifically says there is a higher purpose."
     

    "We have the benefit of hindsight," Freedland continues. "The popularity of eugenics as an idea plunges after the war, because people took one look at where it leads. The British had the experience of sitting in cinemas looking at newsreels of Belsen, and later Auschwitz, and wanting no part in that. But it can be chilling when you look at the people I've quoted with these sorts of ideas. Sir Bertrand Russell with his colour-coded procreation tickets, for example. It's Orwellian."

    Freedland points out that Britain has created a "creation myth" around the Second World War. "We've re-carved the landscape of that period," he explains. "We say that the Nazis were 100 per cent evil and we were 100 per cent good; we were morally and ideologically pure, and would obviously have nothing to do with any of their ideas. But actually, people who were absolutely good, patriotic Brits were in thrall to an idea that was horribly close to aspects of Nazism."
     
    http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/features/shhhdont-mention-the-eugenics-7166322.html
    , @Yak-15
    I watched the full first season of that show and part of the second season. It has some great moments but is completely hardcore SJW porn. It's thought to watch at times.
    , @Jim Don Bob
    That's too bad. I like Clive Owen as an actor.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. rising scientists such as Stephen Jay Gould, Richard Lewontin, and Leon Kamin

    Not only were they Jews, but also Communists. I am not sure which of these loyalties played a more important part in their anti-eugenic posture. Remember that a tenet of Marxism is that “conditions create consciousness” and therefore that humanity is infinitely malleable by changing the conditions in which people live – that there is, in other words, no such thing as human nature. The prospect of creating “New Soviet Man,” improved in all his traits by living under socialist conditions, was the Bolsheviks’ answer to eugenics, and in effect their counterpart to the Nazi concept of an Aryan “master race.” So great was the ideological commitment of Marxists to the idea that there are no innate qualities inalterable by changed conditions that it even affected the study of plant and animal genetics, leading to Lysenkoism.

    Whenever their Darwinism ran into conflict with their Marxism, Gould, Lewontin, and Kamin predictably favored Marx.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Gabriel M

    Not only were they Jews, but also Communists. I am not sure which of these loyalties played a more important part in their anti-eugenic posture.
     
    Hmmm, so you have a trio of guys who displayed no interest whatsoever in Jewish culture, religion or nationalism and married non-Jews, but who displayed a huge lifelong interest in Leftism and married Leftists. Which was a bigger motivator for them, Judaism or Leftism? What a doozy of a question.

    Seriously, this is hardcore Occam's rubber room stuff. Unzers get treated to a regular succession of "Why do Jews hate Trump?", Why do Jews like Muslim immigrants?" stuff and the results are pretty similar. Here's the Occam's razor explanation. 99.99% of people don't form views on individual subjects, they accept ideologies as packets.That's why you can almost always predict someone's view on illegal immigration from their view on abortion and vice versa. It's also why subscribers to particular ideological packages changes their views on individual subjects (say conservatives on homosexuality) in almost exactly the same way. Thus instead of answering a myriad of individual imponderables like "why are Jews so bugged out about eugenics?" with ever more convoluted theories, you need to answer two separate simple questions.

    1) Why do most Jews outside Israel believe in Leftism?
    2) Why do Leftists hate eugenics.

    Try and you'll see how easy it is.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. guest says:

    Keynes is a plausible target, given his sweeping victory over the field of economics in the 20th century. One of the greatest victories of any “public intellectuals” ever. So great that reading his stuff is perfectly superfluous. Which in a way is good for his reputation, considering how unreadable they are.

    But there’s a downside, in that no one needs him anymore. Generations have thought like Keynesians without knowing it. That’s the default for mainstream economic thinking, except on a few subjects. (Keynes went back and forth on free trade, for instance.) Keynes is like Uncle Tom’s Cabin, or something. You don’t need to actually know him first-hand, and few do. He’s in the culture.

    So people have little sentimental ties to him, and defenders of his ideas don’t need him. So he’s relatively open to attack.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  15. newrouter says:

    ot

    Oroville Dam 15 March Flyover and Update

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  16. syonredux says:
    @syonredux
    RE: Demonizing WASPs for the sin of Eugenics,

    There's a good show on Cinemax called The Knick . Steven Soderbergh directs all the episodes :

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

    It’s set in a New York hospital circa 1900, and Clive Owen stars as a cocaine-addicted surgeon (with his period clothes and moustache, he looks oddly like Edgar Allan Poe; perhaps he should try to get a Poe biopic off the ground), although his Yank accent is only so-so.

    The show is quite PC. A running sub-plot involves one of the characters becoming a pro-eugenics zealot.As you might expect, that character (Dr Everett Gallinger) is a blond WASP. There’s even a scene where he sterilizes an explicitly Jewish boy (Gallinger actually asks him if he is a “Yid” before commencing the procedure).

    And then there’s British Jewish journalist Jonathan Freedland’s 2012 novel Pantheon:

    Its hero, James Zennor, is a junior fellow in an Oxford college, despairing as war wages on the Continent. An injured veteran of the Spanish Civil War he is unwanted by the army, and when he returns home to find his wife and young son missing, fears the same of his own kin. However, he is soon on their trail, one which takes him first to Liverpool and then to the US, specifically Yale University, to uncover the machinations of a covert Allied eugenics programme. Throw in a sub-plot involving a US diplomat with ties to the British far-right, and the result is a barrelling page-turner.

    However, he didn’t see the city of spires as a potential setting for his own fiction until he fell upon the story of the Oxford evacuees. This true story saw 125 children and 25 mothers sent to the safe climes of Yale, on the latter’s invitation. It was one of these children, now a woman in her seventies, who told Freedland of her suspicions as to the motives behind this seemingly altruistic act by academics. “There’s a line in the correspondence between Oxford and Yale,” he explains, “in which one of the people at Yale says words to the effect that ‘through doing this, perhaps we should save some of the children of the intellectual classes for the next generation’. He doesn’t simply say ‘save some lives’, he specifically says there is a higher purpose.”

    “We have the benefit of hindsight,” Freedland continues. “The popularity of eugenics as an idea plunges after the war, because people took one look at where it leads. The British had the experience of sitting in cinemas looking at newsreels of Belsen, and later Auschwitz, and wanting no part in that. But it can be chilling when you look at the people I’ve quoted with these sorts of ideas. Sir Bertrand Russell with his colour-coded procreation tickets, for example. It’s Orwellian.”

    Freedland points out that Britain has created a “creation myth” around the Second World War. “We’ve re-carved the landscape of that period,” he explains. “We say that the Nazis were 100 per cent evil and we were 100 per cent good; we were morally and ideologically pure, and would obviously have nothing to do with any of their ideas. But actually, people who were absolutely good, patriotic Brits were in thrall to an idea that was horribly close to aspects of Nazism.”

    http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/features/shhhdont-mention-the-eugenics-7166322.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    “We have the benefit of hindsight,” Freedland continues. “The popularity of eugenics as an idea plunges after the war, because people took one look at where it leads.

    So much of our social rules today are based on the narrative that the jews tell about WW2. So many assumptions and questionable premises are part of that. It is really amazing. "Where eugenics leads," for example. As if eugenics rather than intergroup competition was the driver of the conflict (whatever the conflict was).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Ron Unz says:

    Ironically enough, one of the most prominent (half-)Jewish geneticists of that era was Nobel Laureate Hermann Muller, a hard-core Communist and also apparently a fanatic Eugenicist.

    He emigrated to the USSR during the 1930s and supposedly tried to persuade Stalin to make Eugenics a central pillar of their drive to create “a New Soviet Man,” but Old Joe didn’t like his ideas, and he eventually needed to flee the country to avoid the Gulag.

    Presumably, if things had gone a little differently, every good leftist, S.J. Gould certainly included, would have hailed Eugenics as core principle of Scientific Socialism, and to suggest otherwise would bring down the wrath of the harder-core SJWs, or in earlier times, perhaps nine grams to the back of the neck.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    After 3 1/2 silly posts that I wrote this morning, I'm tryin' to quit. You brought something up that I'd never heard, read, or thought about - the difference in how these 2 ideologies thought they could create newer and better people (the "Master Race" and the "New Soviet Man" for the German Nazis and the Russian Commies respectively).

    Having grown up during the latter part of the Cold War era, I thought back then that the Soviet Union had always hated and persecuted the Jews, well, persecuted even more than the average citizen, that is. I had no knowledge of the Bolsheviks and what had started the 70-year brutal and life-wrecking experiment with Communism. Knowing more of the history let me understand why, in general, Jewish people, especially those in the media and government, seemed to ignore or even defend the atrocities of the Soviet Union vs. those of Nazi Germany.

    I think the whole "eugenics is bad, mmmkay" thing is, as some here have already postulated, just a function of the fact that eugenics heavily interested the Nazis and that they did work in it that leaned toward the evil side. You're probably right, Ron, that had the Soviet Union had some type of eugenics program, eugenics may have been seen as a great idea by the loonie-left at this point.*

    Possibly the reason for the Soviets pushed the whole "New Soviet Man" deal over anything involving breeding, is that the Soviets needed people to behave under Communism RIGHT NOW, before another revolution could start. Breeding takes more time of course, like 4 5-year plans. The Nazis were thinking more long term, but Hitler's madness eliminated the long term for them.


    * Pretty much the point of the serious 1/2 of one of my posts above - the modern-day left-wing SJW/Cult-Marx people don't even think at the level of anyone on either side of this issue of Steve's post. Give them a word for an idea - they already know they should be for it or against it - thinking is neither necessary nor advised. They are about as dumb as the Moslem fanatics, but without the oil-money, but with girls who'll put out more.
    , @Bill Jones
    Forgive me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Mendel (W)right?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. ringo s says:

    Any thoughts on the abandonment of the manned space program after 1972?
    Apollo was the most ambitious, successful endeavor of the human race. However, it was also the one enterprise of the twentieth century with comparatively few prominent Jews. The astronauts and engineers all seemed like Midwesterners, and the many of the top scientists were Germans! I’m always puzzled how the popular culture suddenly lost its interest in space exploration. I don’t buy budget pressures as the reason. The 1970s was the beginning of the era of huge weapons systems procurements by the Pentagon. Was this given priority for a more aggressive Middle East policy over the space program?

    Read More
    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    I’m always puzzled how the popular culture suddenly lost its interest in space exploration.
     
    Huh?


    http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/

    http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/

    Voyager had it all over Apollo!

    Astronaut was the first profession to be automated.

    , @Buzz Mohawk

    Any thoughts on the abandonment of the manned space program after 1972?
     
    There were at least three factors:

    1) Cost was indeed high.

    2) Manned exploration is much less efficient than unmanned.

    3) Apollo carried great risk of disaster.

    Point number three was brought to my attention by a White House budget analyst I met years ago. (He had worked on the Hubble budget and was speaking about it at a dinner that night.) I asked him why Apollo was dropped, and he told me Nixon and his people worried about another Apollo 13. The race had been won, so why not quit while we were ahead before there are dead astronauts on the moon as permanent memorials to the program?
    , @tyrone
    sex,drugs,rock and roll or they lost their hidden figures.
    , @Faraday's Bobcat
    Golden-Age NASA was not only white, it was southern white (plus German). The NASA centers most involved in manned spaceflight were all in the south: Langley, Johnson, Marshall, Kennedy and the manufacturing facility at Michoud in New Orleans. The only real exception I can think of was Abe Silverstein of the Lewis Research Center in Cleveland, who championed the use of liquid hydrogen as fuel, and chose the name "Apollo". Of course much of the hardware was built in California, but those were contractors, not NASA.

    Feynman played a notable role in the Challenger accident investigation. When called to serve on the investigation board, his first reaction was not do it, because he hated government work, and he was also mildly against manned spaceflight because he thought it had little scientific merit. But he got into the job and it changed his views to, by his account, very pro-NASA.

    After the Columbia disaster, I was involved in fixing some of the problems that had been uncovered by the accident board. Just as with Challenger, the Columbia board featured a Jewish Nobelist in physics (I guess they'd have called Feynman but he was dead by then.) You can easily figure out who I'm talking about if you read the report. Anyway, I had a very unpleasant phone conversation with this guy. I needed to ask him some questions about what he'd written in the accident report, but this guy just dripped with disdain for the space program. Everything NASA had done, or was going to do, was a silly waste of money to him. The GWB-era Moon-Mars program was running then, and even though I hadn't asked, this guy went on a tangent about how humans could never survive the radiation all the way to Mars, and there was no way to shield it, blah blah blah. I had to practically hang up on him to get him to shut up. I think the only reason he volunteered for the board was that Feynman had done it, and all physicists worship Feynman.

    Writing this, I realized that this Columbia guy was not a second Feynman, he was a second Jerry Wiesner. Space buffs will know what I'm talking about.
    , @Jus' Sayin'...

    "...The astronauts and engineers all seemed like Midwesterners, and the many of the top scientists were Germans!..."
     
    I just recently realized that some academic/professional areas which seem to have disproportionately few prominent Jews are various branches of engineering. I began considering this when I learned that although Ashkenazim score on average much higher than other Europeans on the verbal (+2 SD!!!) and mathematical (+1 SD) subsets of IQ tests they under-perform slightly on portions of IQ tests involving spatial manipulations and imagery. It struck me that this latter set of mental skills is critical in most fields of engineering.

    An exception to this last assertion may be electrical engineering, which is heavily oriented to more mathematical types of thinking, e.g., network theory, boolean algebra, mathematical logic, category theory (in software engineering), etc. An interesting test of my hypothesis might be to compare the proportion of Ashkenazim across various fields of engineering, the general population, and fields where Ashkenazim are well-known to be over-represented, e.g., the law, economics, and management/ownership of the entertainment and news industries.
    , @Unladen Swallow
    In addition to the Midwest Americans and Germans, the Gemini program, the one between Mercury and Apollo, the one that actually put us well in front of the Russians had a lot of Brits and Canadians on it following the the Canadian government's decision to cancel to the Avro Arrow fighter jet. The lead designer was Jim Chamberlin, a Canadian engineer who also worked on Mercury and Apollo, he brought over 30 members of his team to NASA as well.
    , @Mr. Anon
    There was no reason for further voyages to the Moon. There is not much of anything there of any value. The most arid, barren desert on Earth is orders of magnitude more hospitable than the surface of the Moon. The only reason for going is to prove that you can do it. Ultimately, going to the Moon was a stunt. It was a magnificent stunt, but a stunt none-the-less. It is possible to imagine a permanent human outpost on the Moon, although it would likely always be dependent on Earth. The Moon is poor in hydrogen and carbon, two pretty important elements for humans.

    As for popular culture losing interesting in space exploration; that interest was never very broad or very deep anyway.

    , @RobRich
    In 1977 the Libertarians sponsored a conference with the American Astronautical Society on how to industrialize /privately colonize space. It was agreed that vast improvements in computing power and massive regulatory changes were essential (at the time creating an internet was a crime in the US and most countries, for example), and while a lot has been done meanwhile, we're just getting to that projected level. Hence the many efforts on private spaceships, etc.

    A few years ago the Libertarians worked with NASA and DARPA to start yearly open conferences on building a Star Trek like starship. This is happening.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. SPMoore8 says:

    Actually, eugenics wasn’t intrinsically racist, the idea involved any people, regardless of “race”, who were breeding generations of morons. HG Wells’, in “Anticipations” (Chapter 9), was quite clear about this:

    Under the really very horrible morality of to-day, the spectacle of a mean-spirited, under-sized, diseased little man, quite incapable of earning a decent living even for himself, married to some underfed, ignorant, ill-shaped, plain and diseased little woman, guilty of the lives of ten or twelve ugly children, is regarded as an extremely edifying spectacle, and the two parents consider their reproductive excesses as giving them a distinct claim upon less fecund and more prosperous people. Benevolent persons throw themselves with peculiar ardour into a case of this sort, and quite passionate efforts are made to strengthen the other against further eventualities and protect the children until they attain to nubile years. Until the attention of the benevolent persons is presently distracted by a new case…. Yet so powerful is the suggestion of current opinions that few people seem to see nowadays just what a horrible and criminal thing this sort of family, seen from the point of view of social physiology, appears”

    So, in sum, we have a cognitive elite that is creating a country — really — that has no room for anyone but cognitive elites and everyone else will scrub the toilets, but they want to pretend that they are actually opposed to cognitive elites. Got it.

    It will be interesting what names they come up with.

    Read More
    • Agree: Autochthon, Escher
    • Replies: @res
    Adding one word makes it very clear:
    they are actually opposed to other cognitive elites
    It's perfectly sensible not to want competition to be at the top of the world being created.

    I think there should be more asking anti-eugenicists about their opinion of all the assortative mating among the "elites." That and asking about the use of genetic testing in the Jewish community for choosing partners. For example, https://jscreen.org/

    To be clear, I think JScreen and similar are a good idea. I just would love to know why all these people criticizing historical figures for eugenics sympathies are OK with things like that.

    Back on topic, the thing that perhaps bothers me the most about the renaming is that the decision was unanimous.

    Have they proposed new names yet? Hopefully any people they choose to honor will have absolutely blameless personal lives (cough, MLK, cough).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Mr. Anon says:

    It’s kind of rich for Jews to oppose eugenics.

    Is there any people on Earth who have practiced eugenics to a greater degree than Jews?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Jews oppose eugenics because it is connected in their mind with Nazi genocide. Before the Nazis turned to mass extermination of Jews, they piloted their extermination techniques on the mentally deficient. OTOH, Hitler was also a vegetarian but this did not discredit vegetarianism.

    Eugenics is a battle for comparative advantage - if everyone is equally smart (or whatever trait you are breeding for) then it doesn't help your group. So it would make perfect sense to say "eugenics for me, not for thee". But the kind of modern leftist Jews who are opposed to eugenics are also opposed to Jewish eugenics. Either they marry someone from another race (admittedly usually from the elites of that race) or else they have no children or at most 1 or 2.

    The future of eugenics belongs to the Chinese. Once the CRISPR technology becomes sufficiently advanced, the Chinese will adopt it ruthlessly and without any qualms.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. @syonredux
    And then there's British Jewish journalist Jonathan Freedland's 2012 novel Pantheon:

    Its hero, James Zennor, is a junior fellow in an Oxford college, despairing as war wages on the Continent. An injured veteran of the Spanish Civil War he is unwanted by the army, and when he returns home to find his wife and young son missing, fears the same of his own kin. However, he is soon on their trail, one which takes him first to Liverpool and then to the US, specifically Yale University, to uncover the machinations of a covert Allied eugenics programme. Throw in a sub-plot involving a US diplomat with ties to the British far-right, and the result is a barrelling page-turner.
     

    However, he didn't see the city of spires as a potential setting for his own fiction until he fell upon the story of the Oxford evacuees. This true story saw 125 children and 25 mothers sent to the safe climes of Yale, on the latter's invitation. It was one of these children, now a woman in her seventies, who told Freedland of her suspicions as to the motives behind this seemingly altruistic act by academics. "There's a line in the correspondence between Oxford and Yale," he explains, "in which one of the people at Yale says words to the effect that 'through doing this, perhaps we should save some of the children of the intellectual classes for the next generation'. He doesn't simply say 'save some lives', he specifically says there is a higher purpose."
     

    "We have the benefit of hindsight," Freedland continues. "The popularity of eugenics as an idea plunges after the war, because people took one look at where it leads. The British had the experience of sitting in cinemas looking at newsreels of Belsen, and later Auschwitz, and wanting no part in that. But it can be chilling when you look at the people I've quoted with these sorts of ideas. Sir Bertrand Russell with his colour-coded procreation tickets, for example. It's Orwellian."

    Freedland points out that Britain has created a "creation myth" around the Second World War. "We've re-carved the landscape of that period," he explains. "We say that the Nazis were 100 per cent evil and we were 100 per cent good; we were morally and ideologically pure, and would obviously have nothing to do with any of their ideas. But actually, people who were absolutely good, patriotic Brits were in thrall to an idea that was horribly close to aspects of Nazism."
     
    http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/features/shhhdont-mention-the-eugenics-7166322.html

    “We have the benefit of hindsight,” Freedland continues. “The popularity of eugenics as an idea plunges after the war, because people took one look at where it leads.

    So much of our social rules today are based on the narrative that the jews tell about WW2. So many assumptions and questionable premises are part of that. It is really amazing. “Where eugenics leads,” for example. As if eugenics rather than intergroup competition was the driver of the conflict (whatever the conflict was).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Slippery slope arguments are not always wrong. If you accept the idea that people with deficient genes should be eliminated from the breeding population, it's not a big reach to say that those people should be eliminated period and not just sterilized - as Stalin said, no person, no problem. And it's not a big reach to expand your definition of "deficient" to include entire races.

    Eugenics also calls into question fundamental American principles. When Jefferson said in the Declaration that "all men are created equal" at the very least he meant that we are all equal in human dignity in the eyes of our Creator, who loves all of his creations . After the advent of Christianity, it was never the English practice to cast their elderly out onto ice floes or to smash the head of deformed infants.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Dan Hayes says:
    @syonredux

    I’m thinking that of the list above, Churchill is presently off-limits and Teddy Roosevelt has too vivid an image today (although I would have said the same about Andrew Jackson 40 years ago). Some of the others are too obscure.
     
    Yeah, the Churchill Cult is still going strong.......but, that being said, I've noticed that quite a few POC academics seem quite eager to take him down....I've a South Asian colleague who blurts out "1943 Bengal Famine!" whenever his name is mentioned......

    Syonredux:

    Churchill has a lot of other sins to answer for. Everyone is aware of his role as the architect of the Gallipoli debacle. Since this is St Patrick’s Day, my own personal favorite was his having a major role in instigating the Irish Civil War following the Irish War of Independence. (Michael Collins was up against the A Team of Churchill, Lloyd George and Chamberlain in the initial peace negotiations.)

    Read More
    • Agree: Hibernian
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. re: Steve’s hypothesis about Jews and evolutionary theory, this is not quite right, it’s more that eugenics died out as an academic discipline due to WW2. Its intellectual content was subsumed by more specialized disciplines, and Jews were pretty well involved in some those.

    -Statistics, divorced from biology and turned into a field of mathematics. This was in fact dominated by Jews after the war (in its theoretical parts, and related areas such as econometrics).

    -Genetics. Jews are well represented there, but it is too big and experimental a field for any minority to dominate.

    -Evolutionary theory. The math here is kinda basic and boring compared to classical Jewish interests like pure math and theoretical physics. I’d expect theoretician Jews to be self-selected away from this field (more so than bright Gentiles), as long as it’s taught out of biology departments and not as mathematics. This might explain why Gould and Lewontin are actually pretty mediocre — they’re the guys who weren’t good enough at math to be interested in something else.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    -Evolutionary theory. The math here is kinda basic and boring compared to classical Jewish interests like pure math and theoretical physics. I’d expect theoretician Jews to be self-selected away from this field (more so than bright Gentiles), as long as it’s taught out of biology departments and not as mathematics. This might explain why Gould and Lewontin are actually pretty mediocre — they’re the guys who weren’t good enough at math to be interested in something else.
     
    There's also Steve's notion about a boyhood in the country playing a role......
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. And in totally unrelated news, Sailer’s Meat seeks to expand.

    Read More
    • LOL: Whoever
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  25. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Meanwhile, at the Paul Robeson/Malcolm X Academy in Detroit, the first publicly-funded, African-centered school in America:

    https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e20_1489806659

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stephen Paul Foster
    Is the language of instruction ebonics?
    , @Dr. X

    Meanwhile, at the Paul Robeson/Malcolm X Academy in Detroit, the first publicly-funded, African-centered school in America

     

    Can't name a school after the president of Stanford who actually knew something about the science of biology, but we can name one after a pimp who converted to Islam in prison and became a communist, eh?
    , @Jus' Sayin'...
    LOL.

    A friend, an anthropologist who spent many years doing field work among several different tribes in Africa, informed me that the high pitched screeching, audible in the video to which you link, seems to be a universal Negro behavioral characteristic. He made this observation after breaking up an escalating confrontation between trespassing Negroes and White students on the campus of a New Jersey college where both he and I were teaching. He did so after I commented on the increasingly incoherent screeching and yammering I had heard from the involved Negroes just before my colleague stepped in. He told me this signaled to him that the Negroes in question were on the verge of escalating the confrontation to violence and that, as a result, he had felt compelled to intervene.

    One additional point can be gleaned from an appendix to the Coleman Report which reported the observed fact that the students of male Negro teachers, even after controlling for various other possible explanatory factors, performed worse on average than the students of all other teachers. Even at the time this was such an inflammatory observation that it was buried in an appendix. To me it seems obvious that the personalities, intellectual capacities, and overt behaviors of Negro and White students are so different that segregated schooling into entirely different educational systems is probably necessary to optimize outcomes for each race. But providing just Negro instructors to Negro students may not be doing the Negro students any favors.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. These British upper middle class left-of-center intellectuals were very in-marrying. For example, J.M. Keynes’ brother Geoffrey, a surgeon and leading William Blake scholar, married Charles Darwin’s grand-daughter.

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

    Eventually they will come for Bertrand Russell.

    I recommend Ray Monk’s two volume biography. Ray Monk seemingly came to deeply dislike Russell in the writing, and the biography did not get the acclaim of his prior bio of Wittgenstein. But anyone with any sense is going to come to dislike Russell, while still respecting him as one of the best.

    If you’ve ever wondered how the nation that put a man on the moon became the nation that recognizes you as Satan incarnate if you deny that a grown man has the inalienable right to shower with teenage girls… the life of Bertrand Russell can be illuminating.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I read one volume of Bertrand Russell's autobiography and I was surprised how much I disliked him personally while finding his politics pretty justifiable.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. @ringo s
    Any thoughts on the abandonment of the manned space program after 1972?
    Apollo was the most ambitious, successful endeavor of the human race. However, it was also the one enterprise of the twentieth century with comparatively few prominent Jews. The astronauts and engineers all seemed like Midwesterners, and the many of the top scientists were Germans! I'm always puzzled how the popular culture suddenly lost its interest in space exploration. I don't buy budget pressures as the reason. The 1970s was the beginning of the era of huge weapons systems procurements by the Pentagon. Was this given priority for a more aggressive Middle East policy over the space program?

    I’m always puzzled how the popular culture suddenly lost its interest in space exploration.

    Huh?

    http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/

    http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/

    Voyager had it all over Apollo!

    Astronaut was the first profession to be automated.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. The school board voted unanimously on Friday to rename both schools given their namesakes’ promotion of eugenics

    I don’t know about eugenics, but I am increasingly finding unanimity creepy.

    Read More
    • Agree: Coemgen, res, Old fogey
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Yeah, I wouldn't read any more into this than California continuing to lose their shit Salem witch-trial style.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. @Anonymous
    Eventually they will come for Bertrand Russell.

    I recommend Ray Monk's two volume biography. Ray Monk seemingly came to deeply dislike Russell in the writing, and the biography did not get the acclaim of his prior bio of Wittgenstein. But anyone with any sense is going to come to dislike Russell, while still respecting him as one of the best.

    If you've ever wondered how the nation that put a man on the moon became the nation that recognizes you as Satan incarnate if you deny that a grown man has the inalienable right to shower with teenage girls... the life of Bertrand Russell can be illuminating.

    I read one volume of Bertrand Russell’s autobiography and I was surprised how much I disliked him personally while finding his politics pretty justifiable.

    Read More
    • LOL: donut
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Surprised again.

    Well, I guess that does help one to be a noticer.
    , @Abe

    I read one volume of Bertrand Russell’s autobiography and I was surprised how much I disliked him personally while finding his politics pretty justifiable.
     
    I don't get that. I feel kind of the opposite. Yes, Russell had enough intellectual integrity to go from cautiously optimistic about the Russian Revolution in 1917 to staunchly anti-Stalinist by the 30's (if not earlier). Yet he was at the same time the sort of louche, detached-from-personal-character belletrist jerk-off that ended up being spiritual godfather to every one of today's special Snowflakes. Basically his political program always came down to liberating humanity from the sort of care, want, and character-building struggle that Russell himself always hated as a distraction from his own rarefied intellectual pursuits. Were his ideal state ever realized it would be an unmitigated social disaster.

    On the other hand I can personally identify with him, and find the broad contours of his life (if not every particular detail) quite endearing. Russell was a great mind (if not necessarily a historically first-rate one- not sure how PRINCIPIA holds up these days), but with the interpersonal intuition and sensitivity of the most exalted of novelists. Yes, Russell had an enormous and reckless sexual appetite, and maybe that lead him to do things that we find objectionable today. Yet with the social constraints placed on that appetite during his day, his actions have to be taken in context. Anyone here read Jim Bouton's BALL FOUR? Not so long ago members of the beloved NEW YORK YANKEES were drilling holes through hotel walls to peep-in on airline stewardesses, and America's hero, Mickey Mantle, was leading "beaver shoot" parties to do the same sort of peeping through unsecured hotel windows.

    My take is that Russell's love of sex, love of female beauty, saved him from becoming the sort of crabbed, misanthropic great mind that has brought so much misery to the world of late. My guess is that much as the imperfect, jarring physical world annoyed him at times, the transcendent beauty of physical love always redeemed it for him in the end and that in turn instilled a patience, and even love, with ordinary people and things. St. Augustine it's not, but it is something...

    , @Laugh Track
    "I read one volume of Bertrand Russell’s autobiography and I was surprised how much I disliked him personally while finding his politics pretty justifiable."

    I take it that the volume just covered ground before his politics got taken over by his Trotskyist assistant?

    , @donut
    Oh , sorry Steve , I wasn't LOL at you comment .
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. 5371 says:

    So these modern day Termans are fine with the SJWs humiliating their great-grandfather, as long as they go a bit easier on their grandfather. Pathetic cucks.
    Keynes wasn’t really more Norman than any other middle class Englishman.
    Half of the “Normans” didn’t actually come from Normandy but from other parts of France.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  32. Steve, of all your theories about Jews, this one is your wackiest yet. No we didn’t produce any major 19th century geneticists, but from the 1950s on lots of Jews have won the Nobel Prize in physiology. I don’t mean to brag (as indeed that would be inappropriate as I myself am not one of those Nobel laureates), but I do think it indicates no reason for an inferiority complex regarding the life sciences, which we might conspiratorially compensate for as per your theory here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  33. O'Really says:

    Oliver Wendell Holmes has his name on many schools, despite being famous for his pro-eugenics decision in Buck v Bell: “Three generations of imbeciles is enough.”

    Less well known is the fact that he was writing for an 8-1 majority, including Justice Brandeis.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Maybe Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr. will get his essays removed from anthology as an extension of the Fred Terman precedent to the fathers of eugenicists.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Less well known is the fact that he was writing for an 8-1 majority, including Justice Brandeis
     
    The 1 was Pierce Butler, who has a long thoroughfare named for him in his native St Paul.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierce_Butler_(justice)

    He, not Blackmun or Brennan, is the Justice the city should brag about.
    , @ben tillman

    Oliver Wendell Holmes has his name on many schools, despite being famous for his pro-eugenics decision in Buck v Bell: “Three generations of imbeciles is enough.”
     
    He wrote, "Three generations of imbeciles are enough".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. @O'Really
    Oliver Wendell Holmes has his name on many schools, despite being famous for his pro-eugenics decision in Buck v Bell: "Three generations of imbeciles is enough."

    Less well known is the fact that he was writing for an 8-1 majority, including Justice Brandeis.

    Maybe Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr. will get his essays removed from anthology as an extension of the Fred Terman precedent to the fathers of eugenicists.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Abe

    Maybe Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr. will get his essays removed from anthology as an extension of the Fred Terman precedent to the fathers of eugenicists.
     
    Margaret Sanger (Planned Parenthood) was a prominent eugenicist; I'm sure so was Katherine McCormick, who provided research funding for what became the Pill (McCormick's husband became insane, and she was terrified of brining a child of his into the world).

    Reasoning does not seem to work with these people, so I again propose deep-cover methods of infiltrating leftist groups where we can use Pep-cratic Irony to get another circular firing squad going. Join your local Planned Parenthood branch, then at the next anti-Trump theme dinner say how much you love the group, but that its association with Sanger is just too triggering for you, so before dealing any further with current issues, we need to take care of that whole Margaret Sanger damnatio memoriae thing first.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. If they rename those schools to Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown, they’ll be in a strong moral position to resist any future pressure to integrate with East Palo Alto schools.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JMcG
    There is a suburban Philadelphia high school that was built in the last decade. After much thought, it was named after Bayard Rustin. He was a queer black communist. Beat that.
    I've just finished reading on the subjects of the Spanish Civil War and the beginning of the Second World War. What strikes me most is how influential the Comintern was. I've been a student of history my whole life, and it's only becoming clear now how utterly destructive the totalitarian left is to human happiness.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @ringo s
    Any thoughts on the abandonment of the manned space program after 1972?
    Apollo was the most ambitious, successful endeavor of the human race. However, it was also the one enterprise of the twentieth century with comparatively few prominent Jews. The astronauts and engineers all seemed like Midwesterners, and the many of the top scientists were Germans! I'm always puzzled how the popular culture suddenly lost its interest in space exploration. I don't buy budget pressures as the reason. The 1970s was the beginning of the era of huge weapons systems procurements by the Pentagon. Was this given priority for a more aggressive Middle East policy over the space program?

    Any thoughts on the abandonment of the manned space program after 1972?

    There were at least three factors:

    1) Cost was indeed high.

    2) Manned exploration is much less efficient than unmanned.

    3) Apollo carried great risk of disaster.

    Point number three was brought to my attention by a White House budget analyst I met years ago. (He had worked on the Hubble budget and was speaking about it at a dinner that night.) I asked him why Apollo was dropped, and he told me Nixon and his people worried about another Apollo 13. The race had been won, so why not quit while we were ahead before there are dead astronauts on the moon as permanent memorials to the program?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    "The race had been won, so why not quit while we were ahead before there are dead astronauts on the moon as permanent memorials to the program?"
    .
    This is an outstandingly strong image indeed - and therefor makes for a very convincing argument.
    , @Jack D
    The moon is a sterile rock in the vacuum of space. It's not like the discovery of N. America. They proved the point that America was better than the USSR (the main point, really), brought back a bunch of moon rocks and after that there were real diminishing returns - how many moon rocks do you need at tens of millions of $/ lb. ? As soon as the US beat them, the Soviets dropped their manned space program because there was no glory in being #2.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @Steve Sailer
    I read one volume of Bertrand Russell's autobiography and I was surprised how much I disliked him personally while finding his politics pretty justifiable.

    Surprised again.

    Well, I guess that does help one to be a noticer.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. syonredux says:
    @academic gossip
    re: Steve's hypothesis about Jews and evolutionary theory, this is not quite right, it's more that eugenics died out as an academic discipline due to WW2. Its intellectual content was subsumed by more specialized disciplines, and Jews were pretty well involved in some those.


    -Statistics, divorced from biology and turned into a field of mathematics. This was in fact dominated by Jews after the war (in its theoretical parts, and related areas such as econometrics).

    -Genetics. Jews are well represented there, but it is too big and experimental a field for any minority to dominate.

    -Evolutionary theory. The math here is kinda basic and boring compared to classical Jewish interests like pure math and theoretical physics. I'd expect theoretician Jews to be self-selected away from this field (more so than bright Gentiles), as long as it's taught out of biology departments and not as mathematics. This might explain why Gould and Lewontin are actually pretty mediocre --- they're the guys who weren't good enough at math to be interested in something else.

    -Evolutionary theory. The math here is kinda basic and boring compared to classical Jewish interests like pure math and theoretical physics. I’d expect theoretician Jews to be self-selected away from this field (more so than bright Gentiles), as long as it’s taught out of biology departments and not as mathematics. This might explain why Gould and Lewontin are actually pretty mediocre — they’re the guys who weren’t good enough at math to be interested in something else.

    There’s also Steve’s notion about a boyhood in the country playing a role……

    Read More
    • Replies: @Winthorp
    Right - if it was just the second-tier math driving away Jewish theoretician types, they wouldn't have become so over-represented in Economics.
    , @Ivy
    For a brief moment there, I thought that you were writing about a boyhood in the country club. Imagine the science learned around the card table or, heaven forbid, caddying.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. @European-American

    The school board voted unanimously on Friday to rename both schools given their namesakes’ promotion of eugenics
     
    I don't know about eugenics, but I am increasingly finding unanimity creepy.

    Yeah, I wouldn’t read any more into this than California continuing to lose their shit Salem witch-trial style.

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

    India might be an example of what can happen if things get dysgenic enough. Here’s a bleak article (reprinted at ZDnet.com)
    by an Indian concerned about poor intellectual performance (he calls, in standard PC fashion, for more education):

    “Indian IT’s gargantuan re-engineering problem: The rot lies deep for Indian IT and nothing short of an education overhaul will fix it.”, Rajiv Rao for New Tech for Old India, March 17, 2017:

    “…Donald Trump’s proposed immigration reform …could put substantial barriers to Indian IT being able to corner the market on skilled H-1B visas, thereby threatening the lucrative $75 billion or so that it collects in revenue from the US

    …in the areas of AI, digital, robotics, cloud, and Internet of Things, which Indian firms are desperately trying to claw themselves into contention in…

    …automation is rapidly eliminating a vast portion of the more routine, low-level IT jobs that Indian companies use college graduates for…

    …will have to either let go hundreds of thousands of workers …or retrain them to be part of the new wave of IT work …is that even a realistic option?

    …According to no better authority than Srinivas Kandula, CEO of the Indian arm of French IT major Capgemini …the situation in India is especially bleak. “I am not very pessimistic, but it is a challenging task and I tend to believe that 60-65 percent [of Indian IT workers] are just not trainable,” he said. “Probably, India will witness the largest unemployment in the middle level to senior level,” he added…

    …the majority of India’s engineering graduates don’t have skills worth the paper their degrees are printed on. According to employment solutions company Aspiring Minds, a well-known institution that …tracks the worth of college graduates, a staggering 80 percent of engineers in India don’t possess skills that can make them employable

    …the results from their annual survey of 150,000 engineering students from 650 engineering colleges hasn’t changed much in five years …as many as 97 percent of engineering graduates desire positions in software engineering or core engineering but only 3 percent have the requisite chops to be employed in software or product market. Only 7 percent can complete core engineering tasks

    …This may seem very strange stuff…

    …Either the cream of this cohort is going abroad… or every one of these minds is capable …but is stymied by the rot that is the Indian higher educational system …technology institutions …enroll 2.9 million students annually …many of these colleges have rock-bottom standards if they are not fly-by-night operations…

    …former IIT professor …said that “a lot of people have talked about poor quality curriculum, poor quality faculty, poor infrastructure, poor school education, and so on. I disagree. There is a much simpler explanation for this: Copying in our colleges, besides laziness.”

    …prospective recruits — including those with several years industry experience — couldn’t write the most basic code that is taught in the very first semester in college…

    …hundreds of millions of unemployed and unemployable graduates (India sends 6 million graduates into the work force every year) — is a recipe for social upheaval.”

    Yeah, it really was all just a scam to cut costs without having to deal with things like pensions, get a subservient workforce, and do population replacement with a liberal voting bloc in the bargin.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous

    it really was all just
     
    Thanks for the uplift. Luckily, I've been drinking gin, so I don't care enough to go shoot myself.
    , @Jus' Sayin'...
    Several times over the past two decades I have run across H-1B Indian engineers who were laughably incompetent. In one case, one of the young ladies I was supervising ( a second generation Indian-American BTW) informed me that the VP we reported to, an H-1B with a MS degree from India's premier technical university, quite literally did not understand the concept of compound interest and was incorrectly discounting a cost estimate. I checked and it turned out to be true. He exercised a a blockheaded level of stubbornness in refusing to correct the errors he had made. The guy was also a total snake, licking the boots of anyone senior to him, horribly mistreating those under him, and making pathetically inept delta-male attempts at sexual harassment which became the butt of office jokes.

    Another Indian H-1B was a senior manager on a major state software project in which I was involved. He so thoroughly screwed things up that the state was forced, at enormous expense, to hire an outside consulting firm to essentially reprocess all data produced by the system whose development was overseen by this guy.
    , @AnotherDad
    He's charitable and PC--it's the schools!

    No, India is a dysgenic disaster. While India's TFR is coming down to within shouting distance of replacement--a good thing--it's dysgenically distributed.

    The well educated upcaste smarties have well below replacement fertility. (Two is the "standard" at which you stop. But many are content with one whom they think they have the resources to deliver the appropriate lifestyle to. And of course a bunch never get hitched or never pull the trigger.) And then, of course, a fair number of the smartest leave and have their kids in the US (or other parts of the Anglosphere).

    Meanwhile the countryside peasant lower castes, untouchables, tribals and the Muslims are still breeding away. India ticks a percent more Muslim each decade, which actually hides how much more Muslim the young people are. India is getting dumber and more Muslim!

    For all the happy talk--India is a demographic dysgenic disaster.
    , @cynthia curran
    Well, pensions were dropped for most companies years ago. My mother has one but I don't. The only big defender of pensions is Ralph Nader.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. @O'Really
    Oliver Wendell Holmes has his name on many schools, despite being famous for his pro-eugenics decision in Buck v Bell: "Three generations of imbeciles is enough."

    Less well known is the fact that he was writing for an 8-1 majority, including Justice Brandeis.

    Less well known is the fact that he was writing for an 8-1 majority, including Justice Brandeis

    The 1 was Pierce Butler, who has a long thoroughfare named for him in his native St Paul.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierce_Butler_(justice)

    He, not Blackmun or Brennan, is the Justice the city should brag about.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @Steve Sailer
    Emma Lazarus invented "the American idea."

    Emma Lazarus invented “the American idea.”

    No, her grandfather did. He co-founded the NYSE, and, as we all know, the business of America is business.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    No, her grandfather did. He co-founded the NYSE,
     
    Quite a long list of co-founders:




    Peter Anspach … 3 Great Dock Street
    Armstrong & Barnewall … 58 Broad Street
    Andrew D. Barclay … 136 Pearl Street
    Samuel Beebe … 21 Nassau Street
    G. N. Bleecker … 21 Broad Street
    Leonard Bleecker … 16 Wall Street
    John Bush … 195 Water Street
    John Ferrers … 205 Water Street






    Isaac M. Gomez … 32 Maiden Lane
    Travis Handak … 55 Broad Street
    John A. Hardenbrook … 24 Nassau Street
    Ephraim Hart … 74 Broadway
    John Henry … 13 Duke Street
    Augustine H. Lawrence … 132 Water Street
    Samuel March … 243 Queen Street
    Charles McEvers Jr. … 194 Water Street
    Julian McEvers … 140 Greenwich Street
    David Reedy … 58 Wall Street
    Robinson & Hartshorne … 198 Queen Street
    Benjamin Seixas … 8 Hanover Square
    Hugh Smith … Tontine Coffee House
    Sutton & Hardy … 20 Wall Street
    Benjamin Winthrop … 2 Great Dock Street
    Alexander Zuntz … 97 Broad Street
    , @syonredux
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQMzJ5Z7zBw
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. syonredux says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Emma Lazarus invented “the American idea.”
     
    No, her grandfather did. He co-founded the NYSE, and, as we all know, the business of America is business.

    No, her grandfather did. He co-founded the NYSE,

    Quite a long list of co-founders:

    Peter Anspach … 3 Great Dock Street
    Armstrong & Barnewall … 58 Broad Street
    Andrew D. Barclay … 136 Pearl Street
    Samuel Beebe … 21 Nassau Street
    G. N. Bleecker … 21 Broad Street
    Leonard Bleecker … 16 Wall Street
    John Bush … 195 Water Street
    John Ferrers … 205 Water Street

    Isaac M. Gomez … 32 Maiden Lane
    Travis Handak … 55 Broad Street
    John A. Hardenbrook … 24 Nassau Street
    Ephraim Hart … 74 Broadway
    John Henry … 13 Duke Street
    Augustine H. Lawrence … 132 Water Street
    Samuel March … 243 Queen Street
    Charles McEvers Jr. … 194 Water Street
    Julian McEvers … 140 Greenwich Street
    David Reedy … 58 Wall Street
    Robinson & Hartshorne … 198 Queen Street
    Benjamin Seixas … 8 Hanover Square
    Hugh Smith … Tontine Coffee House
    Sutton & Hardy … 20 Wall Street
    Benjamin Winthrop … 2 Great Dock Street
    Alexander Zuntz … 97 Broad Street

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna

    Hugh Smith … Tontine Coffee House
     
    Couldn't resist looking this one up, since Mr Smith gave the 'Coffee House' as his address. Turns out it was all about slavery and white privilege, like everything else in the world.

    Columbia University helps explain: http://maap.columbia.edu/place/16

    Is there any place online which offers a comprehensive tally of reparations paid to date? Including urban destruction, Great Society welfare programs, white flight & collapsed real-estate values, the endless other costs of negro criminality, etc etc?

    Newsweek says it should be $14 Trillion, but they're also saying we haven't started paying yet. http://www.newsweek.com/slavery-reparations-could-cost-14-trillion-according-new-calculation-364141

    Of course the professor being quoted ignores the fact that slaves were fed, clothed, and housed, as well as provided with free medical care. Hey, no wonder they still think they're slaves!

    , @Old Palo Altan
    Samuel Beebee (correct spelling for his branch of the family) was my ancestral uncle, so I know that the founding meeting took place in his offices in Nassau Street.

    On the question of Darwins and Keynes intermarrying: the then child actor (he has gone on to get a brilliant degree in Middle Eastern Studies from Cambridge) who starred as Edmund Pevensie in all three of the Chronicles of Narnia series from 2005-2010 is Skandar Keynes, whose great-great-uncle was the economist and whose thrice great grandfather was Charles Darwin. A great grandfather was the Nobel Prize winning (for Physiology, in 1932) Edgar Adrian.
    A splendid example of the effectiveness of the eugenics approach, he is, no doubt, deeply opposed to such woefully undemocratic practices.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. syonredux says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Emma Lazarus invented “the American idea.”
     
    No, her grandfather did. He co-founded the NYSE, and, as we all know, the business of America is business.

    Read More
    • Replies: @attilathehen
    Said James Jesus Angleton (Mexican mother, WASP father) who headed the CIA.
    , @donut
    This clip has been posted here a number of times. I never get tired of it .
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. @syonredux

    No, her grandfather did. He co-founded the NYSE,
     
    Quite a long list of co-founders:




    Peter Anspach … 3 Great Dock Street
    Armstrong & Barnewall … 58 Broad Street
    Andrew D. Barclay … 136 Pearl Street
    Samuel Beebe … 21 Nassau Street
    G. N. Bleecker … 21 Broad Street
    Leonard Bleecker … 16 Wall Street
    John Bush … 195 Water Street
    John Ferrers … 205 Water Street






    Isaac M. Gomez … 32 Maiden Lane
    Travis Handak … 55 Broad Street
    John A. Hardenbrook … 24 Nassau Street
    Ephraim Hart … 74 Broadway
    John Henry … 13 Duke Street
    Augustine H. Lawrence … 132 Water Street
    Samuel March … 243 Queen Street
    Charles McEvers Jr. … 194 Water Street
    Julian McEvers … 140 Greenwich Street
    David Reedy … 58 Wall Street
    Robinson & Hartshorne … 198 Queen Street
    Benjamin Seixas … 8 Hanover Square
    Hugh Smith … Tontine Coffee House
    Sutton & Hardy … 20 Wall Street
    Benjamin Winthrop … 2 Great Dock Street
    Alexander Zuntz … 97 Broad Street

    Hugh Smith … Tontine Coffee House

    Couldn’t resist looking this one up, since Mr Smith gave the ‘Coffee House’ as his address. Turns out it was all about slavery and white privilege, like everything else in the world.

    Columbia University helps explain: http://maap.columbia.edu/place/16

    Is there any place online which offers a comprehensive tally of reparations paid to date? Including urban destruction, Great Society welfare programs, white flight & collapsed real-estate values, the endless other costs of negro criminality, etc etc?

    Newsweek says it should be $14 Trillion, but they’re also saying we haven’t started paying yet. http://www.newsweek.com/slavery-reparations-could-cost-14-trillion-according-new-calculation-364141

    Of course the professor being quoted ignores the fact that slaves were fed, clothed, and housed, as well as provided with free medical care. Hey, no wonder they still think they’re slaves!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Aside from being tendentious, the page is just plain false. Talk about fake news....

    In 1792, the New York Stock Exchange was located in the Tontine Coffee House at 82 Wall Street. Slave ships were registered here and a value was assigned to the Africans on board.
     

    The companies that insured, outfitted, and owned the boats used to carry Africans from their homelands to enslavement often traded on the stock market.
     
    The securities traded in the early days were mostly government bonds and some bank stocks. The Stock Exchange was not a ship's registry and did not value slaves.

    New York passed a law for the gradual abolition of slavery in 1799. All children born after July 4, 1799 were free. The last adult slave was freed in 1827.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Henceforth, all high schools shall be renamed Emma Lazarus High School.

    That is all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  47. The Left loves its universities.

    Higher education (co-education) today is based on eugenics. Elite colleges, especially liberal arts colleges, have extremely high intra-alumni marriage rates.

    Actually, the colleges I am thinking of also have some of the highest per-capita sexual assault reports. I wonder what that correlation looks like… I’ll get back to you on that!

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

    Silicon Valley is, of course, built on cognitive elitism, but few seem to get the joke:

    Oh man, there’s that term again…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  49. Well, the cult-marxists are ramping up their neo-Stalinist historiography with these purges. How long will it take before they blast away the white guys on Mt. Rushmore to make room for BHO?

    See: http://fosterspeak.blogspot.com/2016/04/woodrow-wilson-meets-his-princeton.html

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

    I like what they did with the Saratoga Memorial and Benedict Arnold. Because he betrayed his country afterwards they very well could not honor him on the memorial. But because he played a key role in that victory, they couldn’t with a straight face erase him and honor someone else. So they left his spot on the memorial empty. The other 3 niches on the memorial have the statues of General Horatio Gates, General Philip Schuyler, and Colonel Daniel Morgan. The fourth niche is empty which prompts visitors to question why, and discover the sordid details.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Njguy73
    Anything that results in more Helen Keller jokes is good in my book.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. @Anonymous
    Meanwhile, at the Paul Robeson/Malcolm X Academy in Detroit, the first publicly-funded, African-centered school in America:

    https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e20_1489806659

    Is the language of instruction ebonics?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. dfordoom says: • Website
    @syonredux

    I’m thinking that of the list above, Churchill is presently off-limits and Teddy Roosevelt has too vivid an image today (although I would have said the same about Andrew Jackson 40 years ago). Some of the others are too obscure.
     
    Yeah, the Churchill Cult is still going strong.......but, that being said, I've noticed that quite a few POC academics seem quite eager to take him down....I've a South Asian colleague who blurts out "1943 Bengal Famine!" whenever his name is mentioned......

    Yeah, the Churchill Cult is still going strong…….but, that being said, I’ve noticed that quite a few POC academics seem quite eager to take him down

    Taking Churchill down is actually a very positive thing. One of the most evil men of the 20th century. Unfortunately he’s often attacked for the wrong things but he was a crazed warmonger.

    Read More
    • Agree: AndrewR, BB753
    • Replies: @jtgw
    The left is good at attacking the right people for the wrong reasons. E.g. Jeff Sessions could justifiably be attacked for his years as an opponent of constitutional restraints on the federal government, but no, they have to go after him for some supposed racist comments 40 years ago.
    , @gda
    Some will take any opportunity to smear great men. "One of the most evil men of the 20th century" indeed. To any ignorant, unread leftist maybe. But not to anyone with half a brain, the will to research and understand historical events, and a non-shuttered mind.

    "If the famine had occurred in peacetime, it would have been dealt with effectively and quickly by the Raj, as so often in the past. At worst, Churchill’s failure was not sending more aid—in the midst of fighting a war for survival. And the war, of course, is what Churchill’s slanderers avoid considering." http://www.winstonchurchill.org/resources/in-the-media/churchill-in-the-news/575-the-bengali-famine

    "Churchill was concerned about the humanitarian catastrophe taking place there, and he pushed for whatever famine relief efforts India itself could provide; they simply weren't adequate. Something like three million people died in Bengal and other parts of southern India as a result. We might even say that Churchill indirectly broke the Bengal famine by appointing as Viceroy Field Marshal Wavell, who mobilized the military to transport food and aid to the stricken regions (something that hadn't occurred to anyone, apparently).”

    Churchill was a flawed individual, it is true. But Churchill did attempt to alleviate the famine. As William Manchester wrote, Churchill “always had second and third thoughts, and they usually improved as he went along. It was part of his pattern of response to any political issue that while his early reactions were often emotional, and even unworthy of him, they were usually succeeded by reason and generosity.”

    Not unlike a certain POTUS.

    Churchill has been in the sights of the left for some time now. But the final line from the link above is priceless - “Sell crazy someplace else. We’re all stocked up here.”
    , @gda
    "As we edit the documents,” states Richard M. Langworth, one of the senior editors of this mammoth project, “we are struck by the sheer volume and variety of issues Churchill confronted. Those who criticize his sometimes bizarre notions or impatience with subordinates have never begun to consider the enormity of his task.”
    "When Churchill is criticized by revisionist historians over what to do about, say, the terrible famine in Bengal, they often forget the multitude of other issues with which he had simultaneously to deal." https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/churchill-challenged/

    Ah yes, the revisionist historians, spewing their bile. Shame on those who just want to pull great men down into the slime they swim in. Sorry, you sad excuses for human beings, we utterly reject your evil blather.
    , @Buzz Mohawk
    Yes, the phenomenon of Churchill worship makes me laugh. Oh thank God we have his precious bust back in our Oval Office. Hah!

    My own favorite text on this subject:

    https://www.amazon.com/Churchill-Hitler-Unnecessary-War-Britain/dp/0307405168

    The only things I like about that man are his drinking and his love for cigars. (Plus maybe his propensity for walking around the White House naked.) Aside from that, he did incalculable damage to my America and to his (now made former by him) empire.

    He made war where there need not have been. That is a speciality of those socially high-placed men (Bush family, anyone?) over whom we common men have no sway.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. JohnnyD says:

    Churchill also believed that England should stay a white country and that colonialism was generally a good thing for non-whites. This probably explains why Obama had the Churchill bust removed from the White House.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Abe

    Churchill also believed that England should stay a white country and that colonialism was generally a good thing for non-whites. This probably explains why Obama had the Churchill bust removed from the White House.
     
    And don't forgot Churchill also colonized Barry's grand-pa-pa. Yet after reading his war memoirs (yes I know, not a completely objective source of testimony) Churchill still emerges as the most radiant hero of the era, especially after one gets to his recounting of just how grim the situation looked in 1940: Germany across the Channel, poised to invade, a mercurial and untrustworthy Stalin still in nominal alliance with Germany, Japan running rampage in the Far East, and an armed-to-the-teeth Italy threatening to grab the Suez from both land and sea.

    And yet he refused Hitler's olive branch, and Steve's recent theory that this was due to his debts to a South African Jewish banker (hmmm... file for bankruptcy, or get hanged when the SS flag flies from the Tower of London) strikes me as one of his less-un-wacky ones.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Yep.

    ‘Milton Keynes’ – the last of England’s centrally planned ‘new towns’, founded during Harold Wilson’s government in 1967 and startlingly modernistic for a British town.
    Designed as an overspill for the over crowded over wrought slums of inner London, whose population pushed 8 million in 1948 and had some terrible housing conditions.
    50 years later, London is again pushing over 8 million (wholly and solely due to mass immigration) and has some pretty dire housing.
    Modern high quality housing in Milton Keynes is given to Somalis.

    The binomial name ‘Milton Keynes’ refers to the ancient Saxon village name, and the Norman lord of the manor as the suffix. It’s a quite a common usage in England.
    Hence in the ‘typical’ English village name of ‘Royston Vasey’ as seen in the BBC comedy ‘League of Gentlemen’ . ‘Royston’ being a good Saxon place name, whilst ‘Vasey’ is a Norman-English ‘noble’ name.
    Actually, ‘Royston Vasey’ is the real life moniker of one Roy ‘Chubby’ Brown, the celebrated ‘Geordie’ (Newcastle native) blue comedian – who made a guest appearance on the show as the mayor.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  55. Another proponent of eugenics: Svante Arrhenius, creator of the world’s first climate change models.

    Will this explode liberal or conservative heads faster?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  56. @Buzz Mohawk

    Any thoughts on the abandonment of the manned space program after 1972?
     
    There were at least three factors:

    1) Cost was indeed high.

    2) Manned exploration is much less efficient than unmanned.

    3) Apollo carried great risk of disaster.

    Point number three was brought to my attention by a White House budget analyst I met years ago. (He had worked on the Hubble budget and was speaking about it at a dinner that night.) I asked him why Apollo was dropped, and he told me Nixon and his people worried about another Apollo 13. The race had been won, so why not quit while we were ahead before there are dead astronauts on the moon as permanent memorials to the program?

    “The race had been won, so why not quit while we were ahead before there are dead astronauts on the moon as permanent memorials to the program?”
    .
    This is an outstandingly strong image indeed – and therefor makes for a very convincing argument.

    Read More
    • Agree: Kyle McKenna
    • Replies: @jtgw
    It's almost too convincing. In what other area of government would mere dead bodies be allowed to get in the way of progress? I find it hard to believe the government could be that prudent; there must have been something else going on.
    , @donut
    "“The race had been won, so why not quit while we were ahead before there are dead astronauts on the moon as permanent memorials to the program?”

    That's a BS reason . The planet is littered with the bodies of dead pioneers . And the bottom of the sea even more . The best way to honour those who might have died is to send more who will eventually be successful and thereby give some meaning to their sacrifice . Only a race of unworthy cowards ( or politicians ) would draw back , not at the risk to the brave explorers , but at the risk of bad press . If that is the reason we drew back from pushing on into the unknown then then we truly deserve the fate that we are facing now.

    "The race" never ends .

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. TangoMan says:

    Big changes in store for PISA tests. Future tests are going to test for adherence to multiculturalism.

    From the BBC:

    Mr Schleicher, who runs the international Pisa rankings, is going to introduce written tests in 2018 on global competency, which will assess how well young people are ready for a diverse and “interconnected world”.

    The tests currently assess teenagers’ abilities in maths, science and reading – but the OECD is going to add this new measure of global competency.

    “This assessment is about the capacity of young people to see the world through different perspectives, appreciate different ideas, be open to different cultures,” he says.

    “It is increasingly important for young people to engage with diversity, to be open to that, to draw value out of it, to see diversity not as a problem.”

    Looking at his photo he appears as a doppelganger of General Wesley Clark who once articulated a very similar position when he stated “There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That’s a 19th century idea and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states.”

    Global elites doubling down on diversity. I would never have imagined that PISA would be used as a vehicle for spreading propaganda. An objective test of knowledge now lends itself to becoming an objective test of propaganda. Is there anything touched by multiculturalism which is spared from corruption?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator

    “There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That’s a 19th century idea and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states.”
     
    Is this animus on the basis of nationality?
    , @Autochthon
    There is a golden opportunity here for a competent psychometrician to now release a valid instrument and begin valid tests to replace the benchmark being abdicated by Mr. Schleicher.

    Perhaps Dr. Murray is interested?
    , @vinteuil
    “This assessment is about the capacity of young people to see the world through different perspectives, appreciate different ideas, be open to different cultures...”

    Heh - what a train-wreck that's going to be. Any serious attempt to measure such capacities would, of course, lead to: whites on top, blacks on the bottom, everybody else in the middle.

    To avoid that result, the "assessment" will have to be totally, grotesquely, non-serious.

    Should be amusing.

    , @vinteuil
    "...doubling down on diversity..."

    At this point, I don't think that phrase quite does justice to the reality.

    It's no longer "doubling down," or "tripling down," or even "quadrupling down."

    No - la phrase juste, here, is "all-in."

    The Cathedral (or, if you prefer, The Synagogue) has staked everything on "diversity" - i.e., on the maximization of non-white immigration into all remaining majority white nations, plus the elimination of whites (well, white gentiles, anyway) from everywhere else.

    For these guys, "diversity," so defined, isn't just everything - it's the only thing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. Since that ban on attainder by blood thingy in the Constitution seems to be falling away, can we now do something sensible, like banning the next of kin (laterally as well as vertically) of prominent politicians, judges, and bureaucrats … even NGO types … from holding high offices or appointment for at least two generations. Keeping people like Chelsea Clinton out of high office would suggest this is of paramount importance. If we had done this earlier, we would have avoided among many others at least one Bush, possibly two, a Gore, possibly a Roosevelt, Jesse Jackson Junior, and possibly even Hillary if you include NOK by marriage, assuming we still recognise marriages.

    Read More
    • Agree: Thea
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  59. Coemgen says:

    “anti-eugenicism” = “pulling the ladders up”

    Read More
    • Agree: Opinionator
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  60. Pericles says:

    Doct. You see, her eyes are open.
    Gen. Ay, but their sense is shut.
    Doct. What is it she does now? Look, how she rubs her hands.
    Gen. It is an accustomed action with her, to seem thus washing her hands. I have known her to continue in this a quarter of an hour.
    Lady M. Yet here’s a spot.
    Doct. Hark! she speaks. I will set down what comes from her, to satisfy my remembrance the more strongly.
    Lady M. Out, damned spot! out, I say! One; two: why, then, ’tis time to do ’t. Hell is murky! Fie, my lord, fie! a soldier, and afeard? What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our power to account? Yet who would have thought the old man to have had so much blood in him?
    Doct. Do you mark that?
    Lady M. The Thane of Fife had a wife: where is she now? What! will these hands ne’er be clean? No more o’ that, my lord, no more o’ that: you mar all with this starting.
    Doct. Go to, go to; you have known what you should not.
    Gen. She has spoke what she should not, I am sure of that: Heaven knows what she has known.
    Lady M. Here’s the smell of the blood still: all the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand. Oh! oh! oh!

    http://www.bartleby.com/70/4151.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  61. tyrone says:
    @ringo s
    Any thoughts on the abandonment of the manned space program after 1972?
    Apollo was the most ambitious, successful endeavor of the human race. However, it was also the one enterprise of the twentieth century with comparatively few prominent Jews. The astronauts and engineers all seemed like Midwesterners, and the many of the top scientists were Germans! I'm always puzzled how the popular culture suddenly lost its interest in space exploration. I don't buy budget pressures as the reason. The 1970s was the beginning of the era of huge weapons systems procurements by the Pentagon. Was this given priority for a more aggressive Middle East policy over the space program?

    sex,drugs,rock and roll or they lost their hidden figures.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. O'Really says:

    I don’t think it will require a constitutional amendment to keep Chelsea Clinton out of high office.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  63. @eah
    Here’s a 2015 list by somebody named Rob Baker of once famous supporters of eugenics:...

    It must have been obvious back then -- as it is even more so now -- that civilization is dysgenic: modern dysgenic civilization + the Peter Principle + political correctness = doomsville.

    There certainly is a view that “civilization” is dysgenic, and that therefore every civilization automatically contains the seeds of its own destruction, but I don’t see it.

    Plenty of civilizations–whether by design or default–do selectively breed for traits desirable to that civilization.

    Ancient Republicans Rome’s traits were so deeply bred into its youth that even after the effective decapitation of society at the catastrophic Battle of Cannae, the demographically truncated population that was left rallied, not only to recover, but to win decisively the Second Punic War. Roman civilization was predicated on citizen-soldiers, and their breeding and culture was for citizen-soldiers.

    The Carolingians were defined by their warrior-nobles and they bred and raised … warrior-nobles.

    The Sultan of the long-reigning Ottomans was a ruthless autocrat, who was the fruit of a breeding program for ruthless autocrats.

    Elizabethan England thrived on trade and exploration and bred and raised merchant-adventurers.

    Etc.

    The trouble starts not with civilization itself, but with hypocrisy: when a civilization that works in a certain way pretends that it works in a different way. It is then that dysgenics activate, whether by design or default.

    Needless to say, The Current Year entails world-historical levels of hypocrisy…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rod1963

    The trouble starts not with civilization itself, but with hypocrisy: when a civilization that works in a certain way pretends that it works in a different way. It is then that dysgenics activate, whether by design or default.

     

    Sparta also practiced eugenics however they never opened their doors to fresh blood lines as causalities mounted during it's war with Athens and instead of retrenching after the war and rebuild their manpower pool they engaged in the same sort of insanity that Athens did - trying to run a empire which exhausted them.

    By the time of Alexander the Great, Sparta was militarily and politically irrelevant.
    , @vinteuil
    "The trouble starts not with civilization itself, but with hypocrisy: when a civilization that works in a certain way pretends that it works in a different way."

    No kidding? Tell me more! Please write the book on this, so that I can stop pretending to myself that I'll ever find the time to do it...

    Seriously: the key to power is to dress up one's self-interest (or one's in-group's interest) in a disguise sufficiently plausible to pass for the common interest.

    White gentiles are such hopeless suckers for that sort of thing.
    , @dfordoom

    Elizabethan England thrived on trade and exploration
     
    And don't forget piracy. ;-)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. @anonymous
    India might be an example of what can happen if things get dysgenic enough. Here's a bleak article (reprinted at ZDnet.com)
    by an Indian concerned about poor intellectual performance (he calls, in standard PC fashion, for more education):

    "Indian IT's gargantuan re-engineering problem: The rot lies deep for Indian IT and nothing short of an education overhaul will fix it.", Rajiv Rao for New Tech for Old India, March 17, 2017:


    "...Donald Trump's proposed immigration reform ...could put substantial barriers to Indian IT being able to corner the market on skilled H-1B visas, thereby threatening the lucrative $75 billion or so that it collects in revenue from the US...

    ...in the areas of AI, digital, robotics, cloud, and Internet of Things, which Indian firms are desperately trying to claw themselves into contention in...

    ...automation is rapidly eliminating a vast portion of the more routine, low-level IT jobs that Indian companies use college graduates for...

    ...will have to either let go hundreds of thousands of workers ...or retrain them to be part of the new wave of IT work ...is that even a realistic option?

    ...According to no better authority than Srinivas Kandula, CEO of the Indian arm of French IT major Capgemini ...the situation in India is especially bleak. "I am not very pessimistic, but it is a challenging task and I tend to believe that 60-65 percent [of Indian IT workers] are just not trainable," he said. "Probably, India will witness the largest unemployment in the middle level to senior level," he added...

    ...the majority of India's engineering graduates don't have skills worth the paper their degrees are printed on. According to employment solutions company Aspiring Minds, a well-known institution that ...tracks the worth of college graduates, a staggering 80 percent of engineers in India don't possess skills that can make them employable...

    ...the results from their annual survey of 150,000 engineering students from 650 engineering colleges hasn't changed much in five years ...as many as 97 percent of engineering graduates desire positions in software engineering or core engineering but only 3 percent have the requisite chops to be employed in software or product market. Only 7 percent can complete core engineering tasks...

    ...This may seem very strange stuff...

    ...Either the cream of this cohort is going abroad... or every one of these minds is capable ...but is stymied by the rot that is the Indian higher educational system ...technology institutions ...enroll 2.9 million students annually ...many of these colleges have rock-bottom standards if they are not fly-by-night operations...

    ...former IIT professor ...said that "a lot of people have talked about poor quality curriculum, poor quality faculty, poor infrastructure, poor school education, and so on. I disagree. There is a much simpler explanation for this: Copying in our colleges, besides laziness."...

    ...prospective recruits -- including those with several years industry experience -- couldn't write the most basic code that is taught in the very first semester in college...

    ...hundreds of millions of unemployed and unemployable graduates (India sends 6 million graduates into the work force every year) -- is a recipe for social upheaval."

     

    Yeah, it really was all just a scam to cut costs without having to deal with things like pensions, get a subservient workforce, and do population replacement with a liberal voting bloc in the bargin.

    it really was all just

    Thanks for the uplift. Luckily, I’ve been drinking gin, so I don’t care enough to go shoot myself.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. David says:
    @Autochthon

    ...eugenics, a 20th century movement that believed in the superiority of particular races over others.
     
    eugenics yoo-jen-iks noun

    the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics)

    I see what she did there....

    It interesting that the name Eugene’s popularity in the US grows, peaks, and declines right along side of the popularity of eugenics as a subject.

    https://www.behindthename.com/name/eugene/top

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. JMcG says:
    @International Jew
    If they rename those schools to Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown, they'll be in a strong moral position to resist any future pressure to integrate with East Palo Alto schools.

    There is a suburban Philadelphia high school that was built in the last decade. After much thought, it was named after Bayard Rustin. He was a queer black communist. Beat that.
    I’ve just finished reading on the subjects of the Spanish Civil War and the beginning of the Second World War. What strikes me most is how influential the Comintern was. I’ve been a student of history my whole life, and it’s only becoming clear now how utterly destructive the totalitarian left is to human happiness.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Tom-in-VA says:

    From Wikipedia, on how the incidence of Tay-Sachs disease has been reduced among Ashkenazi Jews:

    Screening for Tay–Sachs carriers was one of the first great successes of the emerging field of genetic counseling and diagnosis. Proactive testing has been quite effective in eliminating Tay–Sachs occurrence among Ashkenazi Jews, both in Israel and in the diaspora.[13] In 2000, Michael Kaback reported that in the United States and Canada, the incidence of TSD in the Jewish population had declined by more than 90% since the advent of genetic screening.[14] On January 18, 2005, the Israeli English language daily Haaretz reported that as a “Jewish disease” Tay–Sachs had almost been eradicated. Of the 10 babies born with Tay–Sachs in North America in 2003, none had been born to Jewish families. In Israel, only one child was born with Tay–Sachs in 2003, and preliminary results from early 2005 indicated that none were born with the disease in 2004.[15]

    Sounds pretty eugenic to me.

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

    Whilst on the subject, apparently the English term ‘villain’ meaning offender also dates back to Norman times. The original meaning of the word was something akin to ‘peasant’ or ‘serf’. The implication is that, back in the day, in the eyes of the Norman lords ‘offenders’, in the criminal sense and ‘peasants’ were more or less the same thing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  69. Dr. X says:

    The school board voted unanimously on Friday to rename both schools given their namesakes’ promotion of eugenics, a 20th century movement that believed in the superiority of particular races over others.

    I’d be willing to bet good money that every single member of that school board is in favor of taking your tax dollars and giving them to Margaret Sanger’s Planned Parenthood, though.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  70. Dr. X says:
    @Anonymous
    Meanwhile, at the Paul Robeson/Malcolm X Academy in Detroit, the first publicly-funded, African-centered school in America:

    https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e20_1489806659

    Meanwhile, at the Paul Robeson/Malcolm X Academy in Detroit, the first publicly-funded, African-centered school in America

    Can’t name a school after the president of Stanford who actually knew something about the science of biology, but we can name one after a pimp who converted to Islam in prison and became a communist, eh?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. “I’m thinking that of the list above, Churchill is presently off-limits and Teddy Roosevelt has too vivid an image today (although I would have said the same about Andrew Jackson 40 years ago).”

    Churchill and Roosevelt weren’t Southerners. Of course, TR’s support for Madison grant, and Winnie’s support for the boer War, so they could be next.

    Didn’t Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger also support eugenics? Wonder if they’d go after her? And, isn’t an emerging reason for women opting for abortion due to eugenic reasons? (e.g. lack of desire for offspring born with birth defects)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  72. @Autochthon

    ...eugenics, a 20th century movement that believed in the superiority of particular races over others.
     
    eugenics yoo-jen-iks noun

    the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics)

    I see what she did there....

    Exactly. Why is eugenics, which is improvement of specific traits through selective breeding, necessarily linked to the notion of a belief in the superiority of a particular race?

    Evidently Gresham’s Law applies to Logic as well.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. OK, if no one else is going to chime in with this “hatefact” about Helen Keller, I guess it’s going to have to be ol’ Achmed again:

    How come Helen Keller couldn’t drive?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Because she was a woman.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. @Achmed E. Newman
    OK, if no one else is going to chime in with this "hatefact" about Helen Keller, I guess it's going to have to be ol' Achmed again:

    How come Helen Keller couldn't drive?

    Because she was a woman.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Please excuse my hogging the youtube-embed spots here, but this one should have gone with my last comment, but I got fixated with Boogie on Reggae Woman.

    I don't know how this could not be funny for anyone on iSteve - this is from The Office and goes perfectly with my Helen Keller joke:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aVUoy9r0CM
    , @JMcG
    My son is in hysterics. That's way better than the one where she answers the iron!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. @ringo s
    Any thoughts on the abandonment of the manned space program after 1972?
    Apollo was the most ambitious, successful endeavor of the human race. However, it was also the one enterprise of the twentieth century with comparatively few prominent Jews. The astronauts and engineers all seemed like Midwesterners, and the many of the top scientists were Germans! I'm always puzzled how the popular culture suddenly lost its interest in space exploration. I don't buy budget pressures as the reason. The 1970s was the beginning of the era of huge weapons systems procurements by the Pentagon. Was this given priority for a more aggressive Middle East policy over the space program?

    Golden-Age NASA was not only white, it was southern white (plus German). The NASA centers most involved in manned spaceflight were all in the south: Langley, Johnson, Marshall, Kennedy and the manufacturing facility at Michoud in New Orleans. The only real exception I can think of was Abe Silverstein of the Lewis Research Center in Cleveland, who championed the use of liquid hydrogen as fuel, and chose the name “Apollo”. Of course much of the hardware was built in California, but those were contractors, not NASA.

    Feynman played a notable role in the Challenger accident investigation. When called to serve on the investigation board, his first reaction was not do it, because he hated government work, and he was also mildly against manned spaceflight because he thought it had little scientific merit. But he got into the job and it changed his views to, by his account, very pro-NASA.

    After the Columbia disaster, I was involved in fixing some of the problems that had been uncovered by the accident board. Just as with Challenger, the Columbia board featured a Jewish Nobelist in physics (I guess they’d have called Feynman but he was dead by then.) You can easily figure out who I’m talking about if you read the report. Anyway, I had a very unpleasant phone conversation with this guy. I needed to ask him some questions about what he’d written in the accident report, but this guy just dripped with disdain for the space program. Everything NASA had done, or was going to do, was a silly waste of money to him. The GWB-era Moon-Mars program was running then, and even though I hadn’t asked, this guy went on a tangent about how humans could never survive the radiation all the way to Mars, and there was no way to shield it, blah blah blah. I had to practically hang up on him to get him to shut up. I think the only reason he volunteered for the board was that Feynman had done it, and all physicists worship Feynman.

    Writing this, I realized that this Columbia guy was not a second Feynman, he was a second Jerry Wiesner. Space buffs will know what I’m talking about.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Jack D says:
    @Mr. Anon
    It's kind of rich for Jews to oppose eugenics.

    Is there any people on Earth who have practiced eugenics to a greater degree than Jews?

    Jews oppose eugenics because it is connected in their mind with Nazi genocide. Before the Nazis turned to mass extermination of Jews, they piloted their extermination techniques on the mentally deficient. OTOH, Hitler was also a vegetarian but this did not discredit vegetarianism.

    Eugenics is a battle for comparative advantage – if everyone is equally smart (or whatever trait you are breeding for) then it doesn’t help your group. So it would make perfect sense to say “eugenics for me, not for thee”. But the kind of modern leftist Jews who are opposed to eugenics are also opposed to Jewish eugenics. Either they marry someone from another race (admittedly usually from the elites of that race) or else they have no children or at most 1 or 2.

    The future of eugenics belongs to the Chinese. Once the CRISPR technology becomes sufficiently advanced, the Chinese will adopt it ruthlessly and without any qualms.

    Read More
    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    My point was that Jews (the Ashkenazim, at least) effectively did practice a kind of eugenics, even before it was called that.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    OTOH, Hitler was also a vegetarian but this did not discredit vegetarianism.
     
    He was a welfare statist as well.
    , @attilathehen
    No, the future of genetics is not with the Chinese. The Chinese (as all Asians) do not have the "zigzag in the brain" that whites have. Unless they can make themselves white, this CRISPR technology will do nothing for them. Also, the Chinese have aborted themselves so much that they are the most rapidly aging country in the world.
    , @Busby
    And without regard to the unintended consequences.

    Or as Dr. Malcolm put it, "Yeah, yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. That’s what I get for getting on the keyboard before I’ve read the whole article (much less the comments, yet):

    Maybe in a decade Malcolm Gladwell will be telling Helen Keller jokes during sales convention keynote addresses and all the regional sales managers will be laughing uproariously as they feel morally superior to that … eugenicist.

    Having told one Helen Keller joke already (one of the better ones, you’ve gotta admit), I hasten to add that I feel in no way morally superior to an amazing woman like that, whatever her politics were. I have nothing but awe for someone with such huge handicaps that could even get up every morning.

    I had not read your ’14 article, Steve, but it’s more interesting stuff. It’s really true that the cult-marxists, SJW’s or whatever the latest term for these loonies is, are part of a big religious cult more than they have political views. The eugenicists, and the other side in that debate, of many years ago that you write about cared about human beings and society, whether right or wrong. These people wanting to change the names of schools, trying to kick Charles Murray’s ass, etc. don’t even know enough history or logic to debate anything or even understand what they are for or against. They are told what is bad and what is good and they will follow their religion unthinkingly to any ends. (Spoiler alert: their end is nigh – peak stupidity is around the corner.)

    Having said all that, I do not regret writing my joke here anyway. Don’t worry, it’ll only be funny until women learn to drive.

    If they get that far, these loonies could replace the Helen Keller name on some high schools for the blind with “Stevie Wonder High”. Would it really matter though? Who’s gonna read it, if it’s a school for the blind. I guess you could put a bunch of big braille dots up there, but still?

    Speaking of Stevie Wonder, I was also gonna write “Ray Charles”, but Stevie was much better – this song has an awesome sound – that fuzzy bass! – Boogie on Reggae Woman

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  78. Jack D says:
    @Opinionator
    “We have the benefit of hindsight,” Freedland continues. “The popularity of eugenics as an idea plunges after the war, because people took one look at where it leads.

    So much of our social rules today are based on the narrative that the jews tell about WW2. So many assumptions and questionable premises are part of that. It is really amazing. "Where eugenics leads," for example. As if eugenics rather than intergroup competition was the driver of the conflict (whatever the conflict was).

    Slippery slope arguments are not always wrong. If you accept the idea that people with deficient genes should be eliminated from the breeding population, it’s not a big reach to say that those people should be eliminated period and not just sterilized – as Stalin said, no person, no problem. And it’s not a big reach to expand your definition of “deficient” to include entire races.

    Eugenics also calls into question fundamental American principles. When Jefferson said in the Declaration that “all men are created equal” at the very least he meant that we are all equal in human dignity in the eyes of our Creator, who loves all of his creations . After the advent of Christianity, it was never the English practice to cast their elderly out onto ice floes or to smash the head of deformed infants.

    Read More
    • Replies: @pyrrhus
    No, the poorer English, and Jews, dumped their problematic children in poorhouses and orphanages, where they usually died.
    , @res
    You raise good points. Eugenics is a tricky area ethically and full of slippery slopes. I just wish there were more nuanced discussion and less semi-arbitrarily deciding to selectively apply the label "eugenics" to things (e.g. see my JScreen comment above for an example of selectivity) and immediately leap to equating that with "literally Hitler."

    I tend to see coercion and who bears the costs (or receives the benefits) as touchstones of the debate. I think people should be free to do what they want in terms of having children as long as they bear the costs themselves. However, there are tricky issues with the idea of societal costs and the probable multiplier effect of genetic engineering on existing inequality. There are also major issues with the means used to accomplish eugenics. Everything from literally Hitler to aborting fetuses with Down Syndrome.
    , @AnotherDad
    > Slippery slope arguments are not always wrong.

    True. But to the extent one can render judgment, this one is.

    I've made your point about "slippery slope" myself numerous times. Saying "slippery slope" doesn't disprove a slippery slope argument. But you can offer a slippery slope argument about almost any action. It's up to those offering the argument to show that the slope is indeed very slippery, and folks are likely to slide on down to something folks generally agree is a bad outcome.

    Such evidence, with respect to eugenics is--charitably--"weak". The eugenicists probably sterilized some people who were unfairly institutionalized, and could have actually taken care of themselves and their children. But the eugenic efforts in Christian countries didn't result in putting old folks onto ice floes or bashing in the heads of disabled kids. Or tossing out Christian principles or Christian charity at all. The Nazi thing is trotted out. But that's notably a case of ideology which *rejected* Christianity. And, it's horrors were more good old fashioned imperialism and race war--i'm taking your land and killing or enslaving you--than "eugenics" gone wild. If you want to draw lessons from the Nazis: "imperialism bad" and "stay explicitly Christian" might be some good lessons to draw.

    In contrast, the evidence for the *reverse* proposition--that when you stop being explicitly concerned with "eugenics", with maintaining your nation's genes and genetic fitness, things slide down hill pretty fast--seems to be pretty darn clear.
    , @SPMoore8
    If you accept the idea that people with deficient genes should be eliminated from the breeding population

    People do that all the time nowadays; it's called "abortion." And, as others have noted, the whole eradication of congenital diseases among Ashkenazim as well as any incest laws are also explicitly eugenic. Not to mention all sorts of physical defects, or Down Syndrome, or any number of other issues that are used to justify pregnancy termination.

    I think it's probably true that having a society where everyone had above average intelligence would be a disaster, so I would agree that eugenics with that sole aim is also highly questionable. And it's also true that the sterilization that the Holmes led SCOTUS endorsed is cruel.

    Having said that, the Wells' quote that I referenced earlier points to a real problem. What do we do when people keep breeding while at the same time are incapable of raising up their progeny? In the case of some nameless (white) couple in London with 12 children a hundred years ago, no problem, we can help them. (It's only 12 people, after all.)

    But what if it's millions of non-Jews in Israel controlled territory? What if it's tens of millions of Muslims, or Asians, who having been thoroughly ground down by overpopulation and war in their homelands, and simply wish to feed their children? What if it's billions of people in Africa? And so on. Slippery slopes go both ways.

    The only response I ever see is that TFR will go down -- eventually -- and then everything will be more or less the way it is now. Given that the world population has increased seven fold in the past 200 years, four fold in the past 100 years, and doubled in the past 50 years it's hard to be optimistic about the latest predictions that assure that it will take 200 years to double again (although I don't want to think about 15 billion on the planet: imagine what NYC, LA and Chicago will look like then.)

    Most religious people leave life and death issues to the Almighty. But in an empirical world where the Almighty doesn't appear to actually intervene, that kind of posture is easily seen as a cop out. Just because we live in a time of incredible plenty, that doesn't change the fact that ultimately life is a zero sum game. The best strategy is to hunker down and do your thing, and not show up as too poor -- and be miserable -- or too rich -- and be the target of envy.

    But what happens if and when we reach the resource wall?

    The current thinking of the progressives is that we should just let whatever happens, happen. That there is no such thing as a specific "culture" worth preserving, and if there is, any immigrant will automatically defer to it, because it's the best. That it's wonderful to have communities where you can eat at 12 different ethnic restaurants on one block and that's wonderful that the public schools are instructing a new generation of Einsteins in 12 different languages, etc.

    But most groups on planet Earth don't think that way, and never have; it's always been "Our way" versus the "Other way" and there's no apology for what one prefers. We seem to have lost that in Europe and the US, and while that's a morally impeccable posture in terms of blameworthiness it's also self-extinguishing.
    , @dfordoom

    Slippery slope arguments are not always wrong
     
    .

    In fact they are almost always right.

    If you accept the idea that people with deficient genes should be eliminated from the breeding population, it’s not a big reach to say that those people should be eliminated period and not just sterilized – as Stalin said, no person, no problem. And it’s not a big reach to expand your definition of “deficient” to include entire races.
     
    I could easily imagine a time when climate change deniers and Christians might be classified as mentally deficient and marked down for elimination from the breeding pool.

    And if you think that's absurd, just remember that homosexual marriage and transgender bathroom rights were considered absurd twenty years ago.

    Eugenics really is a seriously risky thing to play around with.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  80. @Achmed E. Newman
    Because she was a woman.

    Please excuse my hogging the youtube-embed spots here, but this one should have gone with my last comment, but I got fixated with Boogie on Reggae Woman.

    I don’t know how this could not be funny for anyone on iSteve – this is from The Office and goes perfectly with my Helen Keller joke:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. @ringo s
    Any thoughts on the abandonment of the manned space program after 1972?
    Apollo was the most ambitious, successful endeavor of the human race. However, it was also the one enterprise of the twentieth century with comparatively few prominent Jews. The astronauts and engineers all seemed like Midwesterners, and the many of the top scientists were Germans! I'm always puzzled how the popular culture suddenly lost its interest in space exploration. I don't buy budget pressures as the reason. The 1970s was the beginning of the era of huge weapons systems procurements by the Pentagon. Was this given priority for a more aggressive Middle East policy over the space program?

    “…The astronauts and engineers all seemed like Midwesterners, and the many of the top scientists were Germans!…”

    I just recently realized that some academic/professional areas which seem to have disproportionately few prominent Jews are various branches of engineering. I began considering this when I learned that although Ashkenazim score on average much higher than other Europeans on the verbal (+2 SD!!!) and mathematical (+1 SD) subsets of IQ tests they under-perform slightly on portions of IQ tests involving spatial manipulations and imagery. It struck me that this latter set of mental skills is critical in most fields of engineering.

    An exception to this last assertion may be electrical engineering, which is heavily oriented to more mathematical types of thinking, e.g., network theory, boolean algebra, mathematical logic, category theory (in software engineering), etc. An interesting test of my hypothesis might be to compare the proportion of Ashkenazim across various fields of engineering, the general population, and fields where Ashkenazim are well-known to be over-represented, e.g., the law, economics, and management/ownership of the entertainment and news industries.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  83. pyrrhus says:
    @Anon
    Forrest Gump Academy

    Mike Judge Academy…

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

    A recent article named these two middle schools as 2 of the top 3 middle schools in the entire country. Either the names are magic, or the kids who go there (from silicon valley families) are??

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  85. pyrrhus says:
    @Jack D
    Slippery slope arguments are not always wrong. If you accept the idea that people with deficient genes should be eliminated from the breeding population, it's not a big reach to say that those people should be eliminated period and not just sterilized - as Stalin said, no person, no problem. And it's not a big reach to expand your definition of "deficient" to include entire races.

    Eugenics also calls into question fundamental American principles. When Jefferson said in the Declaration that "all men are created equal" at the very least he meant that we are all equal in human dignity in the eyes of our Creator, who loves all of his creations . After the advent of Christianity, it was never the English practice to cast their elderly out onto ice floes or to smash the head of deformed infants.

    No, the poorer English, and Jews, dumped their problematic children in poorhouses and orphanages, where they usually died.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. The American Empire is an electronic empire. Chalmers Johnson said it was an empire of military bases, but I won’t listen to anybody with the name Chalmers.

    The US dollar is the world’s reserve currency and it is electronically conjured up out of thin air. Nothing but government force backs the US dollar. The debt-based fiat currency US dollar system is only backed up by the American Empire’s ability to project military power.

    Electronics are the whole damn ballgame. You need a certain level of brainpower to think up ways of using electronics to project power. The attacks on the founders of Silicon Valley and the attacks on those who created a means to measure intelligence seem to be originating from boobs who take for granted what previous generations have done.

    Stagnation is thick in the air of California and the entirety of the American Empire. Maybe the people attacking the ones who created the electronics industry in Silicon Valley and devised systems of measuring intelligence are just burning the candle at both ends. They know or they sense that the global financial system is slowly imploding but they remain silent about that. Instead, they use their energy to attack the ones who created all the systems that are now imploding.

    My all time favorite for school board mischief is the capital appreciation bond. School boards get a pile of loot up front and then they promise to pay a huge pile of loot in the future. The banks who send the money to the school boards get the money cheap from the Federal Reserve Bank in anticipation of a huge payout in the future. All of this loot is just electronic currency no different from a tally stick. The irresponsible slobs on the school boards just figure they’ll be out of the area when the capital appreciation bond financially detonates.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  87. @Anonymous
    Meanwhile, at the Paul Robeson/Malcolm X Academy in Detroit, the first publicly-funded, African-centered school in America:

    https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e20_1489806659

    LOL.

    A friend, an anthropologist who spent many years doing field work among several different tribes in Africa, informed me that the high pitched screeching, audible in the video to which you link, seems to be a universal Negro behavioral characteristic. He made this observation after breaking up an escalating confrontation between trespassing Negroes and White students on the campus of a New Jersey college where both he and I were teaching. He did so after I commented on the increasingly incoherent screeching and yammering I had heard from the involved Negroes just before my colleague stepped in. He told me this signaled to him that the Negroes in question were on the verge of escalating the confrontation to violence and that, as a result, he had felt compelled to intervene.

    One additional point can be gleaned from an appendix to the Coleman Report which reported the observed fact that the students of male Negro teachers, even after controlling for various other possible explanatory factors, performed worse on average than the students of all other teachers. Even at the time this was such an inflammatory observation that it was buried in an appendix. To me it seems obvious that the personalities, intellectual capacities, and overt behaviors of Negro and White students are so different that segregated schooling into entirely different educational systems is probably necessary to optimize outcomes for each race. But providing just Negro instructors to Negro students may not be doing the Negro students any favors.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ScarletNumber
    William Paterson?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. Ben Frank says:

    Conquerors humiliate the conquered by destroying the most precious treasures of their civilizations. The less civilized the conquerors are, the more they love this crime.

    Muslims for example burned the Library of Alexandria around 642, blew up the Parthenon in 1687, dynamited Afghanistan’s giant Buddha statues in 2001 and destroyed Palmyra in 2015.

    Your town is on the list for future destruction. All USA is on the list.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  89. @anonymous
    India might be an example of what can happen if things get dysgenic enough. Here's a bleak article (reprinted at ZDnet.com)
    by an Indian concerned about poor intellectual performance (he calls, in standard PC fashion, for more education):

    "Indian IT's gargantuan re-engineering problem: The rot lies deep for Indian IT and nothing short of an education overhaul will fix it.", Rajiv Rao for New Tech for Old India, March 17, 2017:


    "...Donald Trump's proposed immigration reform ...could put substantial barriers to Indian IT being able to corner the market on skilled H-1B visas, thereby threatening the lucrative $75 billion or so that it collects in revenue from the US...

    ...in the areas of AI, digital, robotics, cloud, and Internet of Things, which Indian firms are desperately trying to claw themselves into contention in...

    ...automation is rapidly eliminating a vast portion of the more routine, low-level IT jobs that Indian companies use college graduates for...

    ...will have to either let go hundreds of thousands of workers ...or retrain them to be part of the new wave of IT work ...is that even a realistic option?

    ...According to no better authority than Srinivas Kandula, CEO of the Indian arm of French IT major Capgemini ...the situation in India is especially bleak. "I am not very pessimistic, but it is a challenging task and I tend to believe that 60-65 percent [of Indian IT workers] are just not trainable," he said. "Probably, India will witness the largest unemployment in the middle level to senior level," he added...

    ...the majority of India's engineering graduates don't have skills worth the paper their degrees are printed on. According to employment solutions company Aspiring Minds, a well-known institution that ...tracks the worth of college graduates, a staggering 80 percent of engineers in India don't possess skills that can make them employable...

    ...the results from their annual survey of 150,000 engineering students from 650 engineering colleges hasn't changed much in five years ...as many as 97 percent of engineering graduates desire positions in software engineering or core engineering but only 3 percent have the requisite chops to be employed in software or product market. Only 7 percent can complete core engineering tasks...

    ...This may seem very strange stuff...

    ...Either the cream of this cohort is going abroad... or every one of these minds is capable ...but is stymied by the rot that is the Indian higher educational system ...technology institutions ...enroll 2.9 million students annually ...many of these colleges have rock-bottom standards if they are not fly-by-night operations...

    ...former IIT professor ...said that "a lot of people have talked about poor quality curriculum, poor quality faculty, poor infrastructure, poor school education, and so on. I disagree. There is a much simpler explanation for this: Copying in our colleges, besides laziness."...

    ...prospective recruits -- including those with several years industry experience -- couldn't write the most basic code that is taught in the very first semester in college...

    ...hundreds of millions of unemployed and unemployable graduates (India sends 6 million graduates into the work force every year) -- is a recipe for social upheaval."

     

    Yeah, it really was all just a scam to cut costs without having to deal with things like pensions, get a subservient workforce, and do population replacement with a liberal voting bloc in the bargin.

    Several times over the past two decades I have run across H-1B Indian engineers who were laughably incompetent. In one case, one of the young ladies I was supervising ( a second generation Indian-American BTW) informed me that the VP we reported to, an H-1B with a MS degree from India’s premier technical university, quite literally did not understand the concept of compound interest and was incorrectly discounting a cost estimate. I checked and it turned out to be true. He exercised a a blockheaded level of stubbornness in refusing to correct the errors he had made. The guy was also a total snake, licking the boots of anyone senior to him, horribly mistreating those under him, and making pathetically inept delta-male attempts at sexual harassment which became the butt of office jokes.

    Another Indian H-1B was a senior manager on a major state software project in which I was involved. He so thoroughly screwed things up that the state was forced, at enormous expense, to hire an outside consulting firm to essentially reprocess all data produced by the system whose development was overseen by this guy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivy
    Knowing the H-1B percentage of a US company's IT staff could be useful in shorting stocks. There may be a short-term expense reduction but the long-term effects seem detrimental. My IT manager had nothing good to say about those . BTW, we were never a candidate for outsourcing, and I respected his opinion as an objective observer. He and I saw enough examples of incompetence to convince us of the time bomb aspect of such a policy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. jtgw says:
    @guest
    WASP is a well-known term, and has connotations beyond Anglo-American. For instance: America's ruling class.

    “Anglo-American WASP” is still redundant, though, since the “Anglo” is already contained in the acronym WASP.

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

    ot ot
    Oroville 17 March Spectacular Re-Opening of Main Spillway

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  92. jtgw says:
    @dfordoom

    Yeah, the Churchill Cult is still going strong…….but, that being said, I’ve noticed that quite a few POC academics seem quite eager to take him down
     
    Taking Churchill down is actually a very positive thing. One of the most evil men of the 20th century. Unfortunately he's often attacked for the wrong things but he was a crazed warmonger.

    The left is good at attacking the right people for the wrong reasons. E.g. Jeff Sessions could justifiably be attacked for his years as an opponent of constitutional restraints on the federal government, but no, they have to go after him for some supposed racist comments 40 years ago.

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

    At least it’s better than waging an actual war of nuclear bombs and missiles.

    Say what you want about shooting war, but one of its upsides is transparency of intention. The culture has been debauched by decades of political warfare posing as morality.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  94. Jack D says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Any thoughts on the abandonment of the manned space program after 1972?
     
    There were at least three factors:

    1) Cost was indeed high.

    2) Manned exploration is much less efficient than unmanned.

    3) Apollo carried great risk of disaster.

    Point number three was brought to my attention by a White House budget analyst I met years ago. (He had worked on the Hubble budget and was speaking about it at a dinner that night.) I asked him why Apollo was dropped, and he told me Nixon and his people worried about another Apollo 13. The race had been won, so why not quit while we were ahead before there are dead astronauts on the moon as permanent memorials to the program?

    The moon is a sterile rock in the vacuum of space. It’s not like the discovery of N. America. They proved the point that America was better than the USSR (the main point, really), brought back a bunch of moon rocks and after that there were real diminishing returns – how many moon rocks do you need at tens of millions of $/ lb. ? As soon as the US beat them, the Soviets dropped their manned space program because there was no glory in being #2.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    As soon as the US beat them, the Soviets dropped their manned space program because there was no glory in being #2.
     
    They dropped their plans to go the Moon, not their manned space program. Russians have been in orbit, off-and-on, every since Gagarin.
    , @Charles Pewitt
    https://youtu.be/8195fn_toLQ


    Moon Rock by Talking Heads

    I got wild imagination
    Talkin' transubstantiation
    Any version will do
    I got mass communication
    I'm the human corporation
    I ate a rock from the moon
    Moon in the rock, rock in the moon
    There's a moon in my throat
    You might think I'm wasting time
    You might laugh but not for long
    Hey! I'm working it out ... (work it out)
    , @ringo s
    There is Mars. von Braun always considered the moon a stepping stone to a manned voyage to Mars. They said they had a realistic plan to get there (and back) by 1985. (von Braun died of cancer in 1977.)
    , @inertial
    As soon as the US beat them, the Soviets dropped their manned space program.

    Huh?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. jtgw says:

    I’m sure the left, including leftist Jewish intellectuals, will find a way to eat their cake and have it, too. As you noted, Israel gets away with eugenics programs simply by not calling them “eugenics programs”. The left-wing media understand the power of naming: if a certain name has come to be taboo, just rename the thing. It is the name that is taboo, not the thing itself. So I’m sure they will continue to ensure that their elite schools uphold cognitive elitism, all the while claiming to be universally accessible and non-discriminatory.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  96. jtgw says:
    @Dieter Kief
    "The race had been won, so why not quit while we were ahead before there are dead astronauts on the moon as permanent memorials to the program?"
    .
    This is an outstandingly strong image indeed - and therefor makes for a very convincing argument.

    It’s almost too convincing. In what other area of government would mere dead bodies be allowed to get in the way of progress? I find it hard to believe the government could be that prudent; there must have been something else going on.

    Read More
    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @The Q Entity
    There was also the oil crisis of 1973 and the resulting economic downturn, which lasted into the 1980s. The costs of space missions - already high - suddenly became much greater. Confining manned operations to low earth orbit was much cheaper.

    In spite of the dangers, if it hadn't been for this economic consideration it's likely the lunar program would have been continued, and you would have seen the establishment of an Antarctica-like permanently manned base on the moon.

    , @Anonymous
    Science is not the real reason for manned space exploration. It's about accepting a challenge and conquering it. Science is a byproduct.

    From a libertarian standpoint manned space "exploration" should not be funded by government.
    But we are not libertarians, are we??
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. Jack D says:
    @Kyle McKenna

    Hugh Smith … Tontine Coffee House
     
    Couldn't resist looking this one up, since Mr Smith gave the 'Coffee House' as his address. Turns out it was all about slavery and white privilege, like everything else in the world.

    Columbia University helps explain: http://maap.columbia.edu/place/16

    Is there any place online which offers a comprehensive tally of reparations paid to date? Including urban destruction, Great Society welfare programs, white flight & collapsed real-estate values, the endless other costs of negro criminality, etc etc?

    Newsweek says it should be $14 Trillion, but they're also saying we haven't started paying yet. http://www.newsweek.com/slavery-reparations-could-cost-14-trillion-according-new-calculation-364141

    Of course the professor being quoted ignores the fact that slaves were fed, clothed, and housed, as well as provided with free medical care. Hey, no wonder they still think they're slaves!

    Aside from being tendentious, the page is just plain false. Talk about fake news….

    In 1792, the New York Stock Exchange was located in the Tontine Coffee House at 82 Wall Street. Slave ships were registered here and a value was assigned to the Africans on board.

    The companies that insured, outfitted, and owned the boats used to carry Africans from their homelands to enslavement often traded on the stock market.

    The securities traded in the early days were mostly government bonds and some bank stocks. The Stock Exchange was not a ship’s registry and did not value slaves.

    New York passed a law for the gradual abolition of slavery in 1799. All children born after July 4, 1799 were free. The last adult slave was freed in 1827.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. Njguy73 says:
    @anonymous
    I like what they did with the Saratoga Memorial and Benedict Arnold. Because he betrayed his country afterwards they very well could not honor him on the memorial. But because he played a key role in that victory, they couldn't with a straight face erase him and honor someone else. So they left his spot on the memorial empty. The other 3 niches on the memorial have the statues of General Horatio Gates, General Philip Schuyler, and Colonel Daniel Morgan. The fourth niche is empty which prompts visitors to question why, and discover the sordid details.

    Anything that results in more Helen Keller jokes is good in my book.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. @jtgw
    It's almost too convincing. In what other area of government would mere dead bodies be allowed to get in the way of progress? I find it hard to believe the government could be that prudent; there must have been something else going on.

    There was also the oil crisis of 1973 and the resulting economic downturn, which lasted into the 1980s. The costs of space missions – already high – suddenly became much greater. Confining manned operations to low earth orbit was much cheaper.

    In spite of the dangers, if it hadn’t been for this economic consideration it’s likely the lunar program would have been continued, and you would have seen the establishment of an Antarctica-like permanently manned base on the moon.

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

    OT

    Ain’t that the truth:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  101. @ringo s
    Any thoughts on the abandonment of the manned space program after 1972?
    Apollo was the most ambitious, successful endeavor of the human race. However, it was also the one enterprise of the twentieth century with comparatively few prominent Jews. The astronauts and engineers all seemed like Midwesterners, and the many of the top scientists were Germans! I'm always puzzled how the popular culture suddenly lost its interest in space exploration. I don't buy budget pressures as the reason. The 1970s was the beginning of the era of huge weapons systems procurements by the Pentagon. Was this given priority for a more aggressive Middle East policy over the space program?

    In addition to the Midwest Americans and Germans, the Gemini program, the one between Mercury and Apollo, the one that actually put us well in front of the Russians had a lot of Brits and Canadians on it following the the Canadian government’s decision to cancel to the Avro Arrow fighter jet. The lead designer was Jim Chamberlin, a Canadian engineer who also worked on Mercury and Apollo, he brought over 30 members of his team to NASA as well.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. Mr. Anon says:
    @ringo s
    Any thoughts on the abandonment of the manned space program after 1972?
    Apollo was the most ambitious, successful endeavor of the human race. However, it was also the one enterprise of the twentieth century with comparatively few prominent Jews. The astronauts and engineers all seemed like Midwesterners, and the many of the top scientists were Germans! I'm always puzzled how the popular culture suddenly lost its interest in space exploration. I don't buy budget pressures as the reason. The 1970s was the beginning of the era of huge weapons systems procurements by the Pentagon. Was this given priority for a more aggressive Middle East policy over the space program?

    There was no reason for further voyages to the Moon. There is not much of anything there of any value. The most arid, barren desert on Earth is orders of magnitude more hospitable than the surface of the Moon. The only reason for going is to prove that you can do it. Ultimately, going to the Moon was a stunt. It was a magnificent stunt, but a stunt none-the-less. It is possible to imagine a permanent human outpost on the Moon, although it would likely always be dependent on Earth. The Moon is poor in hydrogen and carbon, two pretty important elements for humans.

    As for popular culture losing interesting in space exploration; that interest was never very broad or very deep anyway.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...
    The Moon will eventually be absolutely essential to space exploration. It is at the edge of the Earth's gravitational well. Launches from there will have much higher payload to fuel ratios than even current space stations. Such payload to fuel ratios are essential if space exploration is ever to be an economically sound enterprise.

    We can build as massive facilities as we want quite cheaply by burrowing under the surface. Every expansion of space stations involved extremely expensive deliveries of materials from the bottom of the Earth's gravitational well, extremely complex construction techniques, and special structures designed to withhold vacuum, radiation, and extreme high velocity impact events. Building under the surface of the Moon obviates almost all these problems. Besides this the low gravity, high vacuum, and open to solar radiation surface of the Moon provides great industrial opportunities. Eventually private enterprise will go there if governments don't; at least if governments don't get in the way.

    Contrary to your assertion, it appears the Moon has significant quantities of water and hence Hydrogen. Water is certainly essential to life, I never knew Hydrogen wqas. Perhaps you can enlighten me. Carbon and other essentials can be recycled. Habitats on the Moon will be closed systems just like the Earth.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  104. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jack D
    The moon is a sterile rock in the vacuum of space. It's not like the discovery of N. America. They proved the point that America was better than the USSR (the main point, really), brought back a bunch of moon rocks and after that there were real diminishing returns - how many moon rocks do you need at tens of millions of $/ lb. ? As soon as the US beat them, the Soviets dropped their manned space program because there was no glory in being #2.

    As soon as the US beat them, the Soviets dropped their manned space program because there was no glory in being #2.

    They dropped their plans to go the Moon, not their manned space program. Russians have been in orbit, off-and-on, every since Gagarin.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jack D
    Jews oppose eugenics because it is connected in their mind with Nazi genocide. Before the Nazis turned to mass extermination of Jews, they piloted their extermination techniques on the mentally deficient. OTOH, Hitler was also a vegetarian but this did not discredit vegetarianism.

    Eugenics is a battle for comparative advantage - if everyone is equally smart (or whatever trait you are breeding for) then it doesn't help your group. So it would make perfect sense to say "eugenics for me, not for thee". But the kind of modern leftist Jews who are opposed to eugenics are also opposed to Jewish eugenics. Either they marry someone from another race (admittedly usually from the elites of that race) or else they have no children or at most 1 or 2.

    The future of eugenics belongs to the Chinese. Once the CRISPR technology becomes sufficiently advanced, the Chinese will adopt it ruthlessly and without any qualms.

    My point was that Jews (the Ashkenazim, at least) effectively did practice a kind of eugenics, even before it was called that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. res says:
    @SPMoore8
    Actually, eugenics wasn't intrinsically racist, the idea involved any people, regardless of "race", who were breeding generations of morons. HG Wells', in "Anticipations" (Chapter 9), was quite clear about this:

    Under the really very horrible morality of to-day, the spectacle of a mean-spirited, under-sized, diseased little man, quite incapable of earning a decent living even for himself, married to some underfed, ignorant, ill-shaped, plain and diseased little woman, guilty of the lives of ten or twelve ugly children, is regarded as an extremely edifying spectacle, and the two parents consider their reproductive excesses as giving them a distinct claim upon less fecund and more prosperous people. Benevolent persons throw themselves with peculiar ardour into a case of this sort, and quite passionate efforts are made to strengthen the other against further eventualities and protect the children until they attain to nubile years. Until the attention of the benevolent persons is presently distracted by a new case.... Yet so powerful is the suggestion of current opinions that few people seem to see nowadays just what a horrible and criminal thing this sort of family, seen from the point of view of social physiology, appears"
     
    So, in sum, we have a cognitive elite that is creating a country -- really -- that has no room for anyone but cognitive elites and everyone else will scrub the toilets, but they want to pretend that they are actually opposed to cognitive elites. Got it.

    It will be interesting what names they come up with.

    Adding one word makes it very clear:
    they are actually opposed to other cognitive elites
    It’s perfectly sensible not to want competition to be at the top of the world being created.

    I think there should be more asking anti-eugenicists about their opinion of all the assortative mating among the “elites.” That and asking about the use of genetic testing in the Jewish community for choosing partners. For example, https://jscreen.org/

    To be clear, I think JScreen and similar are a good idea. I just would love to know why all these people criticizing historical figures for eugenics sympathies are OK with things like that.

    Back on topic, the thing that perhaps bothers me the most about the renaming is that the decision was unanimous.

    Have they proposed new names yet? Hopefully any people they choose to honor will have absolutely blameless personal lives (cough, MLK, cough).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. @Jack D
    The moon is a sterile rock in the vacuum of space. It's not like the discovery of N. America. They proved the point that America was better than the USSR (the main point, really), brought back a bunch of moon rocks and after that there were real diminishing returns - how many moon rocks do you need at tens of millions of $/ lb. ? As soon as the US beat them, the Soviets dropped their manned space program because there was no glory in being #2.

    Moon Rock by Talking Heads

    I got wild imagination
    Talkin’ transubstantiation
    Any version will do
    I got mass communication
    I’m the human corporation
    I ate a rock from the moon
    Moon in the rock, rock in the moon
    There’s a moon in my throat
    You might think I’m wasting time
    You might laugh but not for long
    Hey! I’m working it out … (work it out)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. Abe says: • Website
    @Kyle McKenna

    Todd Collins, who previously said he supported finding a new name for Jordan but hesitated on Terman, said Friday that he recognizes how much names matter — particularly to the students, parents and community members who have testified about their experiences with racial exclusion or discrimination..
     
    History shows to Every People a choice between Nationalism and Tribalism.

    Our fearless leaders have thrown aside the Nationalism which held this once-great country together, and henceforth America will be nothing more than polyglot, tribal warfare among the many warring factions, currently united only by their hatred of Whitey. Everything remotely redolent of the people who made America the greatest nation in the world will be rent asunder.

    The same people who currently rule over these warring factions, using Divide and Conquer as their mantra, just coincidentally conceive of Nationalism as the worst of all evils. They are never happier when everyone else is at one another's throats. Control of the flow of information continues to protect them. 24/7/365.

    History shows to Every People a choice between Nationalism and Tribalism.

    Our fearless leaders have thrown aside the Nationalism which held this once-great country together, and henceforth America will be nothing more than polyglot, tribal warfare

    And yet are not Blacks effectively a tribe within America right now? I’m only half-joking when I say things would go a lot smoother if we acknowledged that and gave Blacks the same sort of tribal dispensation we give the Sioux and Apache. The Michael Brown case was handled through the norms of Roman-Anglo jurisprudence, which correctly found officer Darren Wilson legally not at fault and let him off without punishment or compensation to the family. Well, we all know how well that turned out! But what if instead of the cold logic of individual rights-based Western jurisprudence, we had acknowledged the Michael Brown case was largely a tribal honor-based one, and that whatever the rights or wrongs of Darren Wilson and Michael Brown’s deadly altercation, one of Black America’s own had indubitably been killed, and therefore it was owed weregild (blood money) as both compensation to the family and a face-saving gesture to the injured tribe?

    Read More
    • Agree: bomag
    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    And yet are not Blacks effectively a tribe within America right now?
    ...
    whatever the rights or wrongs of Darren Wilson and Michael Brown’s deadly altercation, one of Black America’s own had indubitably been killed, and therefore it was owed weregild (blood money) as both compensation to the family and a face-saving gesture to the injured tribe?
     
    Your point is taken. But if you're going to go that route, and acknowledge the tribal reality, then before you go rewriting law and erecting some cumbersome legal-bureaucratic apparatus to deal with "the black tribe", it's much simpler and much, much better in the long run to just separate.
    , @Jus' Sayin'...
    A great idea if one were to follow it all the way to the logical conclusion and put these tribal members on reservations far away from the rest of us. There they can police and govern themselves with their own tribal police and tribal councils.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. So eugenics is bad but birth control, saving the planet (from the people), and population control – all ideas closely aligned with eugenics – are good.

    Not easy to be a good-thinker nowadays. Cognitive dissonance doesn’t begin to describe it. From my observations, the secret to successfully holding so many contradictory beliefs involves fanatical loathing for “others” combined with resolute intellectual sloth.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  110. @Jack D
    Jews oppose eugenics because it is connected in their mind with Nazi genocide. Before the Nazis turned to mass extermination of Jews, they piloted their extermination techniques on the mentally deficient. OTOH, Hitler was also a vegetarian but this did not discredit vegetarianism.

    Eugenics is a battle for comparative advantage - if everyone is equally smart (or whatever trait you are breeding for) then it doesn't help your group. So it would make perfect sense to say "eugenics for me, not for thee". But the kind of modern leftist Jews who are opposed to eugenics are also opposed to Jewish eugenics. Either they marry someone from another race (admittedly usually from the elites of that race) or else they have no children or at most 1 or 2.

    The future of eugenics belongs to the Chinese. Once the CRISPR technology becomes sufficiently advanced, the Chinese will adopt it ruthlessly and without any qualms.

    OTOH, Hitler was also a vegetarian but this did not discredit vegetarianism.

    He was a welfare statist as well.

    Read More
    • Replies: @fnn
    Also an anti-smoking activist.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. res says:
    @Jack D
    Slippery slope arguments are not always wrong. If you accept the idea that people with deficient genes should be eliminated from the breeding population, it's not a big reach to say that those people should be eliminated period and not just sterilized - as Stalin said, no person, no problem. And it's not a big reach to expand your definition of "deficient" to include entire races.

    Eugenics also calls into question fundamental American principles. When Jefferson said in the Declaration that "all men are created equal" at the very least he meant that we are all equal in human dignity in the eyes of our Creator, who loves all of his creations . After the advent of Christianity, it was never the English practice to cast their elderly out onto ice floes or to smash the head of deformed infants.

    You raise good points. Eugenics is a tricky area ethically and full of slippery slopes. I just wish there were more nuanced discussion and less semi-arbitrarily deciding to selectively apply the label “eugenics” to things (e.g. see my JScreen comment above for an example of selectivity) and immediately leap to equating that with “literally Hitler.”

    I tend to see coercion and who bears the costs (or receives the benefits) as touchstones of the debate. I think people should be free to do what they want in terms of having children as long as they bear the costs themselves. However, there are tricky issues with the idea of societal costs and the probable multiplier effect of genetic engineering on existing inequality. There are also major issues with the means used to accomplish eugenics. Everything from literally Hitler to aborting fetuses with Down Syndrome.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. @TangoMan
    Big changes in store for PISA tests. Future tests are going to test for adherence to multiculturalism.

    From the BBC:


    Mr Schleicher, who runs the international Pisa rankings, is going to introduce written tests in 2018 on global competency, which will assess how well young people are ready for a diverse and "interconnected world".

    The tests currently assess teenagers' abilities in maths, science and reading - but the OECD is going to add this new measure of global competency.

    "This assessment is about the capacity of young people to see the world through different perspectives, appreciate different ideas, be open to different cultures," he says.

    "It is increasingly important for young people to engage with diversity, to be open to that, to draw value out of it, to see diversity not as a problem."
     

    Looking at his photo he appears as a doppelganger of General Wesley Clark who once articulated a very similar position when he stated "There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That’s a 19th century idea and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states.”

    Global elites doubling down on diversity. I would never have imagined that PISA would be used as a vehicle for spreading propaganda. An objective test of knowledge now lends itself to becoming an objective test of propaganda. Is there anything touched by multiculturalism which is spared from corruption?

    “There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That’s a 19th century idea and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states.”

    Is this animus on the basis of nationality?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. I’m thinking that of the list above, Churchill is presently off-limits and Teddy Roosevelt has too vivid an image today (although I would have said the same about Andrew Jackson 40 years ago).

    The left still sees some value in the necessity of white heroes. Once there are more non-whites who are household names, then the remaining white heroes will be gone. The two exceptions may be Abraham Lincoln (who can be retroactively be considered a homosexual) and FDR (more for being disabled than for his record as President). Everyone else is as good as gone, as you pointed out with Andrew Jackson and before that, Thomas Jefferson. The Democrat Jefferson-Jackson fundraising dinner is very triggering to some modern Democrats and I don’t expect that name to stick much longer (several states have already changed the name).

    At the pace history is being rewritten, by 2030, 17th-19th century whites will just be presented as a group of backwards renegade slave owners, with the founders being multiracial like the Hamilton play.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    The two exceptions may be Abraham Lincoln (who can be retroactively be considered a homosexual) and FDR (more for being disabled than for his record as President).
     
    The long-term prospects for FDR do not look good. Cf TN Coates' redlining crusade and Japanese internment during WW2.
    , @BB753
    Teddy Roosevelt could qualify as disabled on account of his severe myopia and near total loss of vision in one eye after getting punched during a boxing match.

    http://www.doctorzebra.com/prez/g26.htm

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. gda says:
    @dfordoom

    Yeah, the Churchill Cult is still going strong…….but, that being said, I’ve noticed that quite a few POC academics seem quite eager to take him down
     
    Taking Churchill down is actually a very positive thing. One of the most evil men of the 20th century. Unfortunately he's often attacked for the wrong things but he was a crazed warmonger.

    Some will take any opportunity to smear great men. “One of the most evil men of the 20th century” indeed. To any ignorant, unread leftist maybe. But not to anyone with half a brain, the will to research and understand historical events, and a non-shuttered mind.

    “If the famine had occurred in peacetime, it would have been dealt with effectively and quickly by the Raj, as so often in the past. At worst, Churchill’s failure was not sending more aid—in the midst of fighting a war for survival. And the war, of course, is what Churchill’s slanderers avoid considering.” http://www.winstonchurchill.org/resources/in-the-media/churchill-in-the-news/575-the-bengali-famine

    “Churchill was concerned about the humanitarian catastrophe taking place there, and he pushed for whatever famine relief efforts India itself could provide; they simply weren’t adequate. Something like three million people died in Bengal and other parts of southern India as a result. We might even say that Churchill indirectly broke the Bengal famine by appointing as Viceroy Field Marshal Wavell, who mobilized the military to transport food and aid to the stricken regions (something that hadn’t occurred to anyone, apparently).”

    Churchill was a flawed individual, it is true. But Churchill did attempt to alleviate the famine. As William Manchester wrote, Churchill “always had second and third thoughts, and they usually improved as he went along. It was part of his pattern of response to any political issue that while his early reactions were often emotional, and even unworthy of him, they were usually succeeded by reason and generosity.”

    Not unlike a certain POTUS.

    Churchill has been in the sights of the left for some time now. But the final line from the link above is priceless – “Sell crazy someplace else. We’re all stocked up here.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Churchill has been in the sights of the left for some time now.
     
    That may be so but there are very sound reasons for conservatives to despise Churchill.

    Just because the left hates someone doesn't make that person a hero. Leftists hate Churchill because they don't know anything about him, because they don't know anything about history. If leftists did know anything about him they'd see him as a leftist hero. He was after all one of the architects of the welfare state. Churchill was never a conservative. During the periods when he was leader of the Conservative Party he was always regarded by the party as a treacherous outsider with zero commitment to the party's principles.

    He also played a major role in transforming Britain into a US vassal. Maybe that's why conservatives admire him so much.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. @syonredux
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQMzJ5Z7zBw

    Said James Jesus Angleton (Mexican mother, WASP father) who headed the CIA.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Said James Jesus Angleton (Mexican mother, WASP father)
     
    They left that part out in THE GOOD SHEPHERD. Goes against the narrative ("Hispanics were totally barred from elite positions in society prior to the '60s"). So, Damon's Edward Wilson is purely WASP in the film. And he also doesn't know E.E. Cummings, T.S. Eliot, and Ezra Pound. It's a rare example of a fictionalized version of a person being less interesting than the real man.

    who headed the CIA.
     
    Angleton was chief of CIA Counterintelligence; he never served as director.
    , @attilathehen
    Thanks for the correction. Yes, the real Angleton was much more interesting. I read about his friendship with Pound.

    John Nash (the math genius) had a wife from El Salvador. She moved to the Mississippi when she was 11, but I read that in the movie about his life, she was portrayed as a classic Southern belle.

    These Hispanics are too WASPy to fit the present day narrative. That's why a black Hispanic like Perez is put in the limelight. In Latin America, he is black. In the USA, he is black.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. @anonymous
    India might be an example of what can happen if things get dysgenic enough. Here's a bleak article (reprinted at ZDnet.com)
    by an Indian concerned about poor intellectual performance (he calls, in standard PC fashion, for more education):

    "Indian IT's gargantuan re-engineering problem: The rot lies deep for Indian IT and nothing short of an education overhaul will fix it.", Rajiv Rao for New Tech for Old India, March 17, 2017:


    "...Donald Trump's proposed immigration reform ...could put substantial barriers to Indian IT being able to corner the market on skilled H-1B visas, thereby threatening the lucrative $75 billion or so that it collects in revenue from the US...

    ...in the areas of AI, digital, robotics, cloud, and Internet of Things, which Indian firms are desperately trying to claw themselves into contention in...

    ...automation is rapidly eliminating a vast portion of the more routine, low-level IT jobs that Indian companies use college graduates for...

    ...will have to either let go hundreds of thousands of workers ...or retrain them to be part of the new wave of IT work ...is that even a realistic option?

    ...According to no better authority than Srinivas Kandula, CEO of the Indian arm of French IT major Capgemini ...the situation in India is especially bleak. "I am not very pessimistic, but it is a challenging task and I tend to believe that 60-65 percent [of Indian IT workers] are just not trainable," he said. "Probably, India will witness the largest unemployment in the middle level to senior level," he added...

    ...the majority of India's engineering graduates don't have skills worth the paper their degrees are printed on. According to employment solutions company Aspiring Minds, a well-known institution that ...tracks the worth of college graduates, a staggering 80 percent of engineers in India don't possess skills that can make them employable...

    ...the results from their annual survey of 150,000 engineering students from 650 engineering colleges hasn't changed much in five years ...as many as 97 percent of engineering graduates desire positions in software engineering or core engineering but only 3 percent have the requisite chops to be employed in software or product market. Only 7 percent can complete core engineering tasks...

    ...This may seem very strange stuff...

    ...Either the cream of this cohort is going abroad... or every one of these minds is capable ...but is stymied by the rot that is the Indian higher educational system ...technology institutions ...enroll 2.9 million students annually ...many of these colleges have rock-bottom standards if they are not fly-by-night operations...

    ...former IIT professor ...said that "a lot of people have talked about poor quality curriculum, poor quality faculty, poor infrastructure, poor school education, and so on. I disagree. There is a much simpler explanation for this: Copying in our colleges, besides laziness."...

    ...prospective recruits -- including those with several years industry experience -- couldn't write the most basic code that is taught in the very first semester in college...

    ...hundreds of millions of unemployed and unemployable graduates (India sends 6 million graduates into the work force every year) -- is a recipe for social upheaval."

     

    Yeah, it really was all just a scam to cut costs without having to deal with things like pensions, get a subservient workforce, and do population replacement with a liberal voting bloc in the bargin.

    He’s charitable and PC–it’s the schools!

    No, India is a dysgenic disaster. While India’s TFR is coming down to within shouting distance of replacement–a good thing–it’s dysgenically distributed.

    The well educated upcaste smarties have well below replacement fertility. (Two is the “standard” at which you stop. But many are content with one whom they think they have the resources to deliver the appropriate lifestyle to. And of course a bunch never get hitched or never pull the trigger.) And then, of course, a fair number of the smartest leave and have their kids in the US (or other parts of the Anglosphere).

    Meanwhile the countryside peasant lower castes, untouchables, tribals and the Muslims are still breeding away. India ticks a percent more Muslim each decade, which actually hides how much more Muslim the young people are. India is getting dumber and more Muslim!

    For all the happy talk–India is a demographic dysgenic disaster.

    Read More
    • Replies: @biz
    I definitely saw that there. Among old women, only saris. Among young women, lots of burkas and hijabs and the like. With eyes open it is obvious that India is becoming rapidly more Muslim at the young end.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Abe says: • Website

    They said that they don’t oppose renaming but hope the school will be formally renamed to honor Frederick. “I feel like my grandfather is being thrown under the bus

    Yes, but as our sainted former-President has shown, throwing your grandparents under the bus- if they’re white, that is- is a categorical imperative now.

    no one has accused him of doing anything wrong, but there’s somehow the idea ‘because of his father he’s tainted,’” said Jim, whose middle name is Lewis. “That’s even more chilling — the idea that you’re not judged by your own actions or your own beliefs, but you’re being judged by your immediate relatives.”

    “Now go and strike Termanalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, from infant unto suckling, from ox unto sheep, so that the name of Termanalek not be mentioned even with reference to an animal by saying ‘This animal belonged to Termanalek.’”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  118. @Jack D
    Jews oppose eugenics because it is connected in their mind with Nazi genocide. Before the Nazis turned to mass extermination of Jews, they piloted their extermination techniques on the mentally deficient. OTOH, Hitler was also a vegetarian but this did not discredit vegetarianism.

    Eugenics is a battle for comparative advantage - if everyone is equally smart (or whatever trait you are breeding for) then it doesn't help your group. So it would make perfect sense to say "eugenics for me, not for thee". But the kind of modern leftist Jews who are opposed to eugenics are also opposed to Jewish eugenics. Either they marry someone from another race (admittedly usually from the elites of that race) or else they have no children or at most 1 or 2.

    The future of eugenics belongs to the Chinese. Once the CRISPR technology becomes sufficiently advanced, the Chinese will adopt it ruthlessly and without any qualms.

    No, the future of genetics is not with the Chinese. The Chinese (as all Asians) do not have the “zigzag in the brain” that whites have. Unless they can make themselves white, this CRISPR technology will do nothing for them. Also, the Chinese have aborted themselves so much that they are the most rapidly aging country in the world.

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

    History shows to Every People a choice between Nationalism and Tribalism.

    Our fearless leaders have thrown aside the Nationalism which held this once-great country together, and henceforth America will be nothing more than polyglot, tribal warfare
     
    And yet are not Blacks effectively a tribe within America right now? I'm only half-joking when I say things would go a lot smoother if we acknowledged that and gave Blacks the same sort of tribal dispensation we give the Sioux and Apache. The Michael Brown case was handled through the norms of Roman-Anglo jurisprudence, which correctly found officer Darren Wilson legally not at fault and let him off without punishment or compensation to the family. Well, we all know how well that turned out! But what if instead of the cold logic of individual rights-based Western jurisprudence, we had acknowledged the Michael Brown case was largely a tribal honor-based one, and that whatever the rights or wrongs of Darren Wilson and Michael Brown's deadly altercation, one of Black America's own had indubitably been killed, and therefore it was owed weregild (blood money) as both compensation to the family and a face-saving gesture to the injured tribe?

    And yet are not Blacks effectively a tribe within America right now?

    whatever the rights or wrongs of Darren Wilson and Michael Brown’s deadly altercation, one of Black America’s own had indubitably been killed, and therefore it was owed weregild (blood money) as both compensation to the family and a face-saving gesture to the injured tribe?

    Your point is taken. But if you’re going to go that route, and acknowledge the tribal reality, then before you go rewriting law and erecting some cumbersome legal-bureaucratic apparatus to deal with “the black tribe”, it’s much simpler and much, much better in the long run to just separate.

    Read More
    • Agree: Kyle McKenna
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. Busby says:
    @Jack D
    Jews oppose eugenics because it is connected in their mind with Nazi genocide. Before the Nazis turned to mass extermination of Jews, they piloted their extermination techniques on the mentally deficient. OTOH, Hitler was also a vegetarian but this did not discredit vegetarianism.

    Eugenics is a battle for comparative advantage - if everyone is equally smart (or whatever trait you are breeding for) then it doesn't help your group. So it would make perfect sense to say "eugenics for me, not for thee". But the kind of modern leftist Jews who are opposed to eugenics are also opposed to Jewish eugenics. Either they marry someone from another race (admittedly usually from the elites of that race) or else they have no children or at most 1 or 2.

    The future of eugenics belongs to the Chinese. Once the CRISPR technology becomes sufficiently advanced, the Chinese will adopt it ruthlessly and without any qualms.

    And without regard to the unintended consequences.

    Or as Dr. Malcolm put it, “Yeah, yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn’t stop to think if they should.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. My view has long been that the engine of the current eugenics controversy is largely a proxy war between the two biggest winners of the 20th Century, Anglo-American WASPs and Jews, for historical bragging rights, with ethnocentric Jews such as Stephen Jay Gould retconning history to denigrate their chief ethnic rivals for honors.

    The otherwise inscrutable proxy war can be found in philosophy, too, with ((Fodor)) and ((Nagel)) against Dennett. (Those are three of philosophy’s biggest names from the past fifty years.)

    Remarkably (“Sailer’s luck”), Dennett is apparently also an Anglo-Norman name.

    In fairness, the elevation of Darwin to brightest star in the firmament has struck me as itself a bit of Anglo/Gentile pride, similar to and probably in reaction against the apotheosis of Einstein. Newton must be too remote. But maybe Hilbert and Poincare (the 20th century’s greatest mathematicians) play a similar role in the cognitive economies of Germany and France.

    Read More
  122. @Timothy Black

    My view has long been that the engine of the current eugenics controversy is largely a proxy war between the two biggest winners of the 20th Century, Anglo-American WASPs and Jews, for historical bragging rights, with ethnocentric Jews such as Stephen Jay Gould retconning history to denigrate their chief ethnic rivals for honors.
     
    The otherwise inscrutable proxy war can be found in philosophy, too, with ((Fodor)) and ((Nagel)) against Dennett. (Those are three of philosophy's biggest names from the past fifty years.)

    Remarkably ("Sailer's luck"), Dennett is apparently also an Anglo-Norman name.

    In fairness, the elevation of Darwin to brightest star in the firmament has struck me as itself a bit of Anglo/Gentile pride, similar to and probably in reaction against the apotheosis of Einstein. Newton must be too remote. But maybe Hilbert and Poincare (the 20th century's greatest mathematicians) play a similar role in the cognitive economies of Germany and France.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. Abe says: • Website
    @JohnnyD
    Churchill also believed that England should stay a white country and that colonialism was generally a good thing for non-whites. This probably explains why Obama had the Churchill bust removed from the White House.

    Churchill also believed that England should stay a white country and that colonialism was generally a good thing for non-whites. This probably explains why Obama had the Churchill bust removed from the White House.

    And don’t forgot Churchill also colonized Barry’s grand-pa-pa. Yet after reading his war memoirs (yes I know, not a completely objective source of testimony) Churchill still emerges as the most radiant hero of the era, especially after one gets to his recounting of just how grim the situation looked in 1940: Germany across the Channel, poised to invade, a mercurial and untrustworthy Stalin still in nominal alliance with Germany, Japan running rampage in the Far East, and an armed-to-the-teeth Italy threatening to grab the Suez from both land and sea.

    And yet he refused Hitler’s olive branch, and Steve’s recent theory that this was due to his debts to a South African Jewish banker (hmmm… file for bankruptcy, or get hanged when the SS flag flies from the Tower of London) strikes me as one of his less-un-wacky ones.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Yet after reading his war memoirs (yes I know, not a completely objective source of testimony) Churchill still emerges as the most radiant hero of the era, especially after one gets to his recounting of just how grim the situation looked in 1940
     
    Ah yes, Churchill's war memoirs. The first great masterpiece of revisionist history. Or perhaps it would be truer to describe his historical works as masterpieces of historical fiction.

    Churchill once said, "History will be kind to me because I intend to write it."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. gda says:
    @dfordoom

    Yeah, the Churchill Cult is still going strong…….but, that being said, I’ve noticed that quite a few POC academics seem quite eager to take him down
     
    Taking Churchill down is actually a very positive thing. One of the most evil men of the 20th century. Unfortunately he's often attacked for the wrong things but he was a crazed warmonger.

    “As we edit the documents,” states Richard M. Langworth, one of the senior editors of this mammoth project, “we are struck by the sheer volume and variety of issues Churchill confronted. Those who criticize his sometimes bizarre notions or impatience with subordinates have never begun to consider the enormity of his task.”
    “When Churchill is criticized by revisionist historians over what to do about, say, the terrible famine in Bengal, they often forget the multitude of other issues with which he had simultaneously to deal.” https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/churchill-challenged/

    Ah yes, the revisionist historians, spewing their bile. Shame on those who just want to pull great men down into the slime they swim in. Sorry, you sad excuses for human beings, we utterly reject your evil blather.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Ah yes, the revisionist historians, spewing their bile.
     
    All history is revisionist history. All historians are biased, they all have agendas, they all emphasise the things that will support their agendas and de-emphasise the things that conflict with their agendas. An historian who had no agenda would be an historian who had no ideas and he would not be worth reading. Objective histories do not exist.

    What matters is to be aware of each historian's bias.

    "Revisionist historian" is an insult we reserve for those historians with whom we disagree because their bias differs from ours. We fondly imagine that our favourite historians are totally objective because their bias matches ours.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. @Jack D
    Slippery slope arguments are not always wrong. If you accept the idea that people with deficient genes should be eliminated from the breeding population, it's not a big reach to say that those people should be eliminated period and not just sterilized - as Stalin said, no person, no problem. And it's not a big reach to expand your definition of "deficient" to include entire races.

    Eugenics also calls into question fundamental American principles. When Jefferson said in the Declaration that "all men are created equal" at the very least he meant that we are all equal in human dignity in the eyes of our Creator, who loves all of his creations . After the advent of Christianity, it was never the English practice to cast their elderly out onto ice floes or to smash the head of deformed infants.

    > Slippery slope arguments are not always wrong.

    True. But to the extent one can render judgment, this one is.

    I’ve made your point about “slippery slope” myself numerous times. Saying “slippery slope” doesn’t disprove a slippery slope argument. But you can offer a slippery slope argument about almost any action. It’s up to those offering the argument to show that the slope is indeed very slippery, and folks are likely to slide on down to something folks generally agree is a bad outcome.

    Such evidence, with respect to eugenics is–charitably–”weak”. The eugenicists probably sterilized some people who were unfairly institutionalized, and could have actually taken care of themselves and their children. But the eugenic efforts in Christian countries didn’t result in putting old folks onto ice floes or bashing in the heads of disabled kids. Or tossing out Christian principles or Christian charity at all. The Nazi thing is trotted out. But that’s notably a case of ideology which *rejected* Christianity. And, it’s horrors were more good old fashioned imperialism and race war–i’m taking your land and killing or enslaving you–than “eugenics” gone wild. If you want to draw lessons from the Nazis: “imperialism bad” and “stay explicitly Christian” might be some good lessons to draw.

    In contrast, the evidence for the *reverse* proposition–that when you stop being explicitly concerned with “eugenics”, with maintaining your nation’s genes and genetic fitness, things slide down hill pretty fast–seems to be pretty darn clear.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. @TangoMan
    Big changes in store for PISA tests. Future tests are going to test for adherence to multiculturalism.

    From the BBC:


    Mr Schleicher, who runs the international Pisa rankings, is going to introduce written tests in 2018 on global competency, which will assess how well young people are ready for a diverse and "interconnected world".

    The tests currently assess teenagers' abilities in maths, science and reading - but the OECD is going to add this new measure of global competency.

    "This assessment is about the capacity of young people to see the world through different perspectives, appreciate different ideas, be open to different cultures," he says.

    "It is increasingly important for young people to engage with diversity, to be open to that, to draw value out of it, to see diversity not as a problem."
     

    Looking at his photo he appears as a doppelganger of General Wesley Clark who once articulated a very similar position when he stated "There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That’s a 19th century idea and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states.”

    Global elites doubling down on diversity. I would never have imagined that PISA would be used as a vehicle for spreading propaganda. An objective test of knowledge now lends itself to becoming an objective test of propaganda. Is there anything touched by multiculturalism which is spared from corruption?

    There is a golden opportunity here for a competent psychometrician to now release a valid instrument and begin valid tests to replace the benchmark being abdicated by Mr. Schleicher.

    Perhaps Dr. Murray is interested?

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

    http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/chandler/2017/03/17/arrests-made-vandalism-chandler-menorah-into-swastika-naomi-ellis-seth-ellis/99329674/

    From Ellis Island to Ellis in Wonderland.

    Attack of the Blazis.

    As guru Ramzpaul says:

    “Diversity just does the ‘hate’ jobs Whites won’t do.”

    PS. Give the black kids some credit for creativity. Turning a Menorah into a Swastika, that takes some imagination and handicraft.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  128. Hugh says:

    Eugenics is alive and kicking.

    Kevin Williamson can’t wait for downscale white communities to die out.

    It doesn’t get much more eugenic than that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  129. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    While Diversity has Ellis Island myth, it looks like white are stuck on Gilligan’s Island or Guilt-Again’s Island. Whites are stranded on this island of white guilt from which they can never escape.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  130. I was surprised to learn recently that Bertrand Russell advocated preemptive nuclear bombing of Russia immediately after WWII.

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

    Terman and Jordan are both stale, pale males with links to Indiana. Ugh. Just think how much better Stanford and Silicon Valley would be today, if Terman and Jordan had been more vibrant or had Ellis Island roots or had, in general, just been more American?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  132. Quick quiz. Who said the following quote about slavs?

    Then for a time the Slav … will sweep down on the Austrian monarchy with all its barbarity… . But … the Austrian Germans … will be set free and wreak a bloody revenge on the Slav barbarians. The general war which will then break out will smash this Slav Sonderbund and wipe out all these petty hidebound nations, down to their very names.

    The next world war will result in the disappearance from the face of the earth … of entire … peoples. And that, too, is a step forward.

    A. Adolph Hitler.
    B. Friedrich Engels, co-author The Communist Manifesto.
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Answer is B.

    The Magyar Struggle
    Source: MECW Volume 8, p. 227;
    Written: by Engels about January 8, 1849;
    First published: in Neue Rheinische Zeitung No. 194, January 13, 1849.

    Among all the large and small nations of Austria, only three standard-bearers of progress took an active part in history, and still retain their vitality — the Germans, the Poles and the Magyars. Hence they are now revolutionary.

    All the other large and small nationalities and peoples are destined to perish before long in the revolutionary world storm. For that reason they are now counter-revolutionary.

    There is no country in Europe which does not have in some corner or other one or several ruined fragments of peoples, the remnant of a former population that was suppressed and held in bondage by the nation which later became the main vehicle of historical development. These relics of a nation mercilessly trampled under foot in the course of history, as Hegel says, these residual fragments of peoples always become fanatical standard-bearers of counter-revolution and remain so until their complete extirpation or loss of their national character, just as their whole existence in general is itself a protest against a great historical revolution.

    Such, in Scotland, are the Gaels, the supporters of the Stuarts from 1640 to 1745.

    Such, in France, are the Bretons, the supporters of the Bourbons from 1792 to 1800.

    Such, in Spain, are the Basques, the supporters of Don Carlos.

    Then for a time the Slav counter-revolution will sweep down on the Austrian monarchy with all its barbarity… . But at the first victorious uprising of the French proletariat … , the Austrian Germans and Magyars will be set free and wreak a bloody revenge on the Slav barbarians. The general war which will then break out will smash this Slav Sonderbund and wipe out all these petty hidebound nations, down to their very names.

    The next world war will result in the disappearance from the face of the earth not only of reactionary classes and dynasties, but also of entire reactionary peoples. And that, too, is a step forward.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Engels had a really lousy crystal ball. There was no "victorious uprising of the French proletariat" and the Slavs he was talking about were not the Russians but the Slav minorities of the Austro-Hungarian empire, such as the Serbs. Of course their restiveness did lead to WWI but the end result was the dissolution of the empire and national self-realization (more or less) for the Slav minorities, not their crushing by the Austrians and Hungarians. Not to mention the other "defeated" and "reactionary" minorities that he mentions (Basques, Scots) are still working on their own self-determination. So nationalism is not at all a spent force (while "World Revolution" is).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. e says:

    America, where all blue cities become Berkeley.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  134. @eah
    Here’s a 2015 list by somebody named Rob Baker of once famous supporters of eugenics:...

    It must have been obvious back then -- as it is even more so now -- that civilization is dysgenic: modern dysgenic civilization + the Peter Principle + political correctness = doomsville.

    It must have been obvious back then — as it is even more so now — that civilization is dysgenic: modern dysgenic civilization + the Peter Principle + political correctness = doomsville.

    Civilization is not dysgenic.

    Gregory Clark demonstrated this–I believe conclusively–in “Farewell to Alms”. The prosperous, responsible, conscientious middle classes left more–smarter more conscientious–descendants. And he proposes this is what prepared England for industrial lift off. England isn’t “the world” or “civilization”, but it’s the case were we have the best data. Surveying other civilized nations, it appears pretty clear to me that they tend to throw up smarter more conscientious peoples.

    What does seem to be the case is that “modern civilization”–industrial or post-industrial, tends to become dysgenic. This starts with creating a surplus, then medical advances providing more protection for disease (keeping around the weaker and more sickly). (We all however like prosperity over scarcity and like avoiding disease!) What then seems to flip the script into dysgenics is the welfare state and then finally feminism–encouraging educated (correlated with smart) women to pursue career over babies.

    These seems like eminently solvable problems. Example: the condition of welfare for people unable to take care of themselves is no more children. And setting incentives–tax wise and culturally in terms of status–for smart women to have more children. But to *solve* it you have to be able to *talk* about it. And that is what the powers that be work mightily to prevent and suppress.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bomag

    What then seems to flip the script into dysgenics is the welfare state and then finally feminism...
     
    QED
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. @syonredux

    No, her grandfather did. He co-founded the NYSE,
     
    Quite a long list of co-founders:




    Peter Anspach … 3 Great Dock Street
    Armstrong & Barnewall … 58 Broad Street
    Andrew D. Barclay … 136 Pearl Street
    Samuel Beebe … 21 Nassau Street
    G. N. Bleecker … 21 Broad Street
    Leonard Bleecker … 16 Wall Street
    John Bush … 195 Water Street
    John Ferrers … 205 Water Street






    Isaac M. Gomez … 32 Maiden Lane
    Travis Handak … 55 Broad Street
    John A. Hardenbrook … 24 Nassau Street
    Ephraim Hart … 74 Broadway
    John Henry … 13 Duke Street
    Augustine H. Lawrence … 132 Water Street
    Samuel March … 243 Queen Street
    Charles McEvers Jr. … 194 Water Street
    Julian McEvers … 140 Greenwich Street
    David Reedy … 58 Wall Street
    Robinson & Hartshorne … 198 Queen Street
    Benjamin Seixas … 8 Hanover Square
    Hugh Smith … Tontine Coffee House
    Sutton & Hardy … 20 Wall Street
    Benjamin Winthrop … 2 Great Dock Street
    Alexander Zuntz … 97 Broad Street

    Samuel Beebee (correct spelling for his branch of the family) was my ancestral uncle, so I know that the founding meeting took place in his offices in Nassau Street.

    On the question of Darwins and Keynes intermarrying: the then child actor (he has gone on to get a brilliant degree in Middle Eastern Studies from Cambridge) who starred as Edmund Pevensie in all three of the Chronicles of Narnia series from 2005-2010 is Skandar Keynes, whose great-great-uncle was the economist and whose thrice great grandfather was Charles Darwin. A great grandfather was the Nobel Prize winning (for Physiology, in 1932) Edgar Adrian.
    A splendid example of the effectiveness of the eugenics approach, he is, no doubt, deeply opposed to such woefully undemocratic practices.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. SPMoore8 says:
    @Jack D
    Slippery slope arguments are not always wrong. If you accept the idea that people with deficient genes should be eliminated from the breeding population, it's not a big reach to say that those people should be eliminated period and not just sterilized - as Stalin said, no person, no problem. And it's not a big reach to expand your definition of "deficient" to include entire races.

    Eugenics also calls into question fundamental American principles. When Jefferson said in the Declaration that "all men are created equal" at the very least he meant that we are all equal in human dignity in the eyes of our Creator, who loves all of his creations . After the advent of Christianity, it was never the English practice to cast their elderly out onto ice floes or to smash the head of deformed infants.

    If you accept the idea that people with deficient genes should be eliminated from the breeding population

    People do that all the time nowadays; it’s called “abortion.” And, as others have noted, the whole eradication of congenital diseases among Ashkenazim as well as any incest laws are also explicitly eugenic. Not to mention all sorts of physical defects, or Down Syndrome, or any number of other issues that are used to justify pregnancy termination.

    I think it’s probably true that having a society where everyone had above average intelligence would be a disaster, so I would agree that eugenics with that sole aim is also highly questionable. And it’s also true that the sterilization that the Holmes led SCOTUS endorsed is cruel.

    Having said that, the Wells’ quote that I referenced earlier points to a real problem. What do we do when people keep breeding while at the same time are incapable of raising up their progeny? In the case of some nameless (white) couple in London with 12 children a hundred years ago, no problem, we can help them. (It’s only 12 people, after all.)

    But what if it’s millions of non-Jews in Israel controlled territory? What if it’s tens of millions of Muslims, or Asians, who having been thoroughly ground down by overpopulation and war in their homelands, and simply wish to feed their children? What if it’s billions of people in Africa? And so on. Slippery slopes go both ways.

    The only response I ever see is that TFR will go down — eventually — and then everything will be more or less the way it is now. Given that the world population has increased seven fold in the past 200 years, four fold in the past 100 years, and doubled in the past 50 years it’s hard to be optimistic about the latest predictions that assure that it will take 200 years to double again (although I don’t want to think about 15 billion on the planet: imagine what NYC, LA and Chicago will look like then.)

    Most religious people leave life and death issues to the Almighty. But in an empirical world where the Almighty doesn’t appear to actually intervene, that kind of posture is easily seen as a cop out. Just because we live in a time of incredible plenty, that doesn’t change the fact that ultimately life is a zero sum game. The best strategy is to hunker down and do your thing, and not show up as too poor — and be miserable — or too rich — and be the target of envy.

    But what happens if and when we reach the resource wall?

    The current thinking of the progressives is that we should just let whatever happens, happen. That there is no such thing as a specific “culture” worth preserving, and if there is, any immigrant will automatically defer to it, because it’s the best. That it’s wonderful to have communities where you can eat at 12 different ethnic restaurants on one block and that’s wonderful that the public schools are instructing a new generation of Einsteins in 12 different languages, etc.

    But most groups on planet Earth don’t think that way, and never have; it’s always been “Our way” versus the “Other way” and there’s no apology for what one prefers. We seem to have lost that in Europe and the US, and while that’s a morally impeccable posture in terms of blameworthiness it’s also self-extinguishing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
    You seem to be saying that "average intelligence" is fixed and immutable.
    Surely if "everybody had above average intelligence" then there would simply be a new and higher average? Say 120 or even 130?
    And how in heaven's name would that be a disaster?
    , @AnotherDad

    I think it’s probably true that having a society where everyone had above average intelligence would be a disaster...
     
    That can only happen in Minnesota.
    , @Rod1963

    But most groups on planet Earth don’t think that way, and never have; it’s always been “Our way” versus the “Other way” and there’s no apology for what one prefers. We seem to have lost that in Europe and the US, and while that’s a morally impeccable posture in terms of blameworthiness it’s also self-extinguishing.
     
    And who promotes this suicidal thinking - our brightest and most impeccably educated that's who. Nor are they just "progressives" who buy into this culture of death nonsense but others like the Koch brothers and most Silicon Valley luminaries that the HBD crowd worships.

    Of course to them it's not suicidal at all. Socially and economically isolated from their own policies life is wonderful for them. If things blow up they'll run to New Zealand

    Bottom line is this: our cognitive elites along with others have declared war on whites and their civilization. It's really quite unique in history where the ruling class and it's subordinates have gone collectively stark raving mad.

    They are hell bent on destroying the very population/cultural pools they arose from. Their motto could very well be "f**k you I got mine and you get nothing".

    Look this movement is top down and has been from day one. You had a bunch of wealthy types and intellectuals who bought into various strains of utopianism and cultural Marxism and couple that with their innate contempt for the lower class and you arrive where we are. That includes most if not all of the Silicon Valley drones who support Hillary and globalism.

    And that leaves us to determine what is the appropriate response to our cognitive elite's ongoing attempt to destroy us. I do know we certainly shouldn't try to breed more of these monsters.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. Rod1963 says:
    @Almost Missouri
    There certainly is a view that "civilization" is dysgenic, and that therefore every civilization automatically contains the seeds of its own destruction, but I don't see it.

    Plenty of civilizations--whether by design or default--do selectively breed for traits desirable to that civilization.

    Ancient Republicans Rome's traits were so deeply bred into its youth that even after the effective decapitation of society at the catastrophic Battle of Cannae, the demographically truncated population that was left rallied, not only to recover, but to win decisively the Second Punic War. Roman civilization was predicated on citizen-soldiers, and their breeding and culture was for citizen-soldiers.

    The Carolingians were defined by their warrior-nobles and they bred and raised ... warrior-nobles.

    The Sultan of the long-reigning Ottomans was a ruthless autocrat, who was the fruit of a breeding program for ruthless autocrats.

    Elizabethan England thrived on trade and exploration and bred and raised merchant-adventurers.

    Etc.

    The trouble starts not with civilization itself, but with hypocrisy: when a civilization that works in a certain way pretends that it works in a different way. It is then that dysgenics activate, whether by design or default.

    Needless to say, The Current Year entails world-historical levels of hypocrisy...

    The trouble starts not with civilization itself, but with hypocrisy: when a civilization that works in a certain way pretends that it works in a different way. It is then that dysgenics activate, whether by design or default.

    Sparta also practiced eugenics however they never opened their doors to fresh blood lines as causalities mounted during it’s war with Athens and instead of retrenching after the war and rebuild their manpower pool they engaged in the same sort of insanity that Athens did – trying to run a empire which exhausted them.

    By the time of Alexander the Great, Sparta was militarily and politically irrelevant.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Busby
    Epaminondas Of Thebes liberating the helots was kind of important too.

    To be fair to your point, the original foreign policy of Sparta was to avoid battle when possible because they were well aware their pool of manpower was limited. The Spartan victory in the Peloponnesian War was their undoing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. Abe says: • Website
    @Steve Sailer
    I read one volume of Bertrand Russell's autobiography and I was surprised how much I disliked him personally while finding his politics pretty justifiable.

    I read one volume of Bertrand Russell’s autobiography and I was surprised how much I disliked him personally while finding his politics pretty justifiable.

    I don’t get that. I feel kind of the opposite. Yes, Russell had enough intellectual integrity to go from cautiously optimistic about the Russian Revolution in 1917 to staunchly anti-Stalinist by the 30′s (if not earlier). Yet he was at the same time the sort of louche, detached-from-personal-character belletrist jerk-off that ended up being spiritual godfather to every one of today’s special Snowflakes. Basically his political program always came down to liberating humanity from the sort of care, want, and character-building struggle that Russell himself always hated as a distraction from his own rarefied intellectual pursuits. Were his ideal state ever realized it would be an unmitigated social disaster.

    On the other hand I can personally identify with him, and find the broad contours of his life (if not every particular detail) quite endearing. Russell was a great mind (if not necessarily a historically first-rate one- not sure how PRINCIPIA holds up these days), but with the interpersonal intuition and sensitivity of the most exalted of novelists. Yes, Russell had an enormous and reckless sexual appetite, and maybe that lead him to do things that we find objectionable today. Yet with the social constraints placed on that appetite during his day, his actions have to be taken in context. Anyone here read Jim Bouton’s BALL FOUR? Not so long ago members of the beloved NEW YORK YANKEES were drilling holes through hotel walls to peep-in on airline stewardesses, and America’s hero, Mickey Mantle, was leading “beaver shoot” parties to do the same sort of peeping through unsecured hotel windows.

    My take is that Russell’s love of sex, love of female beauty, saved him from becoming the sort of crabbed, misanthropic great mind that has brought so much misery to the world of late. My guess is that much as the imperfect, jarring physical world annoyed him at times, the transcendent beauty of physical love always redeemed it for him in the end and that in turn instilled a patience, and even love, with ordinary people and things. St. Augustine it’s not, but it is something…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
    Very nicely put.
    Russell was, never forget, a nobleman in a time when it mattered. He tells a charming story of once being the only male in his grandparents' country house when the Prime Minister, William Ewart Gladstone, payed an unexpected visit. Russell, then 17, was thus in the unenviable position of hosting the most powerful man in the land, which, among other things, meant being left alone with him after dinner to talk matters of state over port and cigars. He remembered that Gladstone treated him as an adult, making no concession for his tender years. I suspect that Russell will have done better than most of us; after all, his grandfather had been PM too.
    He was everything you say, and also quite ruthless: he argued for using the atomic bomb against the Soviet Union while they didn't have it themselves, and only switched to nuclear disarmament once they did.
    Listen to him on Youtube: perfectly thought-out paragraphs flow effortlesly from his lips in an accent which tells us better than any I know (including Churchill, whose voice was influenced by his American mother) what an English aristocrat of the heyday of Empire sounded like.
    On the other hand I cannot avoid finding it just that his philandering ways and cold-hearted atheism turned his son and heir into a devout and life-long Anglican.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. Winthorp says:
    @syonredux

    -Evolutionary theory. The math here is kinda basic and boring compared to classical Jewish interests like pure math and theoretical physics. I’d expect theoretician Jews to be self-selected away from this field (more so than bright Gentiles), as long as it’s taught out of biology departments and not as mathematics. This might explain why Gould and Lewontin are actually pretty mediocre — they’re the guys who weren’t good enough at math to be interested in something else.
     
    There's also Steve's notion about a boyhood in the country playing a role......

    Right – if it was just the second-tier math driving away Jewish theoretician types, they wouldn’t have become so over-represented in Economics.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. Abe says: • Website
    @Steve Sailer
    Maybe Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr. will get his essays removed from anthology as an extension of the Fred Terman precedent to the fathers of eugenicists.

    Maybe Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr. will get his essays removed from anthology as an extension of the Fred Terman precedent to the fathers of eugenicists.

    Margaret Sanger (Planned Parenthood) was a prominent eugenicist; I’m sure so was Katherine McCormick, who provided research funding for what became the Pill (McCormick’s husband became insane, and she was terrified of brining a child of his into the world).

    Reasoning does not seem to work with these people, so I again propose deep-cover methods of infiltrating leftist groups where we can use Pep-cratic Irony to get another circular firing squad going. Join your local Planned Parenthood branch, then at the next anti-Trump theme dinner say how much you love the group, but that its association with Sanger is just too triggering for you, so before dealing any further with current issues, we need to take care of that whole Margaret Sanger damnatio memoriae thing first.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. J1234 says:
    @syonredux

    I’m thinking that of the list above, Churchill is presently off-limits and Teddy Roosevelt has too vivid an image today (although I would have said the same about Andrew Jackson 40 years ago). Some of the others are too obscure.
     
    Yeah, the Churchill Cult is still going strong.......but, that being said, I've noticed that quite a few POC academics seem quite eager to take him down....I've a South Asian colleague who blurts out "1943 Bengal Famine!" whenever his name is mentioned......

    Yeah, the Churchill Cult is still going strong…….but, that being said, I’ve noticed that quite a few POC academics seem quite eager to take him down

    And just a few years ago, British white advocate Paul Weston was arrested for publicly reading a quote from a book by Winston Churchill.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hampshire-27186573

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. vinteuil says:
    @TangoMan
    Big changes in store for PISA tests. Future tests are going to test for adherence to multiculturalism.

    From the BBC:


    Mr Schleicher, who runs the international Pisa rankings, is going to introduce written tests in 2018 on global competency, which will assess how well young people are ready for a diverse and "interconnected world".

    The tests currently assess teenagers' abilities in maths, science and reading - but the OECD is going to add this new measure of global competency.

    "This assessment is about the capacity of young people to see the world through different perspectives, appreciate different ideas, be open to different cultures," he says.

    "It is increasingly important for young people to engage with diversity, to be open to that, to draw value out of it, to see diversity not as a problem."
     

    Looking at his photo he appears as a doppelganger of General Wesley Clark who once articulated a very similar position when he stated "There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That’s a 19th century idea and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states.”

    Global elites doubling down on diversity. I would never have imagined that PISA would be used as a vehicle for spreading propaganda. An objective test of knowledge now lends itself to becoming an objective test of propaganda. Is there anything touched by multiculturalism which is spared from corruption?

    “This assessment is about the capacity of young people to see the world through different perspectives, appreciate different ideas, be open to different cultures…”

    Heh – what a train-wreck that’s going to be. Any serious attempt to measure such capacities would, of course, lead to: whites on top, blacks on the bottom, everybody else in the middle.

    To avoid that result, the “assessment” will have to be totally, grotesquely, non-serious.

    Should be amusing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. Jake says:
    @Kyle McKenna

    Todd Collins, who previously said he supported finding a new name for Jordan but hesitated on Terman, said Friday that he recognizes how much names matter — particularly to the students, parents and community members who have testified about their experiences with racial exclusion or discrimination..
     
    History shows to Every People a choice between Nationalism and Tribalism.

    Our fearless leaders have thrown aside the Nationalism which held this once-great country together, and henceforth America will be nothing more than polyglot, tribal warfare among the many warring factions, currently united only by their hatred of Whitey. Everything remotely redolent of the people who made America the greatest nation in the world will be rent asunder.

    The same people who currently rule over these warring factions, using Divide and Conquer as their mantra, just coincidentally conceive of Nationalism as the worst of all evils. They are never happier when everyone else is at one another's throats. Control of the flow of information continues to protect them. 24/7/365.

    Divide and conquer, because the process causes chaos.

    That is what the English historically did with amazing success long before Jews had any real power. In fact, I think it rather obvious that without the English Elites embracing Jews, Jews never would have come to wiled the power they have increasingly over the past half century and more.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. Gabriel M says:
    @Crawfurdmuir

    rising scientists such as Stephen Jay Gould, Richard Lewontin, and Leon Kamin
     
    Not only were they Jews, but also Communists. I am not sure which of these loyalties played a more important part in their anti-eugenic posture. Remember that a tenet of Marxism is that "conditions create consciousness" and therefore that humanity is infinitely malleable by changing the conditions in which people live - that there is, in other words, no such thing as human nature. The prospect of creating "New Soviet Man," improved in all his traits by living under socialist conditions, was the Bolsheviks' answer to eugenics, and in effect their counterpart to the Nazi concept of an Aryan "master race." So great was the ideological commitment of Marxists to the idea that there are no innate qualities inalterable by changed conditions that it even affected the study of plant and animal genetics, leading to Lysenkoism.

    Whenever their Darwinism ran into conflict with their Marxism, Gould, Lewontin, and Kamin predictably favored Marx.

    Not only were they Jews, but also Communists. I am not sure which of these loyalties played a more important part in their anti-eugenic posture.

    Hmmm, so you have a trio of guys who displayed no interest whatsoever in Jewish culture, religion or nationalism and married non-Jews, but who displayed a huge lifelong interest in Leftism and married Leftists. Which was a bigger motivator for them, Judaism or Leftism? What a doozy of a question.

    Seriously, this is hardcore Occam’s rubber room stuff. Unzers get treated to a regular succession of “Why do Jews hate Trump?”, Why do Jews like Muslim immigrants?” stuff and the results are pretty similar. Here’s the Occam’s razor explanation. 99.99% of people don’t form views on individual subjects, they accept ideologies as packets.That’s why you can almost always predict someone’s view on illegal immigration from their view on abortion and vice versa. It’s also why subscribers to particular ideological packages changes their views on individual subjects (say conservatives on homosexuality) in almost exactly the same way. Thus instead of answering a myriad of individual imponderables like “why are Jews so bugged out about eugenics?” with ever more convoluted theories, you need to answer two separate simple questions.

    1) Why do most Jews outside Israel believe in Leftism?
    2) Why do Leftists hate eugenics.

    Try and you’ll see how easy it is.

    Read More
    • Agree: anonguy
    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir

    Hmmm, so you have a trio of guys who displayed no interest whatsoever in Jewish culture, religion or nationalism and married non-Jews, but who displayed a huge lifelong interest in Leftism and married Leftists. Which was a bigger motivator for them, Judaism or Leftism? What a doozy of a question.
     
    The antecedent question should be, what is Jewishness? Is it the practice of Judaism, or an ethnic identity?

    1) Why do most Jews outside Israel believe in Leftism?
    2) Why do Leftists hate eugenics.
     

    I'm not sure that "most Jews outside Israel believe in Leftism." Certainly, most secular Jews in the United States do. Religiously observant Jews are more likely to be politically conservative.

    Leftism seems to be particularly virulent among Ashkenazic Jews of East European descent, who make up most of the U.S. Jewish population. Yuri Slezkine does a good job of explaining the political attitudes formed by the experience of this group under Tsarist rule. They brought their peculiar antipathies with them when they emigrated. We may note that the earlier German Jewish immigrants in the Northern U.S. tended to be middle-class Republicans, whereas the colonial-era Sephardic Jewish settlers in the South were slaveholders and supported the Confederacy. Judah P. Benjamin was of course the most famous of these, but he had many compatriots. The father of the financier and presidential advisor Bernard Baruch was a medical officer on the staff of Robert E. Lee, and the general's personal physician.

    In England the sympathies of that country's old Sephardic community, dating to the reign of Charles II, were generally Tory. This reflected the letters of indulgence given them by Charles and renewed by his brother James II and VII. The Princess (later Queen) Anne was the first British royal to visit a synagogue. British Jews' Tory sympathies turned to Jacobitism after the Hanoverian succession. The novelist and pamphleteer Henry Fielding remarked on this in the mid-18th century. Disraeli's Toryism may be a late reflection of the same phenomenon.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. Ganderson says:

    We used to park at a turnoff where Prior goes ’round the corner onto Pierce Butler to watch the state fair fireworks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  146. @Ron Unz
    Ironically enough, one of the most prominent (half-)Jewish geneticists of that era was Nobel Laureate Hermann Muller, a hard-core Communist and also apparently a fanatic Eugenicist.

    He emigrated to the USSR during the 1930s and supposedly tried to persuade Stalin to make Eugenics a central pillar of their drive to create "a New Soviet Man," but Old Joe didn't like his ideas, and he eventually needed to flee the country to avoid the Gulag.

    Presumably, if things had gone a little differently, every good leftist, S.J. Gould certainly included, would have hailed Eugenics as core principle of Scientific Socialism, and to suggest otherwise would bring down the wrath of the harder-core SJWs, or in earlier times, perhaps nine grams to the back of the neck.

    After 3 1/2 silly posts that I wrote this morning, I’m tryin’ to quit. You brought something up that I’d never heard, read, or thought about – the difference in how these 2 ideologies thought they could create newer and better people (the “Master Race” and the “New Soviet Man” for the German Nazis and the Russian Commies respectively).

    Having grown up during the latter part of the Cold War era, I thought back then that the Soviet Union had always hated and persecuted the Jews, well, persecuted even more than the average citizen, that is. I had no knowledge of the Bolsheviks and what had started the 70-year brutal and life-wrecking experiment with Communism. Knowing more of the history let me understand why, in general, Jewish people, especially those in the media and government, seemed to ignore or even defend the atrocities of the Soviet Union vs. those of Nazi Germany.

    I think the whole “eugenics is bad, mmmkay” thing is, as some here have already postulated, just a function of the fact that eugenics heavily interested the Nazis and that they did work in it that leaned toward the evil side. You’re probably right, Ron, that had the Soviet Union had some type of eugenics program, eugenics may have been seen as a great idea by the loonie-left at this point.*

    Possibly the reason for the Soviets pushed the whole “New Soviet Man” deal over anything involving breeding, is that the Soviets needed people to behave under Communism RIGHT NOW, before another revolution could start. Breeding takes more time of course, like 4 5-year plans. The Nazis were thinking more long term, but Hitler’s madness eliminated the long term for them.

    * Pretty much the point of the serious 1/2 of one of my posts above – the modern-day left-wing SJW/Cult-Marx people don’t even think at the level of anyone on either side of this issue of Steve’s post. Give them a word for an idea – they already know they should be for it or against it – thinking is neither necessary nor advised. They are about as dumb as the Moslem fanatics, but without the oil-money, but with girls who’ll put out more.

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

    How big a deal are Jews on the Palo Alto school board? I don’t see any Jewish names mentioned in this article. When I lived in the Bay Area after having lived in LA, I was struck by how many fewer obvious Jews there seemed to be, and how much less prominent Jewish identity was there (granted, this is compared to LA). There was a joke that what Jews there were in the Bay Area were more likely to be Buddhist than particularly Jewish. This Palo Alto story seems pretty much to be a story of goodwhites doing their best to be goodwhitey, in other words, more likely the descendants of Anglo-Saxons/Anglo-Normans than Jews.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Abe

    This Palo Alto story seems pretty much to be a story of goodwhites doing their best to be goodwhitey
     
    Themtically, but also geographically related, Heartiste had a funny post about "Your Daughter on Berkeley" (https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2017/03/01/the-berkeley-effect/) which had this striking comment attached:

    At this point, I’m more interested in the physiognomy [and the implications for Biological Calvinism] than anything else. That big round pie-shaped face is just screaming “Far Northern European Lutheran” with an utterly malleable, conformist, programmable personality, and no inherent core which could constitute an underlying nature... Look at those big dumb trusting doe-eyes in the Freshmen & Sophomore pics. CH had an essay a while back, postulating that the Far Northern/Northwestern Europeans simply had it too good
     
    So yeah, I bet a lot of round pie-faces involved in this one.
    , @Gabriel M
    Why bring pedantic considerations like "is this actually true?" into a convoluted theory about Jews?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. Jack Cade says:

    And here I thought attainder was outlawed by the constitution. Medieval royalty would be proud of the fellow elite in the school system. “Corruption of the blood” indeed!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  149. Veritatis says:

    “It’s audacious but not absurd to suggest that the two biggest winners in history are the Normans and the Jews, with JM Keynes as a representative of the Norman ascendancy even in the 20th Century.”

    I could find quarrel with the premises behind the main argument, but instead I’ll just ask why Sailer hasn’t noticed to which several other privileged group Keynes belongs to? And in this low IQ part of the world, it is kind of a cliché that a couple of those groups often work together.

    Or is this column just provocation?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  150. @Abe

    I read one volume of Bertrand Russell’s autobiography and I was surprised how much I disliked him personally while finding his politics pretty justifiable.
     
    I don't get that. I feel kind of the opposite. Yes, Russell had enough intellectual integrity to go from cautiously optimistic about the Russian Revolution in 1917 to staunchly anti-Stalinist by the 30's (if not earlier). Yet he was at the same time the sort of louche, detached-from-personal-character belletrist jerk-off that ended up being spiritual godfather to every one of today's special Snowflakes. Basically his political program always came down to liberating humanity from the sort of care, want, and character-building struggle that Russell himself always hated as a distraction from his own rarefied intellectual pursuits. Were his ideal state ever realized it would be an unmitigated social disaster.

    On the other hand I can personally identify with him, and find the broad contours of his life (if not every particular detail) quite endearing. Russell was a great mind (if not necessarily a historically first-rate one- not sure how PRINCIPIA holds up these days), but with the interpersonal intuition and sensitivity of the most exalted of novelists. Yes, Russell had an enormous and reckless sexual appetite, and maybe that lead him to do things that we find objectionable today. Yet with the social constraints placed on that appetite during his day, his actions have to be taken in context. Anyone here read Jim Bouton's BALL FOUR? Not so long ago members of the beloved NEW YORK YANKEES were drilling holes through hotel walls to peep-in on airline stewardesses, and America's hero, Mickey Mantle, was leading "beaver shoot" parties to do the same sort of peeping through unsecured hotel windows.

    My take is that Russell's love of sex, love of female beauty, saved him from becoming the sort of crabbed, misanthropic great mind that has brought so much misery to the world of late. My guess is that much as the imperfect, jarring physical world annoyed him at times, the transcendent beauty of physical love always redeemed it for him in the end and that in turn instilled a patience, and even love, with ordinary people and things. St. Augustine it's not, but it is something...

    Very nicely put.
    Russell was, never forget, a nobleman in a time when it mattered. He tells a charming story of once being the only male in his grandparents’ country house when the Prime Minister, William Ewart Gladstone, payed an unexpected visit. Russell, then 17, was thus in the unenviable position of hosting the most powerful man in the land, which, among other things, meant being left alone with him after dinner to talk matters of state over port and cigars. He remembered that Gladstone treated him as an adult, making no concession for his tender years. I suspect that Russell will have done better than most of us; after all, his grandfather had been PM too.
    He was everything you say, and also quite ruthless: he argued for using the atomic bomb against the Soviet Union while they didn’t have it themselves, and only switched to nuclear disarmament once they did.
    Listen to him on Youtube: perfectly thought-out paragraphs flow effortlesly from his lips in an accent which tells us better than any I know (including Churchill, whose voice was influenced by his American mother) what an English aristocrat of the heyday of Empire sounded like.
    On the other hand I cannot avoid finding it just that his philandering ways and cold-hearted atheism turned his son and heir into a devout and life-long Anglican.

    Read More
    • Replies: @vinteuil
    "...perfectly thought-out paragraphs flow effortlesly from his lips..."

    And yet, his most important contributions to philosophy (or, at any rate, what seemed to be so at the time), e.g. "On Denoting," are almost incredibly badly written - lacking even the superficial clarity of Hume.
    , @development hell
    I cannot avoid finding it just that [Russell's] philandering ways and cold-hearted atheism turned his son and heir into a devout and life-long Anglican.

    Yes, the great man's descendants quickly exhibited Regression to the Nuts:

    "[Son] John Russell had a distinguished early career ... but in later life he was diagnosed as schizophrenic. ... This made him the only person in the UK to be denied the vote on two counts, first, for being a peer and, second, for being insane. He made a speech in the House of Lords that was considered so outlandish that to this day it is the only speech unrecorded by Hansard."

    Sadder still is the fate of the grand-daughter, Lucy Katherine Russell (1948-1975), who lit herself on fire. Something about world peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Anon
    Forrest Gump Academy

    With help from Steven Jay Gould, the Bernie Madoff of Biology

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. vinteuil says:
    @TangoMan
    Big changes in store for PISA tests. Future tests are going to test for adherence to multiculturalism.

    From the BBC:


    Mr Schleicher, who runs the international Pisa rankings, is going to introduce written tests in 2018 on global competency, which will assess how well young people are ready for a diverse and "interconnected world".

    The tests currently assess teenagers' abilities in maths, science and reading - but the OECD is going to add this new measure of global competency.

    "This assessment is about the capacity of young people to see the world through different perspectives, appreciate different ideas, be open to different cultures," he says.

    "It is increasingly important for young people to engage with diversity, to be open to that, to draw value out of it, to see diversity not as a problem."
     

    Looking at his photo he appears as a doppelganger of General Wesley Clark who once articulated a very similar position when he stated "There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That’s a 19th century idea and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states.”

    Global elites doubling down on diversity. I would never have imagined that PISA would be used as a vehicle for spreading propaganda. An objective test of knowledge now lends itself to becoming an objective test of propaganda. Is there anything touched by multiculturalism which is spared from corruption?

    “…doubling down on diversity…”

    At this point, I don’t think that phrase quite does justice to the reality.

    It’s no longer “doubling down,” or “tripling down,” or even “quadrupling down.”

    No – la phrase juste, here, is “all-in.”

    The Cathedral (or, if you prefer, The Synagogue) has staked everything on “diversity” – i.e., on the maximization of non-white immigration into all remaining majority white nations, plus the elimination of whites (well, white gentiles, anyway) from everywhere else.

    For these guys, “diversity,” so defined, isn’t just everything – it’s the only thing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. Abe says: • Website
    @Thomas
    How big a deal are Jews on the Palo Alto school board? I don't see any Jewish names mentioned in this article. When I lived in the Bay Area after having lived in LA, I was struck by how many fewer obvious Jews there seemed to be, and how much less prominent Jewish identity was there (granted, this is compared to LA). There was a joke that what Jews there were in the Bay Area were more likely to be Buddhist than particularly Jewish. This Palo Alto story seems pretty much to be a story of goodwhites doing their best to be goodwhitey, in other words, more likely the descendants of Anglo-Saxons/Anglo-Normans than Jews.

    This Palo Alto story seems pretty much to be a story of goodwhites doing their best to be goodwhitey

    Themtically, but also geographically related, Heartiste had a funny post about “Your Daughter on Berkeley” (https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2017/03/01/the-berkeley-effect/) which had this striking comment attached:

    At this point, I’m more interested in the physiognomy [and the implications for Biological Calvinism] than anything else. That big round pie-shaped face is just screaming “Far Northern European Lutheran” with an utterly malleable, conformist, programmable personality, and no inherent core which could constitute an underlying nature… Look at those big dumb trusting doe-eyes in the Freshmen & Sophomore pics. CH had an essay a while back, postulating that the Far Northern/Northwestern Europeans simply had it too good

    So yeah, I bet a lot of round pie-faces involved in this one.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas
    CH had an essay a while back, postulating that the Far Northern/Northwestern Europeans simply had it too good

    I'm not sure about having "had it too good," as much as there having been very hard consequences for your ancestors being too obviously disagreeable and uncooperative if they lived in certain latitudes. In some places historically and prehistorically, if you had irritated the people who lived on the neighboring farm too much, if they had a good harvest that year and and you didn't, you might starve during the winter. In milder climes, by contrast, it might have been to your ancestors' advantage to know how to cut the sharpest zero-sum deal they could, or even just to be able to take what the neighbors had if they could. So some places ended up thousands of years later with the "Law of Jante" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante) and others ended up with warlords.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. Whiskey says: • Website

    No Steve, you’re not seeing the forest for the trees. What is remarkable about Jews in the United States post 1965 is how little they were present among leadership outside of Hollywood and particularly among political leadership.

    Consider the current situation, among the political and cultural life there is … Sarah Silverman, semi-retired Jerry Seinfeld, Lena Dunham, and Chuck Schumer. There was no Jewish President or even plausible President. Democrats have been … JFK, LBJ, Carter, Clinton, and Obama. Einstein faded from relevance as has Jewish literary figures like Philip Roth in favor of people like say, Tom Wolfe and Hunter S. Thompson. Only in various Hedge Funds are Jews leaders, and even in Hollywood an avowed Jewish supporter like Mayim Bialik faces retaliation for criticizing a Palestinian. Think on that for a moment.

    Rather, this is entirely an eternal battle between Viking descended “GoodWhites” and those of Celtic/Saxon/Latin blood, us “BadWhites.” The Termans and Jordan have been deemed BadWhites and thus replaced and scrubbed out. This is consistent with GoodWhite behavior back to the Salem Witch Trials, John Brown and Harper’s Ferry, Uncle Tom’s Cabin, and anti-Slavery, Temperance, Suffragette, and Civil Rights movements and struggles.

    Your explanation is complex and fails Occam’s Razor but meets Occam’s Butterknife. Mine is superior since it is both simpler — an ongoing inter-White ethnic struggle between two radically incompatible groups of Whites with radically different views on everything.

    Which has more powerful explanatory power, GoodWhites acting all GoodWhite since 790, and casting out those who are BadWhite, in a fury of moral virtue signaling and purity expressions, or American Urban Jews somehow engaging in passive aggressive behavior against WASPS while NEVER EVER SHOUTING TO THE SKIES about what they are doing? [American Jews have a well developed reputation for never shutting up, see Silverman, Seinfeld, Reiner, Mel Brooks, etc.]

    Indeed, given that GoodWhite status DEPENDS on casting out others, the dynamic will only increase unless/until an external enemy serious enough to stop things OR a threat to the ruling caste emerges — the Salem Witch trials ended when the Governor’s Wife was accused.

    TLDR; not the Jews. Just another McMartin Preschool hysteria.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterike

    , this is entirely an eternal battle between Viking descended “GoodWhites” and those of Celtic/Saxon/Latin blood, us “BadWhites.
     
    Whiskey, Whiskey, Whiskey. You're banging on again over your favorite hobby horse. But you are missing the key piece. Let me explain.

    Your explication of the good white/bad white war captures the dynamics well, but you miss the source. WHY do good whites take the positions they take?

    Good whites are fervent multi-culturalists. Yet they could just as easily be fervent white nationalists. It would satisfy their need for taking a doctrinaire stance just as well. And indeed, the WASP Progressives in the 1920s and 30s were precisely that: pro-white. Good whites are rabid feminists, yet they could just as easily be rabid gender traditionalists. Good whites are feverishly pro-gay/tran, yet they could just as easily be feverishly in favor of traditional gender norms.

    So who puts these ideas into their heads? It's Jewish influence. Jews started modern feminism. WASPs followed. Jews started the pro-gay movement. WASPs followed. Jews started multi-culturalism. WASPs followed.

    When you control the news megaphone, the entertainment world, the high culture world (especially), then you set the agenda. You determine what's considered acceptable opinion. This is molded largely by Jews. Elite WASPs are suckers for "acceptable opinion" and always have been. Whoever controls that, controls the elite WASPs. And Jews have had total control of the agenda since the 1970s (and strong influence since the 1920s).

    You are so busy watching the tail wag that you are completely missing the dog.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. Wow, so much to read. I will make a rare second Manhattan and really study this but in the meantime….it has been determined for white offenders, that the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. When I was a kid Buffalo Public Schools were numbered…PS#1, PS #78, etc., unless numbers are racist and we know they are because they f**k over minorities on every standard test. Add Rachel Carson, author of the “Silent Spring”, to your list of eugenicists. And, as for Helen Keller, deaf, dumb and blind, amazing that she thought that we should weed out some people, but toss her on the baby lazy susan and see how she fares in life.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  156. bomag says:
    @AnotherDad

    It must have been obvious back then — as it is even more so now — that civilization is dysgenic: modern dysgenic civilization + the Peter Principle + political correctness = doomsville.
     
    Civilization is not dysgenic.

    Gregory Clark demonstrated this--I believe conclusively--in "Farewell to Alms". The prosperous, responsible, conscientious middle classes left more--smarter more conscientious--descendants. And he proposes this is what prepared England for industrial lift off. England isn't "the world" or "civilization", but it's the case were we have the best data. Surveying other civilized nations, it appears pretty clear to me that they tend to throw up smarter more conscientious peoples.

    What does seem to be the case is that "modern civilization"--industrial or post-industrial, tends to become dysgenic. This starts with creating a surplus, then medical advances providing more protection for disease (keeping around the weaker and more sickly). (We all however like prosperity over scarcity and like avoiding disease!) What then seems to flip the script into dysgenics is the welfare state and then finally feminism--encouraging educated (correlated with smart) women to pursue career over babies.

    These seems like eminently solvable problems. Example: the condition of welfare for people unable to take care of themselves is no more children. And setting incentives--tax wise and culturally in terms of status--for smart women to have more children. But to *solve* it you have to be able to *talk* about it. And that is what the powers that be work mightily to prevent and suppress.

    What then seems to flip the script into dysgenics is the welfare state and then finally feminism…

    QED

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. vinteuil says:
    @Almost Missouri
    There certainly is a view that "civilization" is dysgenic, and that therefore every civilization automatically contains the seeds of its own destruction, but I don't see it.

    Plenty of civilizations--whether by design or default--do selectively breed for traits desirable to that civilization.

    Ancient Republicans Rome's traits were so deeply bred into its youth that even after the effective decapitation of society at the catastrophic Battle of Cannae, the demographically truncated population that was left rallied, not only to recover, but to win decisively the Second Punic War. Roman civilization was predicated on citizen-soldiers, and their breeding and culture was for citizen-soldiers.

    The Carolingians were defined by their warrior-nobles and they bred and raised ... warrior-nobles.

    The Sultan of the long-reigning Ottomans was a ruthless autocrat, who was the fruit of a breeding program for ruthless autocrats.

    Elizabethan England thrived on trade and exploration and bred and raised merchant-adventurers.

    Etc.

    The trouble starts not with civilization itself, but with hypocrisy: when a civilization that works in a certain way pretends that it works in a different way. It is then that dysgenics activate, whether by design or default.

    Needless to say, The Current Year entails world-historical levels of hypocrisy...

    “The trouble starts not with civilization itself, but with hypocrisy: when a civilization that works in a certain way pretends that it works in a different way.”

    No kidding? Tell me more! Please write the book on this, so that I can stop pretending to myself that I’ll ever find the time to do it…

    Seriously: the key to power is to dress up one’s self-interest (or one’s in-group’s interest) in a disguise sufficiently plausible to pass for the common interest.

    White gentiles are such hopeless suckers for that sort of thing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. @SPMoore8
    If you accept the idea that people with deficient genes should be eliminated from the breeding population

    People do that all the time nowadays; it's called "abortion." And, as others have noted, the whole eradication of congenital diseases among Ashkenazim as well as any incest laws are also explicitly eugenic. Not to mention all sorts of physical defects, or Down Syndrome, or any number of other issues that are used to justify pregnancy termination.

    I think it's probably true that having a society where everyone had above average intelligence would be a disaster, so I would agree that eugenics with that sole aim is also highly questionable. And it's also true that the sterilization that the Holmes led SCOTUS endorsed is cruel.

    Having said that, the Wells' quote that I referenced earlier points to a real problem. What do we do when people keep breeding while at the same time are incapable of raising up their progeny? In the case of some nameless (white) couple in London with 12 children a hundred years ago, no problem, we can help them. (It's only 12 people, after all.)

    But what if it's millions of non-Jews in Israel controlled territory? What if it's tens of millions of Muslims, or Asians, who having been thoroughly ground down by overpopulation and war in their homelands, and simply wish to feed their children? What if it's billions of people in Africa? And so on. Slippery slopes go both ways.

    The only response I ever see is that TFR will go down -- eventually -- and then everything will be more or less the way it is now. Given that the world population has increased seven fold in the past 200 years, four fold in the past 100 years, and doubled in the past 50 years it's hard to be optimistic about the latest predictions that assure that it will take 200 years to double again (although I don't want to think about 15 billion on the planet: imagine what NYC, LA and Chicago will look like then.)

    Most religious people leave life and death issues to the Almighty. But in an empirical world where the Almighty doesn't appear to actually intervene, that kind of posture is easily seen as a cop out. Just because we live in a time of incredible plenty, that doesn't change the fact that ultimately life is a zero sum game. The best strategy is to hunker down and do your thing, and not show up as too poor -- and be miserable -- or too rich -- and be the target of envy.

    But what happens if and when we reach the resource wall?

    The current thinking of the progressives is that we should just let whatever happens, happen. That there is no such thing as a specific "culture" worth preserving, and if there is, any immigrant will automatically defer to it, because it's the best. That it's wonderful to have communities where you can eat at 12 different ethnic restaurants on one block and that's wonderful that the public schools are instructing a new generation of Einsteins in 12 different languages, etc.

    But most groups on planet Earth don't think that way, and never have; it's always been "Our way" versus the "Other way" and there's no apology for what one prefers. We seem to have lost that in Europe and the US, and while that's a morally impeccable posture in terms of blameworthiness it's also self-extinguishing.

    You seem to be saying that “average intelligence” is fixed and immutable.
    Surely if “everybody had above average intelligence” then there would simply be a new and higher average? Say 120 or even 130?
    And how in heaven’s name would that be a disaster?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    It might have something to do with an overproduction of elites. It's good to not have too many people who are unintelligent and/or have poor impulse control, but having too many people of upper level intelligence could lead to an unbalanced society with not enough individuals willing to do lower level work and too many trying to run the show.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. fnn says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    OTOH, Hitler was also a vegetarian but this did not discredit vegetarianism.
     
    He was a welfare statist as well.

    Also an anti-smoking activist.

    Read More
    • Agree: PV van der Byl
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. Thomas says:
    @Abe

    This Palo Alto story seems pretty much to be a story of goodwhites doing their best to be goodwhitey
     
    Themtically, but also geographically related, Heartiste had a funny post about "Your Daughter on Berkeley" (https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2017/03/01/the-berkeley-effect/) which had this striking comment attached:

    At this point, I’m more interested in the physiognomy [and the implications for Biological Calvinism] than anything else. That big round pie-shaped face is just screaming “Far Northern European Lutheran” with an utterly malleable, conformist, programmable personality, and no inherent core which could constitute an underlying nature... Look at those big dumb trusting doe-eyes in the Freshmen & Sophomore pics. CH had an essay a while back, postulating that the Far Northern/Northwestern Europeans simply had it too good
     
    So yeah, I bet a lot of round pie-faces involved in this one.

    CH had an essay a while back, postulating that the Far Northern/Northwestern Europeans simply had it too good

    I’m not sure about having “had it too good,” as much as there having been very hard consequences for your ancestors being too obviously disagreeable and uncooperative if they lived in certain latitudes. In some places historically and prehistorically, if you had irritated the people who lived on the neighboring farm too much, if they had a good harvest that year and and you didn’t, you might starve during the winter. In milder climes, by contrast, it might have been to your ancestors’ advantage to know how to cut the sharpest zero-sum deal they could, or even just to be able to take what the neighbors had if they could. So some places ended up thousands of years later with the “Law of Jante” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante) and others ended up with warlords.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. vinteuil says:
    @Old Palo Altan
    Very nicely put.
    Russell was, never forget, a nobleman in a time when it mattered. He tells a charming story of once being the only male in his grandparents' country house when the Prime Minister, William Ewart Gladstone, payed an unexpected visit. Russell, then 17, was thus in the unenviable position of hosting the most powerful man in the land, which, among other things, meant being left alone with him after dinner to talk matters of state over port and cigars. He remembered that Gladstone treated him as an adult, making no concession for his tender years. I suspect that Russell will have done better than most of us; after all, his grandfather had been PM too.
    He was everything you say, and also quite ruthless: he argued for using the atomic bomb against the Soviet Union while they didn't have it themselves, and only switched to nuclear disarmament once they did.
    Listen to him on Youtube: perfectly thought-out paragraphs flow effortlesly from his lips in an accent which tells us better than any I know (including Churchill, whose voice was influenced by his American mother) what an English aristocrat of the heyday of Empire sounded like.
    On the other hand I cannot avoid finding it just that his philandering ways and cold-hearted atheism turned his son and heir into a devout and life-long Anglican.

    “…perfectly thought-out paragraphs flow effortlesly from his lips…”

    And yet, his most important contributions to philosophy (or, at any rate, what seemed to be so at the time), e.g. “On Denoting,” are almost incredibly badly written – lacking even the superficial clarity of Hume.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. J1234 says:

    “Eugenics” is just an evil word for something that’s not really evil, but natural in many (though not all) contexts. The Nazis existed as governing body for 12 years, so that’s how long their eugenics program went on. The American Eugenics Society, by contrast, was started 100 years ago, and still exists today – they just had to change their name in the 1970′s…when they finally discovered the word “eugenics” was evil.

    Eugenics is wrong only when the government forces it’s citizenry to take part in it, or murder is used to accomplish it, but claiming the impulse behind eugenics is bad is like saying the impulse for eating food is bad because it can lead to obesity.

    Very few single people (of reproductive age) who are in the market for a spouse go out looking for the dumbest, ugliest and least healthy looking person they can find. That’s an impulse for genetic improvement, folks. Sure…dumb, ugly and unhealthy people get married, too, but that’s often because they possess other redeeming qualities that are well regarded by at least some people (e.g. compassion or wealth.) It’s also because there are relatively limited supplies of smart or attractive or healthy looking people in the world.

    I strongly suspect the practice of eugenics exists in the world of sports. I’ve seen and heard some things that lead me to believe it happens in some Olympic sports, like track and field events. Nobody says much about it.

    American leftist Hermann Joseph Muller, a jew who won the Nobel prize in genetics, went to the Soviet Union in the 1930′s to promote his ideas about eugenics. His creepy letter to Stalin turned Stalin off the idea…and against Muller, who had to escape back to the US. The wiki entry on Muller remains fairly sanitized of his involvement in eugenics, though it is mentioned. Again, eugenics as a government dictated and enforced program (as Muller desired) is unnatural and unethical, so why wouldn’t a dysgenics program in the same context also be unnatural and unethical? Or any policy designed to change the genetics of a population, whether that change is viewed as neutral or not?

    Read More
    • Replies: @ScarletNumber
    Muller was hired at Rice by Julian Huxley, brother of Aldous.
    , @Dan Hayes
    J1234:

    Stalin was more than turned off by Mueller's eugenic ideas!

    Stalin was ready to have him sent off to the Gulag (or worse), but as you noted Muller escaped back to America.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. ringo s says:
    @Jack D
    The moon is a sterile rock in the vacuum of space. It's not like the discovery of N. America. They proved the point that America was better than the USSR (the main point, really), brought back a bunch of moon rocks and after that there were real diminishing returns - how many moon rocks do you need at tens of millions of $/ lb. ? As soon as the US beat them, the Soviets dropped their manned space program because there was no glory in being #2.

    There is Mars. von Braun always considered the moon a stepping stone to a manned voyage to Mars. They said they had a realistic plan to get there (and back) by 1985. (von Braun died of cancer in 1977.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Mars is about the practical limit of manned space travel with chemical rocketry, and if you thought launching a skyscraper and getting back a Volkswagen was bad, mars flight will be an order of magnitude worse.

    But we have to do it. "We", meaning.....if you don't know, no use in talking about it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. Anonym says:
    @Opinionator

    My view has long been that the engine of the current eugenics controversy is largely a proxy war between the two biggest winners of the 20th Century, Anglo-American WASPs and Jews
     
    "Anglo-Americam WASPs," eh?

    In other words, "Anglo-American White Anglo-Saxon Protestants"?

    Is there a reason, Steve, that you can't just call them "Anglo Americans"?

    Given the redundancy in WASP, I immediately suspect that it has been engineered as an anti-White weapon. Let’s see… WASP coined by Andrew Hacker in 1957 according to wikipedia. Google search “Andrew Hacker” Jewish… well whadaya know…

    http://mondoweiss.net/2007/07/the-implosion-o/

    I guess the pest of the so-called WASP has been if not eradicated, somewhat deinfested from power in the Anglosphere. Far be it for Anglos to be ascendent in the Anglosphere… the horror!

    There should be an equivalent term for anti-white Jews. It is important that it is not a general one for Jews, but only the Jews who push for the genocide of the Europeans. I’m pleasantly surprised at the number of married Jews voting for Trump for example, but Jewish-led anti-whiteness is definitely a thing.

    Maybe JIHAD- Jewish/Israeli Hardcore American Democrats? Or Jewish/Israeli Host Anglosphere Destroyers? I like the latter because it well encapsulates their own idiocy.

    JERKs? Jewish… uhhh Europe/Europa/Eurosphere wRecking Krew?

    How about JUDAS? Jewish Undeclared Destroyers of Anglo Society.

    Or JUNTA? Jewish Undermining Numbing Termites of the Anglosphere.

    I am not enamoured with any of them particularly, but at least those are probably the best 4-5 letter words containing J that have a similar flavor to WASP.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Protip for anti-Semites - stop ranting. It makes you seem crazed. Probably you really are crazed, but there's no point in making it so crystal clear.

    WASP was NOT coined by Hacker. From his published reference (the first), it's clear that the term was already in use among sociologists by the time he wrote it down:

    They are 'WASPs'—in the cocktail party jargon of the sociologists. That is, they are wealthy, they are Anglo-Saxon in origin, and they are Protestants (and disproportionately Episcopalian).

     

    So he was merely writing down a term that was already in wide (if not yet published) use. And the original significance of the W as wealthy actually made more sense - white and Anglo-Saxon are redundant and there are plenty of Anglo-Saxon Protestants who are not wealthy (and therefore NOT WASPs).


    But it was Digby Baltzell, himself an ultra-WASP, who really popularized the term. And Baltzell (and Hacker) intended no malice toward the WASPs. Baltzell may have switched the W to white because (especially after the Depression) there were plenty of genteel WASPs who were no longer wealthy but retained their WASPish culture.
    , @SFG
    Glaivester had antijaphetism, which I can get behind. Nothing wrong with being philojaphetic. ;)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. @Opinionator

    My view has long been that the engine of the current eugenics controversy is largely a proxy war between the two biggest winners of the 20th Century, Anglo-American WASPs and Jews
     
    "Anglo-Americam WASPs," eh?

    In other words, "Anglo-American White Anglo-Saxon Protestants"?

    Is there a reason, Steve, that you can't just call them "Anglo Americans"?

    Papists?

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

    Yeah, the Churchill Cult is still going strong…….but, that being said, I’ve noticed that quite a few POC academics seem quite eager to take him down
     
    Taking Churchill down is actually a very positive thing. One of the most evil men of the 20th century. Unfortunately he's often attacked for the wrong things but he was a crazed warmonger.

    Yes, the phenomenon of Churchill worship makes me laugh. Oh thank God we have his precious bust back in our Oval Office. Hah!

    My own favorite text on this subject:

    https://www.amazon.com/Churchill-Hitler-Unnecessary-War-Britain/dp/0307405168

    The only things I like about that man are his drinking and his love for cigars. (Plus maybe his propensity for walking around the White House naked.) Aside from that, he did incalculable damage to my America and to his (now made former by him) empire.

    He made war where there need not have been. That is a speciality of those socially high-placed men (Bush family, anyone?) over whom we common men have no sway.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    I too detest the man but he did have a gift for the Bon Mot.
    , @fnn
    The late historian Ralph Raico's essay is also very good:
    https://mises.org/library/rethinking-churchill
    , @gda
    Hindsight is wonderful, is it not? Who knew that the erstwhile greatest hero of the 20th Century is now, according to the revisionists, the most evil man of the 20th Century?

    What utter claptrap.

    Perhaps those revisionists might turn their attention to the fact that Churchill was prescient about many things other than Hitler’s evil. Maybe a few hundred million lives could have been saved and the entire world history altered had the powers that be listened to his admonitions for the need to overthrow the Bolsheviks in Russia at an early date. Wasn't it FDR who was so enamoured of Stalin? Why not put the blame on him?

    After World War I it was Churchill who urged the Cabinet to send boatloads of food to the blockaded Germans—a proposal greeted with derision by colleagues such as Prime Minister Lloyd George, who preferred to “squeeze the German lemon until the pips squeak.” Their policy prevailed—and we all know what it led to twenty years later.

    Yes, lots of bad policy in Britain in those years, but shameful to lay the blame on Churchill for the War. He was the one who summed up the Treaty of Versailles as "monstrous" and "malignant".

    As the blurb in the link comments:
    “The weakness in Buchanan’s line of thinking, of course, is that by 1939, Hitler’s international word was worthless; yet Buchanan hinges his case on what might have happened had Britain let Hitler go after Poland in 1939 as it had Czechoslovakia”

    Sorry mates, one book by a paleo-conservative loon, no matter how erudite, will not convince those who have actually done real research to change their mind on the great Winston Churchill.

    His complete writings are out there for all to see. Why not make the effort instead of this cheap and worthless sniping. Or perhaps it’s the popular agenda now to denigrate our heroes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. @Buzz Mohawk
    Yes, the phenomenon of Churchill worship makes me laugh. Oh thank God we have his precious bust back in our Oval Office. Hah!

    My own favorite text on this subject:

    https://www.amazon.com/Churchill-Hitler-Unnecessary-War-Britain/dp/0307405168

    The only things I like about that man are his drinking and his love for cigars. (Plus maybe his propensity for walking around the White House naked.) Aside from that, he did incalculable damage to my America and to his (now made former by him) empire.

    He made war where there need not have been. That is a speciality of those socially high-placed men (Bush family, anyone?) over whom we common men have no sway.

    I too detest the man but he did have a gift for the Bon Mot.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. Ivy says:
    @syonredux

    -Evolutionary theory. The math here is kinda basic and boring compared to classical Jewish interests like pure math and theoretical physics. I’d expect theoretician Jews to be self-selected away from this field (more so than bright Gentiles), as long as it’s taught out of biology departments and not as mathematics. This might explain why Gould and Lewontin are actually pretty mediocre — they’re the guys who weren’t good enough at math to be interested in something else.
     
    There's also Steve's notion about a boyhood in the country playing a role......

    For a brief moment there, I thought that you were writing about a boyhood in the country club. Imagine the science learned around the card table or, heaven forbid, caddying.

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

    Speaking of irritable score-settling– you construe Friedman as “anti-eugenics?” (or somehow anti-Reformed Church Of Sailer). He did not write anything notable about the subject though he cited favorably the velocity-of-money guy, Irving Fisher, an arch-eugenicist; which comes greatly to the ire of various “neocon,” oops, paleolibertarian bloggers. Eugenics seems to be just another stick at hand for whichever partisans to bang on whatever.

    The neocons would more likely rename the town to Milton Lincoln or Moscow Sucks, or something similarly public-spirited

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

    OT – But get ready for the crops to start rotting in the fields. From the LA Times,“Wages rise on California farms. Americans still don’t want the jobTrump’s immigration crackdown is supposed to help U.S. citizens. For California farmers, it’s worsening a desperate labor shortage.”

    Some excerpts:

    Growers who can’t raise wages are losing their employees and dealing with it by mechanizing, downsizing or switching to less labor-intensive crops.

    Isn’t this how the free market is supposed to work?

    “The law of supply and demand doesn’t stop being true just because you’re talking about people,” says George Borjas, a Harvard economist and prominent foe of unfettered immigration. “[Farmers] have had an almost endless supply of low-skill workers for a long time, and now they are finding it difficult to transition to a situation where they don’t.”

    Borjas believes the ones who reap the rewards of immigration are employers — not just farmers, but restaurant owners and well-to-do homeowners who hire landscapers and housekeepers. The people who suffer most are American workers, who contend with more competition for jobs and lower pay.

    If farmers upped the average wage to, say, $25 an hour, people born here might think twice. But that’s a pipe dream, many argue.

    “Well before we got to $25, there would be machines out in the fields, doing pruning or harvesting, or we would lose crops,” Martin says.

    Isn’t this how the free market is supposed to work?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    And the cost would be an extra five cents a lettuce.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. @Ron Unz
    Ironically enough, one of the most prominent (half-)Jewish geneticists of that era was Nobel Laureate Hermann Muller, a hard-core Communist and also apparently a fanatic Eugenicist.

    He emigrated to the USSR during the 1930s and supposedly tried to persuade Stalin to make Eugenics a central pillar of their drive to create "a New Soviet Man," but Old Joe didn't like his ideas, and he eventually needed to flee the country to avoid the Gulag.

    Presumably, if things had gone a little differently, every good leftist, S.J. Gould certainly included, would have hailed Eugenics as core principle of Scientific Socialism, and to suggest otherwise would bring down the wrath of the harder-core SJWs, or in earlier times, perhaps nine grams to the back of the neck.

    Forgive me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t Mendel (W)right?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. Yak-15 says:
    @syonredux
    RE: Demonizing WASPs for the sin of Eugenics,

    There's a good show on Cinemax called The Knick . Steven Soderbergh directs all the episodes :

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

    It’s set in a New York hospital circa 1900, and Clive Owen stars as a cocaine-addicted surgeon (with his period clothes and moustache, he looks oddly like Edgar Allan Poe; perhaps he should try to get a Poe biopic off the ground), although his Yank accent is only so-so.

    The show is quite PC. A running sub-plot involves one of the characters becoming a pro-eugenics zealot.As you might expect, that character (Dr Everett Gallinger) is a blond WASP. There’s even a scene where he sterilizes an explicitly Jewish boy (Gallinger actually asks him if he is a “Yid” before commencing the procedure).

    I watched the full first season of that show and part of the second season. It has some great moments but is completely hardcore SJW porn. It’s thought to watch at times.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. @Steve Sailer
    I read one volume of Bertrand Russell's autobiography and I was surprised how much I disliked him personally while finding his politics pretty justifiable.

    “I read one volume of Bertrand Russell’s autobiography and I was surprised how much I disliked him personally while finding his politics pretty justifiable.”

    I take it that the volume just covered ground before his politics got taken over by his Trotskyist assistant?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. @Old Palo Altan
    Very nicely put.
    Russell was, never forget, a nobleman in a time when it mattered. He tells a charming story of once being the only male in his grandparents' country house when the Prime Minister, William Ewart Gladstone, payed an unexpected visit. Russell, then 17, was thus in the unenviable position of hosting the most powerful man in the land, which, among other things, meant being left alone with him after dinner to talk matters of state over port and cigars. He remembered that Gladstone treated him as an adult, making no concession for his tender years. I suspect that Russell will have done better than most of us; after all, his grandfather had been PM too.
    He was everything you say, and also quite ruthless: he argued for using the atomic bomb against the Soviet Union while they didn't have it themselves, and only switched to nuclear disarmament once they did.
    Listen to him on Youtube: perfectly thought-out paragraphs flow effortlesly from his lips in an accent which tells us better than any I know (including Churchill, whose voice was influenced by his American mother) what an English aristocrat of the heyday of Empire sounded like.
    On the other hand I cannot avoid finding it just that his philandering ways and cold-hearted atheism turned his son and heir into a devout and life-long Anglican.

    I cannot avoid finding it just that [Russell's] philandering ways and cold-hearted atheism turned his son and heir into a devout and life-long Anglican.

    Yes, the great man’s descendants quickly exhibited Regression to the Nuts:

    “[Son] John Russell had a distinguished early career … but in later life he was diagnosed as schizophrenic. … This made him the only person in the UK to be denied the vote on two counts, first, for being a peer and, second, for being insane. He made a speech in the House of Lords that was considered so outlandish that to this day it is the only speech unrecorded by Hansard.”

    Sadder still is the fate of the grand-daughter, Lucy Katherine Russell (1948-1975), who lit herself on fire. Something about world peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @benjaminl
    Today I learned from Wikipedia that John Russell, 7th Earl Russell, and Bertrand's grandson, is a Lib Dem, on Twitter, and chair of trustees for "adventure learning charity" Wide Horizons.

    http://johnrussell.zenfolio.com/about.html
    https://twitter.com/john4london
    http://www.widehorizons.org.uk/who-we-are/our-team/staff/


    The similarity to the pattern of declining New England WASPs is quite uncanny. Artistic hobby, check. Outdoor woodsy charity, check. High-minded but clueless politics, check.

    Are the grandchildren of Stephen Jay Gould and Noam Chomsky going to be like this too? Or does it only happen to English Protestants?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. @anonymous
    OT - But get ready for the crops to start rotting in the fields. From the LA Times,"Wages rise on California farms. Americans still don’t want the job - Trump’s immigration crackdown is supposed to help U.S. citizens. For California farmers, it’s worsening a desperate labor shortage."

    Some excerpts:


    Growers who can’t raise wages are losing their employees and dealing with it by mechanizing, downsizing or switching to less labor-intensive crops.
     
    Isn't this how the free market is supposed to work?

    “The law of supply and demand doesn’t stop being true just because you’re talking about people,” says George Borjas, a Harvard economist and prominent foe of unfettered immigration. “[Farmers] have had an almost endless supply of low-skill workers for a long time, and now they are finding it difficult to transition to a situation where they don’t.”

    Borjas believes the ones who reap the rewards of immigration are employers — not just farmers, but restaurant owners and well-to-do homeowners who hire landscapers and housekeepers. The people who suffer most are American workers, who contend with more competition for jobs and lower pay.
     


    If farmers upped the average wage to, say, $25 an hour, people born here might think twice. But that’s a pipe dream, many argue.

    “Well before we got to $25, there would be machines out in the fields, doing pruning or harvesting, or we would lose crops,” Martin says.
     

    Isn't this how the free market is supposed to work?

    And the cost would be an extra five cents a lettuce.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. fnn says:
    @Buzz Mohawk
    Yes, the phenomenon of Churchill worship makes me laugh. Oh thank God we have his precious bust back in our Oval Office. Hah!

    My own favorite text on this subject:

    https://www.amazon.com/Churchill-Hitler-Unnecessary-War-Britain/dp/0307405168

    The only things I like about that man are his drinking and his love for cigars. (Plus maybe his propensity for walking around the White House naked.) Aside from that, he did incalculable damage to my America and to his (now made former by him) empire.

    He made war where there need not have been. That is a speciality of those socially high-placed men (Bush family, anyone?) over whom we common men have no sway.

    The late historian Ralph Raico’s essay is also very good:

    https://mises.org/library/rethinking-churchill

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. inertial says:
    @Jack D
    The moon is a sterile rock in the vacuum of space. It's not like the discovery of N. America. They proved the point that America was better than the USSR (the main point, really), brought back a bunch of moon rocks and after that there were real diminishing returns - how many moon rocks do you need at tens of millions of $/ lb. ? As soon as the US beat them, the Soviets dropped their manned space program because there was no glory in being #2.

    As soon as the US beat them, the Soviets dropped their manned space program.

    Huh?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    I meant their manned Moon landing program. Sorry, I misspoke.

    Their manned low orbit program is alive and well - their secret is that they just keeping using the same proven hardware.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. Would it be too far off the mark simply to assume that 100 years ago everyone was into eugenics, unless proven otherwise? That includes Black American intellectuals such as Du Bois:

    in the 1910s the American eugenics movement was in its infancy, and many leading eugenicists were openly racist, defining Blacks as “a lower race”. Du Bois opposed this view as an unscientific aberration, but still maintained the basic principle of eugenics: That different persons have different inborn characteristics that make them more or less suited for specific kinds of employment, and that by encouraging the most talented members of all races to procreate would better the “stocks” of humanity.” wikipedia

    Eugenics was also supported by African Americans intellectuals such as W. E. B. Du Bois, Thomas Wyatt Turner, and many academics at Tuskegee University, Howard University, and Hampton University; however, they believed the best blacks were as good as the best whites and “The Talented Tenth” of all races should mix. W. E. B. Du Bois believed “only fit blacks should procreate to eradicate the race’s heritage of moral iniquity.” wikipedia

    We have a lot of work to do to erase the honors given to Du Bois, including renaming many schools in Chicago, Brooklyn, Baltimore, Fresno, and so on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  179. donut says:
    @syonredux
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQMzJ5Z7zBw

    This clip has been posted here a number of times. I never get tired of it .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. RobRich says: • Website
    @ringo s
    Any thoughts on the abandonment of the manned space program after 1972?
    Apollo was the most ambitious, successful endeavor of the human race. However, it was also the one enterprise of the twentieth century with comparatively few prominent Jews. The astronauts and engineers all seemed like Midwesterners, and the many of the top scientists were Germans! I'm always puzzled how the popular culture suddenly lost its interest in space exploration. I don't buy budget pressures as the reason. The 1970s was the beginning of the era of huge weapons systems procurements by the Pentagon. Was this given priority for a more aggressive Middle East policy over the space program?

    In 1977 the Libertarians sponsored a conference with the American Astronautical Society on how to industrialize /privately colonize space. It was agreed that vast improvements in computing power and massive regulatory changes were essential (at the time creating an internet was a crime in the US and most countries, for example), and while a lot has been done meanwhile, we’re just getting to that projected level. Hence the many efforts on private spaceships, etc.

    A few years ago the Libertarians worked with NASA and DARPA to start yearly open conferences on building a Star Trek like starship. This is happening.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @jtgw
    It's almost too convincing. In what other area of government would mere dead bodies be allowed to get in the way of progress? I find it hard to believe the government could be that prudent; there must have been something else going on.

    Science is not the real reason for manned space exploration. It’s about accepting a challenge and conquering it. Science is a byproduct.

    From a libertarian standpoint manned space “exploration” should not be funded by government.
    But we are not libertarians, are we??

    Read More
    • Replies: @jtgw
    Well, you can speak for yourself on whether or not you are libertarian.

    Now that I think of it, astronauts did die in the line of duty, e.g. Apollo 1. I do see how astronauts dying in space would be particularly bad PR, while astronauts dying in a cabin fire on earth are just the regular kind of sacrifice you expect from great national projects. But I agree with Q Entity that the more likely reason is the recession. I suppose also everybody realized that the Moon was of no strategic value at that stage, so further exploration or colonization would be pointless.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Almost Missouri
    There certainly is a view that "civilization" is dysgenic, and that therefore every civilization automatically contains the seeds of its own destruction, but I don't see it.

    Plenty of civilizations--whether by design or default--do selectively breed for traits desirable to that civilization.

    Ancient Republicans Rome's traits were so deeply bred into its youth that even after the effective decapitation of society at the catastrophic Battle of Cannae, the demographically truncated population that was left rallied, not only to recover, but to win decisively the Second Punic War. Roman civilization was predicated on citizen-soldiers, and their breeding and culture was for citizen-soldiers.

    The Carolingians were defined by their warrior-nobles and they bred and raised ... warrior-nobles.

    The Sultan of the long-reigning Ottomans was a ruthless autocrat, who was the fruit of a breeding program for ruthless autocrats.

    Elizabethan England thrived on trade and exploration and bred and raised merchant-adventurers.

    Etc.

    The trouble starts not with civilization itself, but with hypocrisy: when a civilization that works in a certain way pretends that it works in a different way. It is then that dysgenics activate, whether by design or default.

    Needless to say, The Current Year entails world-historical levels of hypocrisy...

    Elizabethan England thrived on trade and exploration

    And don’t forget piracy. ;-)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. donut says:
    @Dieter Kief
    "The race had been won, so why not quit while we were ahead before there are dead astronauts on the moon as permanent memorials to the program?"
    .
    This is an outstandingly strong image indeed - and therefor makes for a very convincing argument.

    ““The race had been won, so why not quit while we were ahead before there are dead astronauts on the moon as permanent memorials to the program?”

    That’s a BS reason . The planet is littered with the bodies of dead pioneers . And the bottom of the sea even more . The best way to honour those who might have died is to send more who will eventually be successful and thereby give some meaning to their sacrifice . Only a race of unworthy cowards ( or politicians ) would draw back , not at the risk to the brave explorers , but at the risk of bad press . If that is the reason we drew back from pushing on into the unknown then then we truly deserve the fate that we are facing now.

    “The race” never ends .

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dieter Kief

    “The race” never ends

     

    I can see what you are talking about. I grew up besides a race-track and loved motor-racing - and I still do love - for lots of the same feelings - Tome Wolfe's book on the race to the moon: The Right Stuff.

    But (there's always a but, isn't it?) - The race to the moon did end - for lots of reasons, for sure. And maybe not only for dumb ones. The dead - unburied - bodies - this inner image of them, might well have been one of them. It still makes me shiver, I can't help it.

    , @bomag
    I'm with donut here.

    We were piling up thousands a month in Vietnam for an essentially counter-productive effort, and that war continued with popular support. Airline crashes were much more common.

    The psychic need for zero casualties in every endeavor is a more recent thing, though the continuum toward this end was spooling up in the seventies with the rise of product litigation: asbestos; toxic shock syndrome; anti-smoking campaigns; etc.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Jack D
    Slippery slope arguments are not always wrong. If you accept the idea that people with deficient genes should be eliminated from the breeding population, it's not a big reach to say that those people should be eliminated period and not just sterilized - as Stalin said, no person, no problem. And it's not a big reach to expand your definition of "deficient" to include entire races.

    Eugenics also calls into question fundamental American principles. When Jefferson said in the Declaration that "all men are created equal" at the very least he meant that we are all equal in human dignity in the eyes of our Creator, who loves all of his creations . After the advent of Christianity, it was never the English practice to cast their elderly out onto ice floes or to smash the head of deformed infants.

    Slippery slope arguments are not always wrong

    .

    In fact they are almost always right.

    If you accept the idea that people with deficient genes should be eliminated from the breeding population, it’s not a big reach to say that those people should be eliminated period and not just sterilized – as Stalin said, no person, no problem. And it’s not a big reach to expand your definition of “deficient” to include entire races.

    I could easily imagine a time when climate change deniers and Christians might be classified as mentally deficient and marked down for elimination from the breeding pool.

    And if you think that’s absurd, just remember that homosexual marriage and transgender bathroom rights were considered absurd twenty years ago.

    Eugenics really is a seriously risky thing to play around with.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @ringo s
    There is Mars. von Braun always considered the moon a stepping stone to a manned voyage to Mars. They said they had a realistic plan to get there (and back) by 1985. (von Braun died of cancer in 1977.)

    Mars is about the practical limit of manned space travel with chemical rocketry, and if you thought launching a skyscraper and getting back a Volkswagen was bad, mars flight will be an order of magnitude worse.

    But we have to do it. “We”, meaning…..if you don’t know, no use in talking about it.

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

    OT:

    RIP Chuck Berry.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  187. syonredux says:
    @attilathehen
    Said James Jesus Angleton (Mexican mother, WASP father) who headed the CIA.

    Said James Jesus Angleton (Mexican mother, WASP father)

    They left that part out in THE GOOD SHEPHERD. Goes against the narrative (“Hispanics were totally barred from elite positions in society prior to the ’60s”). So, Damon’s Edward Wilson is purely WASP in the film. And he also doesn’t know E.E. Cummings, T.S. Eliot, and Ezra Pound. It’s a rare example of a fictionalized version of a person being less interesting than the real man.

    who headed the CIA.

    Angleton was chief of CIA Counterintelligence; he never served as director.

    Read More
    • Replies: @attilathehen
    Please see my response at #218. I hit the wrong reply button.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. jtgw says:
    @Anonymous
    Science is not the real reason for manned space exploration. It's about accepting a challenge and conquering it. Science is a byproduct.

    From a libertarian standpoint manned space "exploration" should not be funded by government.
    But we are not libertarians, are we??

    Well, you can speak for yourself on whether or not you are libertarian.

    Now that I think of it, astronauts did die in the line of duty, e.g. Apollo 1. I do see how astronauts dying in space would be particularly bad PR, while astronauts dying in a cabin fire on earth are just the regular kind of sacrifice you expect from great national projects. But I agree with Q Entity that the more likely reason is the recession. I suppose also everybody realized that the Moon was of no strategic value at that stage, so further exploration or colonization would be pointless.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. RIP. Chuck Berry has gone to that Particular Place.

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

    Negative eugenics — euthanizing and sterilizing — is what gave eugenics a bad name. But what about positive eugenics? Encouraging the reproduction of those with highly desirable social traits?

    As an extreme example take Haiti, a society floundering in squalor and disorder largely owing to a severe shortage of human capital. Thus it is reported that 80% of Haitians with a college degree, of which there were never many, have emigrated abroad, mostly to the U.S.. Consequently Haiti lacks that “15% smart fraction” required to organize and administer a functioning modern democratic society. The situation is hopeless as everybody knows (but won’t admit publically).

    Is there, at present, any conceivable way to rectify this unhappy situation that is both practicable and voluntary?

    Assuming crispr is not yet ready for prime time, I can think of only one way — and it could be cryptically accomplished. High IQ males in America might tour Haiti in their youths with the express purpose of impregnating as many attractive nubile females as will let them. How many would let them? I don’t know. But it might not be an inconsequential number when you consider that mulattoes have high social status in Haiti. Mothers everywhere want their children to be successful. And if they think their children will be smart too, that’s a double plus.

    What is wanted, then, is a new kind of missionary. It is a scandalous idea to be sure — though not, so far as I can see, for any rational reason — and I therefore doubt that many Christian missionaries now operating in Haiti would agree to it. But I can think of one group in America known for its social daring that is exceptionally well equipped for the task.

    All that is needed is a good slogan. Any suggestions?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Francis G.
    What if the high-IQ American males contract incurable STDs in Haiti or are murdered by jealous Haitian men...or just don't find Haitian women attractive?
    , @SFG
    Gays? They have STDs too, and the last thing Haiti needs is more AIDS (and gonorrhea, and syphilis, and chlamydia).

    You may also remember when the Germans, in WW2, decided that since the Norwegians were pure Aryans, they would have German SS men impregnate Norwegian women to produce pure Ubermenschen. You can guess how Norwegian men felt about this.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. donut says:
    @Steve Sailer
    I read one volume of Bertrand Russell's autobiography and I was surprised how much I disliked him personally while finding his politics pretty justifiable.

    Oh , sorry Steve , I wasn’t LOL at you comment .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. syonredux says:
    @Random Dude on the Internet

    I’m thinking that of the list above, Churchill is presently off-limits and Teddy Roosevelt has too vivid an image today (although I would have said the same about Andrew Jackson 40 years ago).
     
    The left still sees some value in the necessity of white heroes. Once there are more non-whites who are household names, then the remaining white heroes will be gone. The two exceptions may be Abraham Lincoln (who can be retroactively be considered a homosexual) and FDR (more for being disabled than for his record as President). Everyone else is as good as gone, as you pointed out with Andrew Jackson and before that, Thomas Jefferson. The Democrat Jefferson-Jackson fundraising dinner is very triggering to some modern Democrats and I don't expect that name to stick much longer (several states have already changed the name).

    At the pace history is being rewritten, by 2030, 17th-19th century whites will just be presented as a group of backwards renegade slave owners, with the founders being multiracial like the Hamilton play.

    The two exceptions may be Abraham Lincoln (who can be retroactively be considered a homosexual) and FDR (more for being disabled than for his record as President).

    The long-term prospects for FDR do not look good. Cf TN Coates’ redlining crusade and Japanese internment during WW2.

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

    “It’s audacious but not absurd to suggest that the two biggest winners in history are the Normans and the Jews, with JM Keynes [as documented here, a outspoken eugenicist] as a representative of the Norman ascendancy even in the 20th Century.”

    Huh. I wonder if that’s why neocons/randians have spent the last 50 years arguing that “Keynes was a fag, and that’s why Keynsians discount the future.” Joo much?

    Read More
    • Replies: @PiltdownMan

    I wonder if that’s why neocons/randians have spent the last 50 years arguing that “Keynes was a fag, and that’s why Keynsians discount the future.”
     
    Criticism of Keynes without having to resort to the details of macroeconomics is so fun, and so easy. That's why there's so much of it. The other stuff is hard.
    , @SFG
    That's...really not their argument. Randians think the free market is sacred. Neocons like it, though not as much as the Randians. Their donors don't like paying taxes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. @Mr. Anon
    There was no reason for further voyages to the Moon. There is not much of anything there of any value. The most arid, barren desert on Earth is orders of magnitude more hospitable than the surface of the Moon. The only reason for going is to prove that you can do it. Ultimately, going to the Moon was a stunt. It was a magnificent stunt, but a stunt none-the-less. It is possible to imagine a permanent human outpost on the Moon, although it would likely always be dependent on Earth. The Moon is poor in hydrogen and carbon, two pretty important elements for humans.

    As for popular culture losing interesting in space exploration; that interest was never very broad or very deep anyway.

    The Moon will eventually be absolutely essential to space exploration. It is at the edge of the Earth’s gravitational well. Launches from there will have much higher payload to fuel ratios than even current space stations. Such payload to fuel ratios are essential if space exploration is ever to be an economically sound enterprise.

    We can build as massive facilities as we want quite cheaply by burrowing under the surface. Every expansion of space stations involved extremely expensive deliveries of materials from the bottom of the Earth’s gravitational well, extremely complex construction techniques, and special structures designed to withhold vacuum, radiation, and extreme high velocity impact events. Building under the surface of the Moon obviates almost all these problems. Besides this the low gravity, high vacuum, and open to solar radiation surface of the Moon provides great industrial opportunities. Eventually private enterprise will go there if governments don’t; at least if governments don’t get in the way.

    Contrary to your assertion, it appears the Moon has significant quantities of water and hence Hydrogen. Water is certainly essential to life, I never knew Hydrogen wqas. Perhaps you can enlighten me. Carbon and other essentials can be recycled. Habitats on the Moon will be closed systems just like the Earth.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. benjaminl says:
    @development hell
    I cannot avoid finding it just that [Russell's] philandering ways and cold-hearted atheism turned his son and heir into a devout and life-long Anglican.

    Yes, the great man's descendants quickly exhibited Regression to the Nuts:

    "[Son] John Russell had a distinguished early career ... but in later life he was diagnosed as schizophrenic. ... This made him the only person in the UK to be denied the vote on two counts, first, for being a peer and, second, for being insane. He made a speech in the House of Lords that was considered so outlandish that to this day it is the only speech unrecorded by Hansard."

    Sadder still is the fate of the grand-daughter, Lucy Katherine Russell (1948-1975), who lit herself on fire. Something about world peace.

    Today I learned from Wikipedia that John Russell, 7th Earl Russell, and Bertrand’s grandson, is a Lib Dem, on Twitter, and chair of trustees for “adventure learning charity” Wide Horizons.

    http://johnrussell.zenfolio.com/about.html

    https://twitter.com/john4london

    http://www.widehorizons.org.uk/who-we-are/our-team/staff/

    The similarity to the pattern of declining New England WASPs is quite uncanny. Artistic hobby, check. Outdoor woodsy charity, check. High-minded but clueless politics, check.

    Are the grandchildren of Stephen Jay Gould and Noam Chomsky going to be like this too? Or does it only happen to English Protestants?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    There are Wikipedia pages for Theodore Roosevelt I through VI to test your theory.
    , @development hell

    Are the grandchildren of Stephen Jay Gould and Noam Chomsky going to be like this too?
     
    Actually, yes:

    Wikipedia says Gould had two biological kids, Jesse and Ethan, one of whom is autistic.

    Chomsky has three kids: Aviva, Diane and Harry. Only Aviva has her own Wikipedia page, which notes a minor-league academic career focusing on Brown Bodies and mentions no family. Of the others, the New Yorker reports "Harry, the youngest, is the least political of the three: he is an aspiring violinist who lives in Berkeley and works part time in computer programming. Diane, the middle child, moved to Nicaragua in her mid-twenties to work as a volunteer on a Sandinista newspaper; she fell in love with a Sandinista activist, and stayed." Harry sounds like an okay guy, but none of the kids can hold a candle to dad's fame and they're not on track to produce a new generation that will, either.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. @Abe

    History shows to Every People a choice between Nationalism and Tribalism.

    Our fearless leaders have thrown aside the Nationalism which held this once-great country together, and henceforth America will be nothing more than polyglot, tribal warfare
     
    And yet are not Blacks effectively a tribe within America right now? I'm only half-joking when I say things would go a lot smoother if we acknowledged that and gave Blacks the same sort of tribal dispensation we give the Sioux and Apache. The Michael Brown case was handled through the norms of Roman-Anglo jurisprudence, which correctly found officer Darren Wilson legally not at fault and let him off without punishment or compensation to the family. Well, we all know how well that turned out! But what if instead of the cold logic of individual rights-based Western jurisprudence, we had acknowledged the Michael Brown case was largely a tribal honor-based one, and that whatever the rights or wrongs of Darren Wilson and Michael Brown's deadly altercation, one of Black America's own had indubitably been killed, and therefore it was owed weregild (blood money) as both compensation to the family and a face-saving gesture to the injured tribe?

    A great idea if one were to follow it all the way to the logical conclusion and put these tribal members on reservations far away from the rest of us. There they can police and govern themselves with their own tribal police and tribal councils.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. gda says:
    @Buzz Mohawk
    Yes, the phenomenon of Churchill worship makes me laugh. Oh thank God we have his precious bust back in our Oval Office. Hah!

    My own favorite text on this subject:

    https://www.amazon.com/Churchill-Hitler-Unnecessary-War-Britain/dp/0307405168

    The only things I like about that man are his drinking and his love for cigars. (Plus maybe his propensity for walking around the White House naked.) Aside from that, he did incalculable damage to my America and to his (now made former by him) empire.

    He made war where there need not have been. That is a speciality of those socially high-placed men (Bush family, anyone?) over whom we common men have no sway.

    Hindsight is wonderful, is it not? Who knew that the erstwhile greatest hero of the 20th Century is now, according to the revisionists, the most evil man of the 20th Century?

    What utter claptrap.

    Perhaps those revisionists might turn their attention to the fact that Churchill was prescient about many things other than Hitler’s evil. Maybe a few hundred million lives could have been saved and the entire world history altered had the powers that be listened to his admonitions for the need to overthrow the Bolsheviks in Russia at an early date. Wasn’t it FDR who was so enamoured of Stalin? Why not put the blame on him?

    After World War I it was Churchill who urged the Cabinet to send boatloads of food to the blockaded Germans—a proposal greeted with derision by colleagues such as Prime Minister Lloyd George, who preferred to “squeeze the German lemon until the pips squeak.” Their policy prevailed—and we all know what it led to twenty years later.

    Yes, lots of bad policy in Britain in those years, but shameful to lay the blame on Churchill for the War. He was the one who summed up the Treaty of Versailles as “monstrous” and “malignant”.

    As the blurb in the link comments:
    “The weakness in Buchanan’s line of thinking, of course, is that by 1939, Hitler’s international word was worthless; yet Buchanan hinges his case on what might have happened had Britain let Hitler go after Poland in 1939 as it had Czechoslovakia”

    Sorry mates, one book by a paleo-conservative loon, no matter how erudite, will not convince those who have actually done real research to change their mind on the great Winston Churchill.

    His complete writings are out there for all to see. Why not make the effort instead of this cheap and worthless sniping. Or perhaps it’s the popular agenda now to denigrate our heroes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    Wasn’t it FDR who was so enamoured of Stalin? Why not put the blame on him?
     
    Oh believe me, we do.

    But we're just paleo-conservative loons.
    , @Gabriel M
    The great tragedy is that Churchill's views became accepted at precisely the time when confronting Germany was a bad idea. Appeasement was a popular policy when it was a stupid policy, and war became a popular policy when it was a stupid policy. Churchill was a stopped clock, but people only listened to him at the wrong time. It's an object lesson in what a crummy system democracy is.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. @benjaminl
    Today I learned from Wikipedia that John Russell, 7th Earl Russell, and Bertrand's grandson, is a Lib Dem, on Twitter, and chair of trustees for "adventure learning charity" Wide Horizons.

    http://johnrussell.zenfolio.com/about.html
    https://twitter.com/john4london
    http://www.widehorizons.org.uk/who-we-are/our-team/staff/


    The similarity to the pattern of declining New England WASPs is quite uncanny. Artistic hobby, check. Outdoor woodsy charity, check. High-minded but clueless politics, check.

    Are the grandchildren of Stephen Jay Gould and Noam Chomsky going to be like this too? Or does it only happen to English Protestants?

    There are Wikipedia pages for Theodore Roosevelt I through VI to test your theory.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux
    Theodore Roosevelt V:

    Theodore Roosevelt V (born circa 1976) is an American businessman and environmentalist. Theodore is a great-great-grandson of 26th US President Theodore Roosevelt and through his ancestor Cornelius Van Schaack, Jr., he is a descendant of the Schuyler family
     

    Theodore Roosevelt V was born to Theodore Roosevelt IV (born 1942), investment banker, and Constance Lane Rogers. He is a great-great-grandson of US President Theodore Roosevelt. As an Oyster Bay Roosevelt, and through his ancestor Cornelius Van Schaack, Jr., he is a descendant of the Schuyler family.[2][3]
    He graduated from Deerfield Academy and Princeton University with a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1998[4] and Stanford's Graduate School of Business with an MBA.
    Career[edit]
    Roosevelt was a Senior Vice President in the leverage finance group at Lehman Brothers and its successor, Barclays Capital through 2010.[5] He then joined New York-based hedge fund GoldenTree Asset Management where he served as a Managing Director until 2015.[6] Roosevelt is a board member of the New York League of Conservation Voters[7] and is the Vice Chair of ecoAmerica.[6] He was an early supporter of President Barack Obama's environmental policies and was on the President's energy and environment committee.[8] As a member of the Vote Bison Advisory Council he helped get the American bison named the National Mammal in 2016.[9]
    Personal life[edit]
    At 32, Roosevelt married Serena Clare Torrey on September 12, 2008.[10]
    He has competed in multiple full length Ironman races, including the 2012 US Championship in New York and the 2012 World Championship in Kona, Hawaii.[11]
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Roosevelt_V
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. Jack D says:
    @inertial
    As soon as the US beat them, the Soviets dropped their manned space program.

    Huh?

    I meant their manned Moon landing program. Sorry, I misspoke.

    Their manned low orbit program is alive and well – their secret is that they just keeping using the same proven hardware.

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

    “Now that I think of it, astronauts did die in the line of duty, e.g. Apollo 1.”

    4 NASA astronauts also died due to T-38 accidents (one a goose strike).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  201. syonredux says:
    @Steve Sailer
    There are Wikipedia pages for Theodore Roosevelt I through VI to test your theory.

    Theodore Roosevelt V:

    Theodore Roosevelt V (born circa 1976) is an American businessman and environmentalist. Theodore is a great-great-grandson of 26th US President Theodore Roosevelt and through his ancestor Cornelius Van Schaack, Jr., he is a descendant of the Schuyler family

    Theodore Roosevelt V was born to Theodore Roosevelt IV (born 1942), investment banker, and Constance Lane Rogers. He is a great-great-grandson of US President Theodore Roosevelt. As an Oyster Bay Roosevelt, and through his ancestor Cornelius Van Schaack, Jr., he is a descendant of the Schuyler family.[2][3]
    He graduated from Deerfield Academy and Princeton University with a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1998[4] and Stanford’s Graduate School of Business with an MBA.
    Career[edit]
    Roosevelt was a Senior Vice President in the leverage finance group at Lehman Brothers and its successor, Barclays Capital through 2010.[5] He then joined New York-based hedge fund GoldenTree Asset Management where he served as a Managing Director until 2015.[6] Roosevelt is a board member of the New York League of Conservation Voters[7] and is the Vice Chair of ecoAmerica.[6] He was an early supporter of President Barack Obama’s environmental policies and was on the President’s energy and environment committee.[8] As a member of the Vote Bison Advisory Council he helped get the American bison named the National Mammal in 2016.[9]
    Personal life[edit]
    At 32, Roosevelt married Serena Clare Torrey on September 12, 2008.[10]
    He has competed in multiple full length Ironman races, including the 2012 US Championship in New York and the 2012 World Championship in Kona, Hawaii.[11]

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

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux
    And then there's TR IV:

    After college, he was commissioned on as an ensign in the Naval Reserve on June 16, 1965, and he served as a U.S. Navy officer with Underwater Demolition Team 11 (BUD/S Class 36).[9] After completing BUDS he served for two years in Vietnam with the Navy SEALs. He remained in the Naval Reserve after leaving active duty and was promoted to lieutenant commander on April 1, 1974.
    He then served in the U.S. State Department as a foreign service officer in Washington, D.C. and the Upper Volta.[4]
    Public service[edit]
    Roosevelt is Chair of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions,[10] a Trustee of the Alliance for Climate Protection, a member of the Governing Council of the The Wilderness Society (United States), and a Trustee for the American Museum of Natural History, the World Resources Institute,[11] and The Cultural Institutions Retirement System. He is also a Counselor for the China–U.S. Center for Sustainable Development. He sits on the Advisory Council of the nonpartisan anti-corruption organization Represent.Us,[12] where he served as a consultant in the crafting of the American Anti-Corruption Act.
    At the Republican Convention in 2000, Roosevelt gave the speech on the environment. He gave the keynote speech at the National Governors Association Annual Meeting in 2001 as well as the keynote address at the Governors Conference on Climate Change in April 2008 sponsored by Yale University. Most recently, he spoke at the Conference of Parties Climate Summit in December 2009 in Copenhagen sponsored by the European Union Parliament. In April he announced his support for Ohio Governor John Kasich's bid for the nomination in the Republican Party presidential primaries, 2016.[13]
     
    Well, the serving as a SEAL in Vietnam would have made TR I proud.....
    , @SPMoore8
    TR V:

    As a member of the Vote Bison Advisory Council he helped get the American bison named the National Mammal in 2016.

    Now that's an accomplishment. Reminds me of people who put "have visited all six inhabited continents" on their resumes.

    OT: Following up on Pablo Gomez, Jr., from a couple of weeks ago, Steve Sailer gets some attention:

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/jtes/a-murder-in-berkeley-gave-the-far-right-its-perfect-perp?utm_term=.cd0rPGqYr#.xo36QZbM6

    -- the constant theme in the article is the reluctance of anyone to come forward and publicly defend they, much to the consternation of the author.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. Ivy says:
    @Jus' Sayin'...
    Several times over the past two decades I have run across H-1B Indian engineers who were laughably incompetent. In one case, one of the young ladies I was supervising ( a second generation Indian-American BTW) informed me that the VP we reported to, an H-1B with a MS degree from India's premier technical university, quite literally did not understand the concept of compound interest and was incorrectly discounting a cost estimate. I checked and it turned out to be true. He exercised a a blockheaded level of stubbornness in refusing to correct the errors he had made. The guy was also a total snake, licking the boots of anyone senior to him, horribly mistreating those under him, and making pathetically inept delta-male attempts at sexual harassment which became the butt of office jokes.

    Another Indian H-1B was a senior manager on a major state software project in which I was involved. He so thoroughly screwed things up that the state was forced, at enormous expense, to hire an outside consulting firm to essentially reprocess all data produced by the system whose development was overseen by this guy.

    Knowing the H-1B percentage of a US company’s IT staff could be useful in shorting stocks. There may be a short-term expense reduction but the long-term effects seem detrimental. My IT manager had nothing good to say about those . BTW, we were never a candidate for outsourcing, and I respected his opinion as an objective observer. He and I saw enough examples of incompetence to convince us of the time bomb aspect of such a policy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. syonredux says:
    @syonredux
    Theodore Roosevelt V:

    Theodore Roosevelt V (born circa 1976) is an American businessman and environmentalist. Theodore is a great-great-grandson of 26th US President Theodore Roosevelt and through his ancestor Cornelius Van Schaack, Jr., he is a descendant of the Schuyler family
     

    Theodore Roosevelt V was born to Theodore Roosevelt IV (born 1942), investment banker, and Constance Lane Rogers. He is a great-great-grandson of US President Theodore Roosevelt. As an Oyster Bay Roosevelt, and through his ancestor Cornelius Van Schaack, Jr., he is a descendant of the Schuyler family.[2][3]
    He graduated from Deerfield Academy and Princeton University with a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1998[4] and Stanford's Graduate School of Business with an MBA.
    Career[edit]
    Roosevelt was a Senior Vice President in the leverage finance group at Lehman Brothers and its successor, Barclays Capital through 2010.[5] He then joined New York-based hedge fund GoldenTree Asset Management where he served as a Managing Director until 2015.[6] Roosevelt is a board member of the New York League of Conservation Voters[7] and is the Vice Chair of ecoAmerica.[6] He was an early supporter of President Barack Obama's environmental policies and was on the President's energy and environment committee.[8] As a member of the Vote Bison Advisory Council he helped get the American bison named the National Mammal in 2016.[9]
    Personal life[edit]
    At 32, Roosevelt married Serena Clare Torrey on September 12, 2008.[10]
    He has competed in multiple full length Ironman races, including the 2012 US Championship in New York and the 2012 World Championship in Kona, Hawaii.[11]
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Roosevelt_V

    And then there’s TR IV:

    After college, he was commissioned on as an ensign in the Naval Reserve on June 16, 1965, and he served as a U.S. Navy officer with Underwater Demolition Team 11 (BUD/S Class 36).[9] After completing BUDS he served for two years in Vietnam with the Navy SEALs. He remained in the Naval Reserve after leaving active duty and was promoted to lieutenant commander on April 1, 1974.
    He then served in the U.S. State Department as a foreign service officer in Washington, D.C. and the Upper Volta.[4]
    Public service[edit]
    Roosevelt is Chair of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions,[10] a Trustee of the Alliance for Climate Protection, a member of the Governing Council of the The Wilderness Society (United States), and a Trustee for the American Museum of Natural History, the World Resources Institute,[11] and The Cultural Institutions Retirement System. He is also a Counselor for the China–U.S. Center for Sustainable Development. He sits on the Advisory Council of the nonpartisan anti-corruption organization Represent.Us,[12] where he served as a consultant in the crafting of the American Anti-Corruption Act.
    At the Republican Convention in 2000, Roosevelt gave the speech on the environment. He gave the keynote speech at the National Governors Association Annual Meeting in 2001 as well as the keynote address at the Governors Conference on Climate Change in April 2008 sponsored by Yale University. Most recently, he spoke at the Conference of Parties Climate Summit in December 2009 in Copenhagen sponsored by the European Union Parliament. In April he announced his support for Ohio Governor John Kasich’s bid for the nomination in the Republican Party presidential primaries, 2016.[13]

    Well, the serving as a SEAL in Vietnam would have made TR I proud…..

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    syonredux,

    From the facts you have supplied, it looks like this branch of the Roosevelt family has not yet run out of steam. Hooray!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. dfordoom says: • Website
    @gda
    Some will take any opportunity to smear great men. "One of the most evil men of the 20th century" indeed. To any ignorant, unread leftist maybe. But not to anyone with half a brain, the will to research and understand historical events, and a non-shuttered mind.

    "If the famine had occurred in peacetime, it would have been dealt with effectively and quickly by the Raj, as so often in the past. At worst, Churchill’s failure was not sending more aid—in the midst of fighting a war for survival. And the war, of course, is what Churchill’s slanderers avoid considering." http://www.winstonchurchill.org/resources/in-the-media/churchill-in-the-news/575-the-bengali-famine

    "Churchill was concerned about the humanitarian catastrophe taking place there, and he pushed for whatever famine relief efforts India itself could provide; they simply weren't adequate. Something like three million people died in Bengal and other parts of southern India as a result. We might even say that Churchill indirectly broke the Bengal famine by appointing as Viceroy Field Marshal Wavell, who mobilized the military to transport food and aid to the stricken regions (something that hadn't occurred to anyone, apparently).”

    Churchill was a flawed individual, it is true. But Churchill did attempt to alleviate the famine. As William Manchester wrote, Churchill “always had second and third thoughts, and they usually improved as he went along. It was part of his pattern of response to any political issue that while his early reactions were often emotional, and even unworthy of him, they were usually succeeded by reason and generosity.”

    Not unlike a certain POTUS.

    Churchill has been in the sights of the left for some time now. But the final line from the link above is priceless - “Sell crazy someplace else. We’re all stocked up here.”

    Churchill has been in the sights of the left for some time now.

    That may be so but there are very sound reasons for conservatives to despise Churchill.

    Just because the left hates someone doesn’t make that person a hero. Leftists hate Churchill because they don’t know anything about him, because they don’t know anything about history. If leftists did know anything about him they’d see him as a leftist hero. He was after all one of the architects of the welfare state. Churchill was never a conservative. During the periods when he was leader of the Conservative Party he was always regarded by the party as a treacherous outsider with zero commitment to the party’s principles.

    He also played a major role in transforming Britain into a US vassal. Maybe that’s why conservatives admire him so much.

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

    A Sci-Fi Idea.

    There is a white community. It seems safe, secure, prosperous. and nice. But something is not quite right.
    It turns out it is not an autonomous white community. It is a ‘farmed’ white community.

    YES!! In the future, the non-white globalist masters have decided to ‘farm’ white communities and grow them… to eventually take from them.

    Backstory. There was this great project of spreading globalism all over the world. It pushed non-white hordes into every white nation. The problem was all this Diversity began to bring down the modern world. With demise of white societies, there loomed the demise of nice thing that only white people could make, or Stuff Only Whites Make(SOWM).
    It turned out only white folks could sustain productivity and civilization, without which non-whites can’t have good stuff. So, if non-whites totally take over white societies, it will be the end of not only whiteness but nice stuff made by whiteness.

    But, non-whites didn’t want let go of their power over whites.
    So, what is to be done? If non-whites totally take over white nations, then all will fail and both whites and non-whites will suffer.
    But if non-whites depart from white nations which are restored to whites, then white people will build lots of nice stuff and maybe even use their economic and military power to dominate non-whites.

    So, non-whites figure they will stay in white nations and keep the power… but ‘farm’ white communities where whites will do their wonderful things.. And when whites have made all the good stuff, the non-whites will harvest them.

    It’s like humans allow bees to make honey and then take the honey. Humans must leave bees alone to do their thing. Only after the bees have done the work can humans move in to harvest the honey.
    Same thing with dairy cows. Humans must allow cows to live, eat, and do their own stuff. Then, cows will grow big and provide milk that can be harvested by humans.
    Same with chicken and eggs. Humans must let the chickens to eat and grow up. It is then the chicken lay the eggs and humans take them.

    The trick is how to milk the whiteys and take their eggs.

    So, this sci-fi scenario is different from CAMP OF SAINTS where non-whites just invade and attack and destroy everything.
    It is more like South Africa after apartheid when blacks figured they must keep the whites as working bees who keep making the honey. And now, Zimbabwe wants the white bees back because blacks suck at making honey. Blacks want the power but they also want nice things made by whites. Blacks on their own cannot make the nice stuff. Only whites can make nice stuff. But if whites are left alone to make nice stuff, might they not use their wealth to gain power over non-whites again? So, blacks and non-whites must find a way to keep the power but make the whites make the nice stuff so that blacks can harvest it.
    Like what the Ottoman Turks. Turks weren’t good at business and wealth-creation. They were good at fighting and using brute force, like in MIDNIGHT EXPRESS. So, the Turks used Greeks and Armenians to do much of the business and create wealth for the empire. But then, the Turks took a big chunk of it.

    Now, how could white folks be ‘farmed’? If whites are allowed to make the nice stuff but then the nice stuff is taken from them, wouldn’t they lose the incentive to make nice stuff?

    So, this is what the fiendish non-whites do. Once they ‘farm’ the whites in their communities to make the nice stuff and then once they take most of the good stuff from the whites, they use some special technology to wipe out white memory of what happened. (Since non-whites aren’t smart enough to have developed and maintain such technology, they rely on cuck-white collaborators who worship the Holy Person-of-Color and believe white race must be made to do penance forever to atone for their ‘racist’ sins.)
    So, even though whites are being farm-raised and robbed, following every calamity they are made to think that their community was hit with some terrible mysterious force and must rebuild. So, they go about recreating the wealth. (People don’t lose their incentive to rebuild when the calamity seems beyond human power. It’s like people rebuild hurricanes or tsunamis even though such will happen again.)
    So white folks act like bees. After honey is taken from the bees, bees are clueless as to what happened and go about repairing the hive and reconstructing their honeycomb.

    And suppose the non-whites ‘farm’ white folks for sex as well. Non-whites are a bunch of lowlife race-mixing rapists… but they realize that they if they hump every white ho, there will be no more white women to hump since all their kids will be mulattos or mestizos.
    So, in order to have a steady and endless supply of white women, they make white men hump white women to keep producing white daughters for non-white fiends to hump. So, white men are put out to stud to hump white women to produce white ho’s for non-whites to hump.

    Anyway, over time, some white folks begin to suspect something isn’t quite right in their world. They seem to be living in their own world and making nice things for themselves… but at some point, something happens where so much of the honey is taken and whites must rebuild again.
    White Bees, White Farm, or Never Let Us Know.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    That's actually a really good plot idea for a sci-fi novel. Could you write the novel yourself? The trick, though, would be getting someone to publish and distribute it.
    , @SFG
    For your (presumably HBD-aware audience), they're never going to buy non-whites as puppetmasters...not smart enough. Maybe Jews or Asians.

    As for distribution...hit up Arktos or Nine-Banded Books. I might even buy a copy.

    , @TelfoedJohn
    "Stuff Only Whites Make" .... SOWMa.

    "By this time the soma had begun to work. Eyes shone, cheeks were flushed, the inner light of universal benevolence broke out on every face in happy, friendly smiles. "
    Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  206. JMcG says:
    @Achmed E. Newman
    Because she was a woman.

    My son is in hysterics. That’s way better than the one where she answers the iron!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  207. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Abe

    Churchill also believed that England should stay a white country and that colonialism was generally a good thing for non-whites. This probably explains why Obama had the Churchill bust removed from the White House.
     
    And don't forgot Churchill also colonized Barry's grand-pa-pa. Yet after reading his war memoirs (yes I know, not a completely objective source of testimony) Churchill still emerges as the most radiant hero of the era, especially after one gets to his recounting of just how grim the situation looked in 1940: Germany across the Channel, poised to invade, a mercurial and untrustworthy Stalin still in nominal alliance with Germany, Japan running rampage in the Far East, and an armed-to-the-teeth Italy threatening to grab the Suez from both land and sea.

    And yet he refused Hitler's olive branch, and Steve's recent theory that this was due to his debts to a South African Jewish banker (hmmm... file for bankruptcy, or get hanged when the SS flag flies from the Tower of London) strikes me as one of his less-un-wacky ones.

    Yet after reading his war memoirs (yes I know, not a completely objective source of testimony) Churchill still emerges as the most radiant hero of the era, especially after one gets to his recounting of just how grim the situation looked in 1940

    Ah yes, Churchill’s war memoirs. The first great masterpiece of revisionist history. Or perhaps it would be truer to describe his historical works as masterpieces of historical fiction.

    Churchill once said, “History will be kind to me because I intend to write it.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  208. dfordoom says: • Website
    @gda
    "As we edit the documents,” states Richard M. Langworth, one of the senior editors of this mammoth project, “we are struck by the sheer volume and variety of issues Churchill confronted. Those who criticize his sometimes bizarre notions or impatience with subordinates have never begun to consider the enormity of his task.”
    "When Churchill is criticized by revisionist historians over what to do about, say, the terrible famine in Bengal, they often forget the multitude of other issues with which he had simultaneously to deal." https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/churchill-challenged/

    Ah yes, the revisionist historians, spewing their bile. Shame on those who just want to pull great men down into the slime they swim in. Sorry, you sad excuses for human beings, we utterly reject your evil blather.

    Ah yes, the revisionist historians, spewing their bile.

    All history is revisionist history. All historians are biased, they all have agendas, they all emphasise the things that will support their agendas and de-emphasise the things that conflict with their agendas. An historian who had no agenda would be an historian who had no ideas and he would not be worth reading. Objective histories do not exist.

    What matters is to be aware of each historian’s bias.

    “Revisionist historian” is an insult we reserve for those historians with whom we disagree because their bias differs from ours. We fondly imagine that our favourite historians are totally objective because their bias matches ours.

    Read More
    • Agree: SPMoore8
    • Replies: @gda
    And yet you offer up no body of evidence to back up your silly insult, for that is all it is. Care to name the revisionist historians you seem to think offer reasonable interpretations of how Churchill was "one of the most evil men of the 20th century" and his "crazed warmongering"?

    And I've already dealt with the old Paleo, Buchanan. What's left can only be the leftist academics, and we all know their agenda. Frankly, the only reason they've waited this long to start picking the great man apart is likely because they are cowards - they know they no longer have to watch out for WWII vets looking to punch them in the face. ;-)

    Churchill's whole life was pretty much a black swan event. He was a phenomenal man, certainly the man of the 20th Century. Too bad some people can't deal with that fact.

    Interesting and rather telling that you hit me with the relativist viewpoint on "history" and "historians". You've sort of identified your politics and agenda, haven't you?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. Ivy says:

    OT does Marine LePen have some of that luck of Trump? With the Orly matter on the eve of the French election, and after Bataclan and Nice, many have to reconsider the safety of daily life in an immigration-friendly regime.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  210. Dan Hayes says:
    @syonredux
    And then there's TR IV:

    After college, he was commissioned on as an ensign in the Naval Reserve on June 16, 1965, and he served as a U.S. Navy officer with Underwater Demolition Team 11 (BUD/S Class 36).[9] After completing BUDS he served for two years in Vietnam with the Navy SEALs. He remained in the Naval Reserve after leaving active duty and was promoted to lieutenant commander on April 1, 1974.
    He then served in the U.S. State Department as a foreign service officer in Washington, D.C. and the Upper Volta.[4]
    Public service[edit]
    Roosevelt is Chair of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions,[10] a Trustee of the Alliance for Climate Protection, a member of the Governing Council of the The Wilderness Society (United States), and a Trustee for the American Museum of Natural History, the World Resources Institute,[11] and The Cultural Institutions Retirement System. He is also a Counselor for the China–U.S. Center for Sustainable Development. He sits on the Advisory Council of the nonpartisan anti-corruption organization Represent.Us,[12] where he served as a consultant in the crafting of the American Anti-Corruption Act.
    At the Republican Convention in 2000, Roosevelt gave the speech on the environment. He gave the keynote speech at the National Governors Association Annual Meeting in 2001 as well as the keynote address at the Governors Conference on Climate Change in April 2008 sponsored by Yale University. Most recently, he spoke at the Conference of Parties Climate Summit in December 2009 in Copenhagen sponsored by the European Union Parliament. In April he announced his support for Ohio Governor John Kasich's bid for the nomination in the Republican Party presidential primaries, 2016.[13]
     
    Well, the serving as a SEAL in Vietnam would have made TR I proud.....

    syonredux,

    From the facts you have supplied, it looks like this branch of the Roosevelt family has not yet run out of steam. Hooray!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  211. SPMoore8 says:
    @syonredux
    Theodore Roosevelt V:

    Theodore Roosevelt V (born circa 1976) is an American businessman and environmentalist. Theodore is a great-great-grandson of 26th US President Theodore Roosevelt and through his ancestor Cornelius Van Schaack, Jr., he is a descendant of the Schuyler family
     

    Theodore Roosevelt V was born to Theodore Roosevelt IV (born 1942), investment banker, and Constance Lane Rogers. He is a great-great-grandson of US President Theodore Roosevelt. As an Oyster Bay Roosevelt, and through his ancestor Cornelius Van Schaack, Jr., he is a descendant of the Schuyler family.[2][3]
    He graduated from Deerfield Academy and Princeton University with a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1998[4] and Stanford's Graduate School of Business with an MBA.
    Career[edit]
    Roosevelt was a Senior Vice President in the leverage finance group at Lehman Brothers and its successor, Barclays Capital through 2010.[5] He then joined New York-based hedge fund GoldenTree Asset Management where he served as a Managing Director until 2015.[6] Roosevelt is a board member of the New York League of Conservation Voters[7] and is the Vice Chair of ecoAmerica.[6] He was an early supporter of President Barack Obama's environmental policies and was on the President's energy and environment committee.[8] As a member of the Vote Bison Advisory Council he helped get the American bison named the National Mammal in 2016.[9]
    Personal life[edit]
    At 32, Roosevelt married Serena Clare Torrey on September 12, 2008.[10]
    He has competed in multiple full length Ironman races, including the 2012 US Championship in New York and the 2012 World Championship in Kona, Hawaii.[11]
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Roosevelt_V

    TR V:

    As a member of the Vote Bison Advisory Council he helped get the American bison named the National Mammal in 2016.

    Now that’s an accomplishment. Reminds me of people who put “have visited all six inhabited continents” on their resumes.

    OT: Following up on Pablo Gomez, Jr., from a couple of weeks ago, Steve Sailer gets some attention:

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/jtes/a-murder-in-berkeley-gave-the-far-right-its-perfect-perp?utm_term=.cd0rPGqYr#.xo36QZbM6

    – the constant theme in the article is the reluctance of anyone to come forward and publicly defend they, much to the consternation of the author.

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

    I wish the “slippery slope” argument against eugenics was used against socialism instead. Socialism killed a lot more people than eugenics ever did.

    I like to torment leftists with the fact that the minimum wage was a racist, sexist, ableist plot created by eugenicists. It was invented to eliminate jobs for blacks and the disabled (so they would not be able to afford having children) and white women (so they would instead stay home and have white babies). Its inventors knew it would cost some people their jobs: that was the whole point. Today, supporters do a lot of handwaving to claim that it benefits those at the bottom. It doesn’t.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  213. Busby says:
    @Rod1963

    The trouble starts not with civilization itself, but with hypocrisy: when a civilization that works in a certain way pretends that it works in a different way. It is then that dysgenics activate, whether by design or default.

     

    Sparta also practiced eugenics however they never opened their doors to fresh blood lines as causalities mounted during it's war with Athens and instead of retrenching after the war and rebuild their manpower pool they engaged in the same sort of insanity that Athens did - trying to run a empire which exhausted them.

    By the time of Alexander the Great, Sparta was militarily and politically irrelevant.

    Epaminondas Of Thebes liberating the helots was kind of important too.

    To be fair to your point, the original foreign policy of Sparta was to avoid battle when possible because they were well aware their pool of manpower was limited. The Spartan victory in the Peloponnesian War was their undoing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  214. @Gabriel M

    Not only were they Jews, but also Communists. I am not sure which of these loyalties played a more important part in their anti-eugenic posture.
     
    Hmmm, so you have a trio of guys who displayed no interest whatsoever in Jewish culture, religion or nationalism and married non-Jews, but who displayed a huge lifelong interest in Leftism and married Leftists. Which was a bigger motivator for them, Judaism or Leftism? What a doozy of a question.

    Seriously, this is hardcore Occam's rubber room stuff. Unzers get treated to a regular succession of "Why do Jews hate Trump?", Why do Jews like Muslim immigrants?" stuff and the results are pretty similar. Here's the Occam's razor explanation. 99.99% of people don't form views on individual subjects, they accept ideologies as packets.That's why you can almost always predict someone's view on illegal immigration from their view on abortion and vice versa. It's also why subscribers to particular ideological packages changes their views on individual subjects (say conservatives on homosexuality) in almost exactly the same way. Thus instead of answering a myriad of individual imponderables like "why are Jews so bugged out about eugenics?" with ever more convoluted theories, you need to answer two separate simple questions.

    1) Why do most Jews outside Israel believe in Leftism?
    2) Why do Leftists hate eugenics.

    Try and you'll see how easy it is.

    Hmmm, so you have a trio of guys who displayed no interest whatsoever in Jewish culture, religion or nationalism and married non-Jews, but who displayed a huge lifelong interest in Leftism and married Leftists. Which was a bigger motivator for them, Judaism or Leftism? What a doozy of a question.

    The antecedent question should be, what is Jewishness? Is it the practice of Judaism, or an ethnic identity?

    1) Why do most Jews outside Israel believe in Leftism?
    2) Why do Leftists hate eugenics.

    I’m not sure that “most Jews outside Israel believe in Leftism.” Certainly, most secular Jews in the United States do. Religiously observant Jews are more likely to be politically conservative.

    Leftism seems to be particularly virulent among Ashkenazic Jews of East European descent, who make up most of the U.S. Jewish population. Yuri Slezkine does a good job of explaining the political attitudes formed by the experience of this group under Tsarist rule. They brought their peculiar antipathies with them when they emigrated. We may note that the earlier German Jewish immigrants in the Northern U.S. tended to be middle-class Republicans, whereas the colonial-era Sephardic Jewish settlers in the South were slaveholders and supported the Confederacy. Judah P. Benjamin was of course the most famous of these, but he had many compatriots. The father of the financier and presidential advisor Bernard Baruch was a medical officer on the staff of Robert E. Lee, and the general’s personal physician.

    In England the sympathies of that country’s old Sephardic community, dating to the reign of Charles II, were generally Tory. This reflected the letters of indulgence given them by Charles and renewed by his brother James II and VII. The Princess (later Queen) Anne was the first British royal to visit a synagogue. British Jews’ Tory sympathies turned to Jacobitism after the Hanoverian succession. The novelist and pamphleteer Henry Fielding remarked on this in the mid-18th century. Disraeli’s Toryism may be a late reflection of the same phenomenon.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  215. @SPMoore8
    If you accept the idea that people with deficient genes should be eliminated from the breeding population

    People do that all the time nowadays; it's called "abortion." And, as others have noted, the whole eradication of congenital diseases among Ashkenazim as well as any incest laws are also explicitly eugenic. Not to mention all sorts of physical defects, or Down Syndrome, or any number of other issues that are used to justify pregnancy termination.

    I think it's probably true that having a society where everyone had above average intelligence would be a disaster, so I would agree that eugenics with that sole aim is also highly questionable. And it's also true that the sterilization that the Holmes led SCOTUS endorsed is cruel.

    Having said that, the Wells' quote that I referenced earlier points to a real problem. What do we do when people keep breeding while at the same time are incapable of raising up their progeny? In the case of some nameless (white) couple in London with 12 children a hundred years ago, no problem, we can help them. (It's only 12 people, after all.)

    But what if it's millions of non-Jews in Israel controlled territory? What if it's tens of millions of Muslims, or Asians, who having been thoroughly ground down by overpopulation and war in their homelands, and simply wish to feed their children? What if it's billions of people in Africa? And so on. Slippery slopes go both ways.

    The only response I ever see is that TFR will go down -- eventually -- and then everything will be more or less the way it is now. Given that the world population has increased seven fold in the past 200 years, four fold in the past 100 years, and doubled in the past 50 years it's hard to be optimistic about the latest predictions that assure that it will take 200 years to double again (although I don't want to think about 15 billion on the planet: imagine what NYC, LA and Chicago will look like then.)

    Most religious people leave life and death issues to the Almighty. But in an empirical world where the Almighty doesn't appear to actually intervene, that kind of posture is easily seen as a cop out. Just because we live in a time of incredible plenty, that doesn't change the fact that ultimately life is a zero sum game. The best strategy is to hunker down and do your thing, and not show up as too poor -- and be miserable -- or too rich -- and be the target of envy.

    But what happens if and when we reach the resource wall?

    The current thinking of the progressives is that we should just let whatever happens, happen. That there is no such thing as a specific "culture" worth preserving, and if there is, any immigrant will automatically defer to it, because it's the best. That it's wonderful to have communities where you can eat at 12 different ethnic restaurants on one block and that's wonderful that the public schools are instructing a new generation of Einsteins in 12 different languages, etc.

    But most groups on planet Earth don't think that way, and never have; it's always been "Our way" versus the "Other way" and there's no apology for what one prefers. We seem to have lost that in Europe and the US, and while that's a morally impeccable posture in terms of blameworthiness it's also self-extinguishing.

    I think it’s probably true that having a society where everyone had above average intelligence would be a disaster…

    That can only happen in Minnesota.

    Read More
    • LOL: SPMoore8
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  216. @Jus' Sayin'...
    LOL.

    A friend, an anthropologist who spent many years doing field work among several different tribes in Africa, informed me that the high pitched screeching, audible in the video to which you link, seems to be a universal Negro behavioral characteristic. He made this observation after breaking up an escalating confrontation between trespassing Negroes and White students on the campus of a New Jersey college where both he and I were teaching. He did so after I commented on the increasingly incoherent screeching and yammering I had heard from the involved Negroes just before my colleague stepped in. He told me this signaled to him that the Negroes in question were on the verge of escalating the confrontation to violence and that, as a result, he had felt compelled to intervene.

    One additional point can be gleaned from an appendix to the Coleman Report which reported the observed fact that the students of male Negro teachers, even after controlling for various other possible explanatory factors, performed worse on average than the students of all other teachers. Even at the time this was such an inflammatory observation that it was buried in an appendix. To me it seems obvious that the personalities, intellectual capacities, and overt behaviors of Negro and White students are so different that segregated schooling into entirely different educational systems is probably necessary to optimize outcomes for each race. But providing just Negro instructors to Negro students may not be doing the Negro students any favors.

    William Paterson?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...
    No.

    BTW, it just struck me that to those reading my post now the idea of a White adult male successfully intervening and de-escalating a conflict involving teenage Negro males may seem like a fantasy. But the incident I describe happened back in the early part of the 1970s and exactly as I described. I thought things were bad back then but they have gotten worse to a degree that I literally could not have imagined at that time.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  217. @Anon
    "It’s audacious but not absurd to suggest that the two biggest winners in history are the Normans and the Jews, with JM Keynes [as documented here, a outspoken eugenicist] as a representative of the Norman ascendancy even in the 20th Century."

    Huh. I wonder if that's why neocons/randians have spent the last 50 years arguing that "Keynes was a fag, and that's why Keynsians discount the future." Joo much?

    I wonder if that’s why neocons/randians have spent the last 50 years arguing that “Keynes was a fag, and that’s why Keynsians discount the future.”

    Criticism of Keynes without having to resort to the details of macroeconomics is so fun, and so easy. That’s why there’s so much of it. The other stuff is hard.

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

    “Their manned low orbit program is alive and well – their secret is that they just keeping using the same proven hardware.”

    They keep evolving the system and have gone through a couple of new models. There have been numerous improvements and upgrades. Also numerous little glitches along the way, as they introduced unproven elements and worked out the bugs.

    They can now use a more direct “fast-track rendezvous” which significantly cuts down on the time before they reach the space station:

    Soyuz reentry module, rentry procedure:

    “The Soyuz TMA-08M mission set a new record for the fastest manned docking with a space station, event utilized the new six-hour fast rendezvous instead of the previous Soyuz launches which had, since 1986, taken two days.”

    Soyuz TMA-08M:

    “…making it possible for crew members to leave ground facilities and board the International Space Station in less time than a typical transatlantic flight.”

    Russia Tests Quick Trip to Space Station: Two-day trip to be compressed to 6 hours—but it might complicate international cooperation, IEEE Spectrum, James Oberg, 1 Aug 2012:

    “…1 August 2012—Today a Russian space experiment is testing a new flight plan for visits to the International Space Station (ISS) that harks back to the very first rendezvous missions of the 1960s. If it works, it could become the standard, not only for all Russian spacecraft but also for Western vehicles from both government and private operators…

    …Called a fast rendezvous scheme, the time from launch to docking is about 6 hours, as opposed to the current time frame of two days.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    First of all, I did not mean to indicate that using proven hardware was the wrong approach. In fact it is the right one in aviation and especially in space flight where any unforseen defect means death. The US is still flying B-52 airframes designed in the 1940s today (and for decades to come) for this reason.

    In fact it was the clean sheet design Space Shuttle that was a colossal mistake and a dead end - a classic government clusterfark that was both expensive AND unreliable. It stemmed in part from the desire of the space pilots to actually have something that they could fly. Capsules are basically rocks that can't really be "flown" so the "pilots" can just as well be dogs or chimps instead of humans, which is something that pilots don't like. The unmanned Russian cargo capsule works just as well as the manned versions.

    And of course it is possible to upgrade proven hardware with more modern electronics, etc. as the Russians have done (and as the US has done in the B-52). The "fast rendezvous" that you mention is not even that - there is no physical change to the hardware, just a reprogramming of the orbital trajectory. Maybe because the Russians are lacking in black lady genius mathematicians it has taken them this long to figure out how to rendezvous in fewer orbits.

    Of course, just as Americans are maybe a little too enthralled with the "new" the Russians tend to keep their hardware around a little too long. The Zhiguli auto (known in the West as the Lada) was an (almost) current design (license built 1966 Fiat 124) when it was introduced in 1970 but it was seriously out of date by the time they went out of production in 2010. There are only so many band-aids you can apply to a 40 year old design.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  219. @J1234
    "Eugenics" is just an evil word for something that's not really evil, but natural in many (though not all) contexts. The Nazis existed as governing body for 12 years, so that's how long their eugenics program went on. The American Eugenics Society, by contrast, was started 100 years ago, and still exists today - they just had to change their name in the 1970's...when they finally discovered the word "eugenics" was evil.

    Eugenics is wrong only when the government forces it's citizenry to take part in it, or murder is used to accomplish it, but claiming the impulse behind eugenics is bad is like saying the impulse for eating food is bad because it can lead to obesity.

    Very few single people (of reproductive age) who are in the market for a spouse go out looking for the dumbest, ugliest and least healthy looking person they can find. That's an impulse for genetic improvement, folks. Sure...dumb, ugly and unhealthy people get married, too, but that's often because they possess other redeeming qualities that are well regarded by at least some people (e.g. compassion or wealth.) It's also because there are relatively limited supplies of smart or attractive or healthy looking people in the world.

    I strongly suspect the practice of eugenics exists in the world of sports. I've seen and heard some things that lead me to believe it happens in some Olympic sports, like track and field events. Nobody says much about it.

    American leftist Hermann Joseph Muller, a jew who won the Nobel prize in genetics, went to the Soviet Union in the 1930's to promote his ideas about eugenics. His creepy letter to Stalin turned Stalin off the idea...and against Muller, who had to escape back to the US. The wiki entry on Muller remains fairly sanitized of his involvement in eugenics, though it is mentioned. Again, eugenics as a government dictated and enforced program (as Muller desired) is unnatural and unethical, so why wouldn't a dysgenics program in the same context also be unnatural and unethical? Or any policy designed to change the genetics of a population, whether that change is viewed as neutral or not?

    Muller was hired at Rice by Julian Huxley, brother of Aldous.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Also, Julian Huxley was at Rice a century ago with Sides, the teenage chemistry professor, who was a notorious at the time example of the problems of overly-intelligent children that Terman's Termites study was intended to refute.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  220. @ScarletNumber
    Muller was hired at Rice by Julian Huxley, brother of Aldous.

    Also, Julian Huxley was at Rice a century ago with Sides, the teenage chemistry professor, who was a notorious at the time example of the problems of overly-intelligent children that Terman’s Termites study was intended to refute.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ScarletNumber
    I've never heard of this before, and "sides of Rice" is tough to search. Can you elaborate on this a bit?
    , @HA
    "Also, Julian Huxley was at Rice a century ago with Sides, the teenage chemistry professor."

    His name was Sidis, and the subject he briefly taught was math (specifically, higher geometry). His story -- i.e., cautionary tale -- should be required reading for anyone who takes an interest in IQ. Hollywood covered similar ground with "A Beautiful Mind" and "Shine", but his story didn't have a feelgood ending.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  221. @attilathehen
    Said James Jesus Angleton (Mexican mother, WASP father) who headed the CIA.

    Thanks for the correction. Yes, the real Angleton was much more interesting. I read about his friendship with Pound.

    John Nash (the math genius) had a wife from El Salvador. She moved to the Mississippi when she was 11, but I read that in the movie about his life, she was portrayed as a classic Southern belle.

    These Hispanics are too WASPy to fit the present day narrative. That’s why a black Hispanic like Perez is put in the limelight. In Latin America, he is black. In the USA, he is black.

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

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  223. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Old Palo Altan
    You seem to be saying that "average intelligence" is fixed and immutable.
    Surely if "everybody had above average intelligence" then there would simply be a new and higher average? Say 120 or even 130?
    And how in heaven's name would that be a disaster?

    It might have something to do with an overproduction of elites. It’s good to not have too many people who are unintelligent and/or have poor impulse control, but having too many people of upper level intelligence could lead to an unbalanced society with not enough individuals willing to do lower level work and too many trying to run the show.

    Read More
    • Agree: SPMoore8
    • Replies: @res

    unbalanced society with not enough individuals willing to do lower level work and too many trying to run the show.
     
    I wonder how much of that effect is due to absolute intelligence and how much to relative intelligence and role models while growing up? I occasionally notice I have some friction with people who are fairly smart but who grew up in an environment where they were often the "smartest one in the room." Similarly, I think it's easier to deal with super smart people who have spent time around those even smarter.

    Worth noting the relevance of this to selective immigration from low IQ societies. I think it explains some of the behavior of subcontinental immigrants in the US.
    , @Old Palo Altan
    Let's hope this robot thing turns out to actually work, and then we can fearlessly free the world of stupidity.
    I would add that it is not intelligence which makes some people want to run the show, but a character flaw. Intelligence makes the flaw more dangerous, that's all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  224. Rod1963 says:
    @SPMoore8
    If you accept the idea that people with deficient genes should be eliminated from the breeding population

    People do that all the time nowadays; it's called "abortion." And, as others have noted, the whole eradication of congenital diseases among Ashkenazim as well as any incest laws are also explicitly eugenic. Not to mention all sorts of physical defects, or Down Syndrome, or any number of other issues that are used to justify pregnancy termination.

    I think it's probably true that having a society where everyone had above average intelligence would be a disaster, so I would agree that eugenics with that sole aim is also highly questionable. And it's also true that the sterilization that the Holmes led SCOTUS endorsed is cruel.

    Having said that, the Wells' quote that I referenced earlier points to a real problem. What do we do when people keep breeding while at the same time are incapable of raising up their progeny? In the case of some nameless (white) couple in London with 12 children a hundred years ago, no problem, we can help them. (It's only 12 people, after all.)

    But what if it's millions of non-Jews in Israel controlled territory? What if it's tens of millions of Muslims, or Asians, who having been thoroughly ground down by overpopulation and war in their homelands, and simply wish to feed their children? What if it's billions of people in Africa? And so on. Slippery slopes go both ways.

    The only response I ever see is that TFR will go down -- eventually -- and then everything will be more or less the way it is now. Given that the world population has increased seven fold in the past 200 years, four fold in the past 100 years, and doubled in the past 50 years it's hard to be optimistic about the latest predictions that assure that it will take 200 years to double again (although I don't want to think about 15 billion on the planet: imagine what NYC, LA and Chicago will look like then.)

    Most religious people leave life and death issues to the Almighty. But in an empirical world where the Almighty doesn't appear to actually intervene, that kind of posture is easily seen as a cop out. Just because we live in a time of incredible plenty, that doesn't change the fact that ultimately life is a zero sum game. The best strategy is to hunker down and do your thing, and not show up as too poor -- and be miserable -- or too rich -- and be the target of envy.

    But what happens if and when we reach the resource wall?

    The current thinking of the progressives is that we should just let whatever happens, happen. That there is no such thing as a specific "culture" worth preserving, and if there is, any immigrant will automatically defer to it, because it's the best. That it's wonderful to have communities where you can eat at 12 different ethnic restaurants on one block and that's wonderful that the public schools are instructing a new generation of Einsteins in 12 different languages, etc.

    But most groups on planet Earth don't think that way, and never have; it's always been "Our way" versus the "Other way" and there's no apology for what one prefers. We seem to have lost that in Europe and the US, and while that's a morally impeccable posture in terms of blameworthiness it's also self-extinguishing.

    But most groups on planet Earth don’t think that way, and never have; it’s always been “Our way” versus the “Other way” and there’s no apology for what one prefers. We seem to have lost that in Europe and the US, and while that’s a morally impeccable posture in terms of blameworthiness it’s also self-extinguishing.

    And who promotes this suicidal thinking – our brightest and most impeccably educated that’s who. Nor are they just “progressives” who buy into this culture of death nonsense but others like the Koch brothers and most Silicon Valley luminaries that the HBD crowd worships.

    Of course to them it’s not suicidal at all. Socially and economically isolated from their own policies life is wonderful for them. If things blow up they’ll run to New Zealand

    Bottom line is this: our cognitive elites along with others have declared war on whites and their civilization. It’s really quite unique in history where the ruling class and it’s subordinates have gone collectively stark raving mad.

    They are hell bent on destroying the very population/cultural pools they arose from. Their motto could very well be “f**k you I got mine and you get nothing”.

    Look this movement is top down and has been from day one. You had a bunch of wealthy types and intellectuals who bought into various strains of utopianism and cultural Marxism and couple that with their innate contempt for the lower class and you arrive where we are. That includes most if not all of the Silicon Valley drones who support Hillary and globalism.

    And that leaves us to determine what is the appropriate response to our cognitive elite’s ongoing attempt to destroy us. I do know we certainly shouldn’t try to breed more of these monsters.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    Unique? Increase diversity and the lower class can't unite against you because they're too busy attacking each other. It's not the first time this has been tried. It usually doesn't end well, but that's another story.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  225. @gda
    Hindsight is wonderful, is it not? Who knew that the erstwhile greatest hero of the 20th Century is now, according to the revisionists, the most evil man of the 20th Century?

    What utter claptrap.

    Perhaps those revisionists might turn their attention to the fact that Churchill was prescient about many things other than Hitler’s evil. Maybe a few hundred million lives could have been saved and the entire world history altered had the powers that be listened to his admonitions for the need to overthrow the Bolsheviks in Russia at an early date. Wasn't it FDR who was so enamoured of Stalin? Why not put the blame on him?

    After World War I it was Churchill who urged the Cabinet to send boatloads of food to the blockaded Germans—a proposal greeted with derision by colleagues such as Prime Minister Lloyd George, who preferred to “squeeze the German lemon until the pips squeak.” Their policy prevailed—and we all know what it led to twenty years later.

    Yes, lots of bad policy in Britain in those years, but shameful to lay the blame on Churchill for the War. He was the one who summed up the Treaty of Versailles as "monstrous" and "malignant".

    As the blurb in the link comments:
    “The weakness in Buchanan’s line of thinking, of course, is that by 1939, Hitler’s international word was worthless; yet Buchanan hinges his case on what might have happened had Britain let Hitler go after Poland in 1939 as it had Czechoslovakia”

    Sorry mates, one book by a paleo-conservative loon, no matter how erudite, will not convince those who have actually done real research to change their mind on the great Winston Churchill.

    His complete writings are out there for all to see. Why not make the effort instead of this cheap and worthless sniping. Or perhaps it’s the popular agenda now to denigrate our heroes.

    Wasn’t it FDR who was so enamoured of Stalin? Why not put the blame on him?

    Oh believe me, we do.

    But we’re just paleo-conservative loons.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  226. gda says:
    @dfordoom

    Ah yes, the revisionist historians, spewing their bile.
     
    All history is revisionist history. All historians are biased, they all have agendas, they all emphasise the things that will support their agendas and de-emphasise the things that conflict with their agendas. An historian who had no agenda would be an historian who had no ideas and he would not be worth reading. Objective histories do not exist.

    What matters is to be aware of each historian's bias.

    "Revisionist historian" is an insult we reserve for those historians with whom we disagree because their bias differs from ours. We fondly imagine that our favourite historians are totally objective because their bias matches ours.

    And yet you offer up no body of evidence to back up your silly insult, for that is all it is. Care to name the revisionist historians you seem to think offer reasonable interpretations of how Churchill was “one of the most evil men of the 20th century” and his “crazed warmongering”?

    And I’ve already dealt with the old Paleo, Buchanan. What’s left can only be the leftist academics, and we all know their agenda. Frankly, the only reason they’ve waited this long to start picking the great man apart is likely because they are cowards – they know they no longer have to watch out for WWII vets looking to punch them in the face. ;-)

    Churchill’s whole life was pretty much a black swan event. He was a phenomenal man, certainly the man of the 20th Century. Too bad some people can’t deal with that fact.

    Interesting and rather telling that you hit me with the relativist viewpoint on “history” and “historians”. You’ve sort of identified your politics and agenda, haven’t you?

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    Like a lot of military leaders, whether Churchill was good or bad depends on which end of the gun you were facing.

    As the old saying goes, nobody likes to fight but someone needs to know how.
    , @dfordoom

    Interesting and rather telling that you hit me with the relativist viewpoint on “history” and “historians”. You’ve sort of identified your politics and agenda, haven’t you?
     
    If you're implying that I must be a leftist or a Marxist or a cultural Marxist because I don't worship Churchill then I'm afraid you're a bit wide of the mark. I'm not the kind of conservative who wants to set the clock back to the 1950s. I'm the sort of reactionary who thinks we should set it back to the 15th century, before the Reformation, when our civilisation took its first wrong turning.

    Absolute truth exists in the moral and theological spheres because it comes from God. When it comes to the sometimes farcical and sometimes tragic tale of human history there is no absolute truth because historians are only human and thus fallible.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  227. @syonredux
    RE: Demonizing WASPs for the sin of Eugenics,

    There's a good show on Cinemax called The Knick . Steven Soderbergh directs all the episodes :

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

    It’s set in a New York hospital circa 1900, and Clive Owen stars as a cocaine-addicted surgeon (with his period clothes and moustache, he looks oddly like Edgar Allan Poe; perhaps he should try to get a Poe biopic off the ground), although his Yank accent is only so-so.

    The show is quite PC. A running sub-plot involves one of the characters becoming a pro-eugenics zealot.As you might expect, that character (Dr Everett Gallinger) is a blond WASP. There’s even a scene where he sterilizes an explicitly Jewish boy (Gallinger actually asks him if he is a “Yid” before commencing the procedure).

    That’s too bad. I like Clive Owen as an actor.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  228. @donut
    "“The race had been won, so why not quit while we were ahead before there are dead astronauts on the moon as permanent memorials to the program?”

    That's a BS reason . The planet is littered with the bodies of dead pioneers . And the bottom of the sea even more . The best way to honour those who might have died is to send more who will eventually be successful and thereby give some meaning to their sacrifice . Only a race of unworthy cowards ( or politicians ) would draw back , not at the risk to the brave explorers , but at the risk of bad press . If that is the reason we drew back from pushing on into the unknown then then we truly deserve the fate that we are facing now.

    "The race" never ends .

    “The race” never ends

    I can see what you are talking about. I grew up besides a race-track and loved motor-racing – and I still do love – for lots of the same feelings – Tome Wolfe’s book on the race to the moon: The Right Stuff.

    But (there’s always a but, isn’t it?) – The race to the moon did end – for lots of reasons, for sure. And maybe not only for dumb ones. The dead – unburied – bodies – this inner image of them, might well have been one of them. It still makes me shiver, I can’t help it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  229. SFG says:
    @Rod1963

    But most groups on planet Earth don’t think that way, and never have; it’s always been “Our way” versus the “Other way” and there’s no apology for what one prefers. We seem to have lost that in Europe and the US, and while that’s a morally impeccable posture in terms of blameworthiness it’s also self-extinguishing.
     
    And who promotes this suicidal thinking - our brightest and most impeccably educated that's who. Nor are they just "progressives" who buy into this culture of death nonsense but others like the Koch brothers and most Silicon Valley luminaries that the HBD crowd worships.

    Of course to them it's not suicidal at all. Socially and economically isolated from their own policies life is wonderful for them. If things blow up they'll run to New Zealand

    Bottom line is this: our cognitive elites along with others have declared war on whites and their civilization. It's really quite unique in history where the ruling class and it's subordinates have gone collectively stark raving mad.

    They are hell bent on destroying the very population/cultural pools they arose from. Their motto could very well be "f**k you I got mine and you get nothing".

    Look this movement is top down and has been from day one. You had a bunch of wealthy types and intellectuals who bought into various strains of utopianism and cultural Marxism and couple that with their innate contempt for the lower class and you arrive where we are. That includes most if not all of the Silicon Valley drones who support Hillary and globalism.

    And that leaves us to determine what is the appropriate response to our cognitive elite's ongoing attempt to destroy us. I do know we certainly shouldn't try to breed more of these monsters.

    Unique? Increase diversity and the lower class can’t unite against you because they’re too busy attacking each other. It’s not the first time this has been tried. It usually doesn’t end well, but that’s another story.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  230. SFG says:
    @gda
    And yet you offer up no body of evidence to back up your silly insult, for that is all it is. Care to name the revisionist historians you seem to think offer reasonable interpretations of how Churchill was "one of the most evil men of the 20th century" and his "crazed warmongering"?

    And I've already dealt with the old Paleo, Buchanan. What's left can only be the leftist academics, and we all know their agenda. Frankly, the only reason they've waited this long to start picking the great man apart is likely because they are cowards - they know they no longer have to watch out for WWII vets looking to punch them in the face. ;-)

    Churchill's whole life was pretty much a black swan event. He was a phenomenal man, certainly the man of the 20th Century. Too bad some people can't deal with that fact.

    Interesting and rather telling that you hit me with the relativist viewpoint on "history" and "historians". You've sort of identified your politics and agenda, haven't you?

    Like a lot of military leaders, whether Churchill was good or bad depends on which end of the gun you were facing.

    As the old saying goes, nobody likes to fight but someone needs to know how.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  231. The idea of eugenics sounds so horrible, it is easy to forget one pragmatic reason for considering it: the negative consequences of having low-IQ (and lack of future orientation, etc.) that it brings. If low-IQ people just had menial (or blue-collar) jobs, but were otherwise law-abiding and produced productive children, no one would care.

    But there are huge social costs to their intelligence deficits, and they are imposed on everyone (we all know that the same issues are worse in their own neighborhoods). [try watching programs like the new "Live PD" if you forget]

    So while we cannot actually implement a eugenics program, it is nice to imagine a world where these costs were not imposed on all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Of course we could implement a eugenics program, because we-at least, in the person of several US States-DID once do so. And, unlike the NSDAP era German programs, there is considerable evidence ours worked.

    It was a purely negative eugenics program: stop the retarded, the mentally ill, and seriously criminal from breeding by sterilizing them.

    It saved the nation untold grief and probably actually improved the lives of the sterilized as well.

    People with IQ's such that they can't compete for minimum wage jobs or take care of their own children, people with mental conditions that are likely heritable that make normal living impossible, and repeat felons should be sterilized.
    , @SFG
    I usually argue it like this.

    What's wrong with eugenics?

    Well, you know, the Holocaust.

    Sure, but the Holocaust wasn't bad because it was eugenics, it was bad because it was mass murder. (Arguing it never happened is counterproductive at this point, and anyway I don't believe that myself.) If you killed six million people to breed the new Soviet Man, that'd be wrong, too, right? (You can wake them up about the Holodomor here too if you want to.) So the issue isn't whether improving genetic material is right, it's respecting the rights of people while you're doing it.

    Well, you know, it was racist.

    Sure, but why is improving genetic material racist? Why not take the best people of every race and encourage them to reproduce?

    , @ben tillman

    The idea of eugenics sounds so horrible....
     
    No, it doesn't.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  232. Marcus says:

    WASPs as winners? No they’re the biggest losers of the 20th century. The destruction of Germany as a rival was as pyrrhic a victory as there has ever been.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    In the racial-purity sweepstakes, yes.

    From the elite point of view, though, they successfully defanged the Jewish threat to their ascendance by coopting them. They get cheap labor, international ethnic food, global corporate empires, and kinky sex, and all it cost them was bigger noses on their grandkids. 'Good breeding' went downhill? Well, from the racialist point of view, yes. From the elite point of view, they now can skim the genetic cream of every nation on earth and incorporate them into their empire.
    , @silviosilver

    WASPs as winners? No they’re the biggest losers of the 20th century.
     
    Lol, 229 posts before someone states the bleeding obvious.

    The 20th century was the one in which WASPs sowed the seeds of their own destruction.

    Worldbeaters to easybeats in three generations. Beat that.

    This pathetic laughing stock of a race takes kicks in the head from every direction on a daily basis and cannot even summon up the courage to so much as name - let alone confront - its nemesis.

    I don't mean to upset any WASPs reading this comment, but come on, we all know you're never going to lift a finger to save yourselves.

    Well, it was nice knowing you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  233. @ScarletNumber
    William Paterson?

    No.

    BTW, it just struck me that to those reading my post now the idea of a White adult male successfully intervening and de-escalating a conflict involving teenage Negro males may seem like a fantasy. But the incident I describe happened back in the early part of the 1970s and exactly as I described. I thought things were bad back then but they have gotten worse to a degree that I literally could not have imagined at that time.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  234. @Steve Sailer
    Also, Julian Huxley was at Rice a century ago with Sides, the teenage chemistry professor, who was a notorious at the time example of the problems of overly-intelligent children that Terman's Termites study was intended to refute.

    I’ve never heard of this before, and “sides of Rice” is tough to search. Can you elaborate on this a bit?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Sorry, I misspelled Sidis as Sides:

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

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  235. BB753 says:
    @Random Dude on the Internet

    I’m thinking that of the list above, Churchill is presently off-limits and Teddy Roosevelt has too vivid an image today (although I would have said the same about Andrew Jackson 40 years ago).
     
    The left still sees some value in the necessity of white heroes. Once there are more non-whites who are household names, then the remaining white heroes will be gone. The two exceptions may be Abraham Lincoln (who can be retroactively be considered a homosexual) and FDR (more for being disabled than for his record as President). Everyone else is as good as gone, as you pointed out with Andrew Jackson and before that, Thomas Jefferson. The Democrat Jefferson-Jackson fundraising dinner is very triggering to some modern Democrats and I don't expect that name to stick much longer (several states have already changed the name).

    At the pace history is being rewritten, by 2030, 17th-19th century whites will just be presented as a group of backwards renegade slave owners, with the founders being multiracial like the Hamilton play.

    Teddy Roosevelt could qualify as disabled on account of his severe myopia and near total loss of vision in one eye after getting punched during a boxing match.

    http://www.doctorzebra.com/prez/g26.htm

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  236. dfordoom says: • Website
    @gda
    And yet you offer up no body of evidence to back up your silly insult, for that is all it is. Care to name the revisionist historians you seem to think offer reasonable interpretations of how Churchill was "one of the most evil men of the 20th century" and his "crazed warmongering"?

    And I've already dealt with the old Paleo, Buchanan. What's left can only be the leftist academics, and we all know their agenda. Frankly, the only reason they've waited this long to start picking the great man apart is likely because they are cowards - they know they no longer have to watch out for WWII vets looking to punch them in the face. ;-)

    Churchill's whole life was pretty much a black swan event. He was a phenomenal man, certainly the man of the 20th Century. Too bad some people can't deal with that fact.

    Interesting and rather telling that you hit me with the relativist viewpoint on "history" and "historians". You've sort of identified your politics and agenda, haven't you?

    Interesting and rather telling that you hit me with the relativist viewpoint on “history” and “historians”. You’ve sort of identified your politics and agenda, haven’t you?

    If you’re implying that I must be a leftist or a Marxist or a cultural Marxist because I don’t worship Churchill then I’m afraid you’re a bit wide of the mark. I’m not the kind of conservative who wants to set the clock back to the 1950s. I’m the sort of reactionary who thinks we should set it back to the 15th century, before the Reformation, when our civilisation took its first wrong turning.

    Absolute truth exists in the moral and theological spheres because it comes from God. When it comes to the sometimes farcical and sometimes tragic tale of human history there is no absolute truth because historians are only human and thus fallible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @gda
    Not asking for or expecting worship for Sir Winston.

    But what’s with the totally uncalled for and unsupported vituperative hatred? Where’s that coming from? Because your (still unsubstantiated) insults on Churchill are so far outside the normal range of reactions that it seems you’re just being deliberately outrageous to shock and/or to attract attention. Just how old are you, anyway?

    You get no marks unless you show your working. Haven't they taught you that yet?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  237. ic1000 says:

    Steve, I suggest that you re-package the original post into a lecture format, and present your thinking at Middlebury College. Hilarity is sure to ensue.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    IC, I guess by "hilarity", you mean a broken nose, torso contusions, and multiple lacerations. I had to look up "hilarity", but your definition didn't match any of them on Dictopedia. Weird! ;-}

    However, you put an idea into my mind. This is nothing against Steve, but I think we need to get someone up to Middlebury to speak that will soften them up a bit. I'm talking about a ringer, some guy that looks like a professor of music theory but is actually a national champion kickboxer (preferably an "up-and-coming" one, not known by the students, professors, and admin. at the College yet - like they'd know any kickboxers!).

    Any volunteers here - we can crowdfund your ass with a 1-way 1st-class ticket, one night at a hotel, and a jetranger with a long-line to pull you out of there at the right moment and drop you at the safe zone in front of the engineering school?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  238. Jack D says:
    @Anonym
    Given the redundancy in WASP, I immediately suspect that it has been engineered as an anti-White weapon. Let's see... WASP coined by Andrew Hacker in 1957 according to wikipedia. Google search "Andrew Hacker" Jewish... well whadaya know...

    http://mondoweiss.net/2007/07/the-implosion-o/

    I guess the pest of the so-called WASP has been if not eradicated, somewhat deinfested from power in the Anglosphere. Far be it for Anglos to be ascendent in the Anglosphere... the horror!

    There should be an equivalent term for anti-white Jews. It is important that it is not a general one for Jews, but only the Jews who push for the genocide of the Europeans. I'm pleasantly surprised at the number of married Jews voting for Trump for example, but Jewish-led anti-whiteness is definitely a thing.

    Maybe JIHAD- Jewish/Israeli Hardcore American Democrats? Or Jewish/Israeli Host Anglosphere Destroyers? I like the latter because it well encapsulates their own idiocy.

    JERKs? Jewish... uhhh Europe/Europa/Eurosphere wRecking Krew?

    How about JUDAS? Jewish Undeclared Destroyers of Anglo Society.

    Or JUNTA? Jewish Undermining Numbing Termites of the Anglosphere.

    I am not enamoured with any of them particularly, but at least those are probably the best 4-5 letter words containing J that have a similar flavor to WASP.

    Protip for anti-Semites – stop ranting. It makes you seem crazed. Probably you really are crazed, but there’s no point in making it so crystal clear.

    WASP was NOT coined by Hacker. From his published reference (the first), it’s clear that the term was already in use among sociologists by the time he wrote it down:

    They are ‘WASPs’—in the cocktail party jargon of the sociologists. That is, they are wealthy, they are Anglo-Saxon in origin, and they are Protestants (and disproportionately Episcopalian).

    So he was merely writing down a term that was already in wide (if not yet published) use. And the original significance of the W as wealthy actually made more sense – white and Anglo-Saxon are redundant and there are plenty of Anglo-Saxon Protestants who are not wealthy (and therefore NOT WASPs).

    But it was Digby Baltzell, himself an ultra-WASP, who really popularized the term. And Baltzell (and Hacker) intended no malice toward the WASPs. Baltzell may have switched the W to white because (especially after the Depression) there were plenty of genteel WASPs who were no longer wealthy but retained their WASPish culture.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Thanks for the history and the discussion of "wealthy" for the W. It's especially relevant since communities of white ASPs who are not wealthy ASPs are often far from the latter culturally (e.g. evangelicals). A more nuanced reading would be people emblematic of or sympathetic with wealthy ASP culture which would include the genteel "poor." (both the "fallen" and the aspirational) I think that is what most people actually mean when they use "WASP." Also relevant is the tension between WASP and nouveau riche, but that's a different conversation (and one quite relevant to our current president).
    , @Old Palo Altan
    Baltzell may have been a "ultra WASP" (he certainly looked like one), but his family was never particularly wealthy. So perhaps his change allowed him to feel more snugly WASPish than he knew himself truly to be?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  239. Jack D says:
    @Hippopotamusdrome
    Quick quiz. Who said the following quote about slavs?

    Then for a time the Slav ... will sweep down on the Austrian monarchy with all its barbarity... . But ... the Austrian Germans ... will be set free and wreak a bloody revenge on the Slav barbarians. The general war which will then break out will smash this Slav Sonderbund and wipe out all these petty hidebound nations, down to their very names.
    ...
    The next world war will result in the disappearance from the face of the earth ... of entire ... peoples. And that, too, is a step forward.

     

    A. Adolph Hitler.
    B. Friedrich Engels, co-author The Communist Manifesto.
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Answer is B.

    The Magyar Struggle
    Source: MECW Volume 8, p. 227;
    Written: by Engels about January 8, 1849;
    First published: in Neue Rheinische Zeitung No. 194, January 13, 1849.
    ...
    Among all the large and small nations of Austria, only three standard-bearers of progress took an active part in history, and still retain their vitality — the Germans, the Poles and the Magyars. Hence they are now revolutionary.

    All the other large and small nationalities and peoples are destined to perish before long in the revolutionary world storm. For that reason they are now counter-revolutionary.
    ...
    There is no country in Europe which does not have in some corner or other one or several ruined fragments of peoples, the remnant of a former population that was suppressed and held in bondage by the nation which later became the main vehicle of historical development. These relics of a nation mercilessly trampled under foot in the course of history, as Hegel says, these residual fragments of peoples always become fanatical standard-bearers of counter-revolution and remain so until their complete extirpation or loss of their national character, just as their whole existence in general is itself a protest against a great historical revolution.

    Such, in Scotland, are the Gaels, the supporters of the Stuarts from 1640 to 1745.

    Such, in France, are the Bretons, the supporters of the Bourbons from 1792 to 1800.

    Such, in Spain, are the Basques, the supporters of Don Carlos.
    ...
    Then for a time the Slav counter-revolution will sweep down on the Austrian monarchy with all its barbarity... . But at the first victorious uprising of the French proletariat ... , the Austrian Germans and Magyars will be set free and wreak a bloody revenge on the Slav barbarians. The general war which will then break out will smash this Slav Sonderbund and wipe out all these petty hidebound nations, down to their very names.

    The next world war will result in the disappearance from the face of the earth not only of reactionary classes and dynasties, but also of entire reactionary peoples. And that, too, is a step forward.

     

    Engels had a really lousy crystal ball. There was no “victorious uprising of the French proletariat” and the Slavs he was talking about were not the Russians but the Slav minorities of the Austro-Hungarian empire, such as the Serbs. Of course their restiveness did lead to WWI but the end result was the dissolution of the empire and national self-realization (more or less) for the Slav minorities, not their crushing by the Austrians and Hungarians. Not to mention the other “defeated” and “reactionary” minorities that he mentions (Basques, Scots) are still working on their own self-determination. So nationalism is not at all a spent force (while “World Revolution” is).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Romanian
    He hated Romanians, too, because we are a reactionary and counter-revolutionary people. This made it a bit tricky to study communist canon before 1989.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  240. @anonymous
    India might be an example of what can happen if things get dysgenic enough. Here's a bleak article (reprinted at ZDnet.com)
    by an Indian concerned about poor intellectual performance (he calls, in standard PC fashion, for more education):

    "Indian IT's gargantuan re-engineering problem: The rot lies deep for Indian IT and nothing short of an education overhaul will fix it.", Rajiv Rao for New Tech for Old India, March 17, 2017:


    "...Donald Trump's proposed immigration reform ...could put substantial barriers to Indian IT being able to corner the market on skilled H-1B visas, thereby threatening the lucrative $75 billion or so that it collects in revenue from the US...

    ...in the areas of AI, digital, robotics, cloud, and Internet of Things, which Indian firms are desperately trying to claw themselves into contention in...

    ...automation is rapidly eliminating a vast portion of the more routine, low-level IT jobs that Indian companies use college graduates for...

    ...will have to either let go hundreds of thousands of workers ...or retrain them to be part of the new wave of IT work ...is that even a realistic option?

    ...According to no better authority than Srinivas Kandula, CEO of the Indian arm of French IT major Capgemini ...the situation in India is especially bleak. "I am not very pessimistic, but it is a challenging task and I tend to believe that 60-65 percent [of Indian IT workers] are just not trainable," he said. "Probably, India will witness the largest unemployment in the middle level to senior level," he added...

    ...the majority of India's engineering graduates don't have skills worth the paper their degrees are printed on. According to employment solutions company Aspiring Minds, a well-known institution that ...tracks the worth of college graduates, a staggering 80 percent of engineers in India don't possess skills that can make them employable...

    ...the results from their annual survey of 150,000 engineering students from 650 engineering colleges hasn't changed much in five years ...as many as 97 percent of engineering graduates desire positions in software engineering or core engineering but only 3 percent have the requisite chops to be employed in software or product market. Only 7 percent can complete core engineering tasks...

    ...This may seem very strange stuff...

    ...Either the cream of this cohort is going abroad... or every one of these minds is capable ...but is stymied by the rot that is the Indian higher educational system ...technology institutions ...enroll 2.9 million students annually ...many of these colleges have rock-bottom standards if they are not fly-by-night operations...

    ...former IIT professor ...said that "a lot of people have talked about poor quality curriculum, poor quality faculty, poor infrastructure, poor school education, and so on. I disagree. There is a much simpler explanation for this: Copying in our colleges, besides laziness."...

    ...prospective recruits -- including those with several years industry experience -- couldn't write the most basic code that is taught in the very first semester in college...

    ...hundreds of millions of unemployed and unemployable graduates (India sends 6 million graduates into the work force every year) -- is a recipe for social upheaval."

     

    Yeah, it really was all just a scam to cut costs without having to deal with things like pensions, get a subservient workforce, and do population replacement with a liberal voting bloc in the bargin.

    Well, pensions were dropped for most companies years ago. My mother has one but I don’t. The only big defender of pensions is Ralph Nader.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  241. Mike1 says:

    Keynes is pure Marxism. Read his books. There is a reason why he is worshiped by anyone that wants ever larger government.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  242. Jack D says:
    @anonymous
    "Their manned low orbit program is alive and well – their secret is that they just keeping using the same proven hardware."

    They keep evolving the system and have gone through a couple of new models. There have been numerous improvements and upgrades. Also numerous little glitches along the way, as they introduced unproven elements and worked out the bugs.

    They can now use a more direct "fast-track rendezvous" which significantly cuts down on the time before they reach the space station:

    Soyuz reentry module, rentry procedure:


    "The Soyuz TMA-08M mission set a new record for the fastest manned docking with a space station, event utilized the new six-hour fast rendezvous instead of the previous Soyuz launches which had, since 1986, taken two days."

     

    Soyuz TMA-08M:

    "...making it possible for crew members to leave ground facilities and board the International Space Station in less time than a typical transatlantic flight."

    Russia Tests Quick Trip to Space Station: Two-day trip to be compressed to 6 hours—but it might complicate international cooperation, IEEE Spectrum, James Oberg, 1 Aug 2012:


    "...1 August 2012—Today a Russian space experiment is testing a new flight plan for visits to the International Space Station (ISS) that harks back to the very first rendezvous missions of the 1960s. If it works, it could become the standard, not only for all Russian spacecraft but also for Western vehicles from both government and private operators...

    ...Called a fast rendezvous scheme, the time from launch to docking is about 6 hours, as opposed to the current time frame of two days."

     

    First of all, I did not mean to indicate that using proven hardware was the wrong approach. In fact it is the right one in aviation and especially in space flight where any unforseen defect means death. The US is still flying B-52 airframes designed in the 1940s today (and for decades to come) for this reason.

    In fact it was the clean sheet design Space Shuttle that was a colossal mistake and a dead end – a classic government clusterfark that was both expensive AND unreliable. It stemmed in part from the desire of the space pilots to actually have something that they could fly. Capsules are basically rocks that can’t really be “flown” so the “pilots” can just as well be dogs or chimps instead of humans, which is something that pilots don’t like. The unmanned Russian cargo capsule works just as well as the manned versions.

    And of course it is possible to upgrade proven hardware with more modern electronics, etc. as the Russians have done (and as the US has done in the B-52). The “fast rendezvous” that you mention is not even that – there is no physical change to the hardware, just a reprogramming of the orbital trajectory. Maybe because the Russians are lacking in black lady genius mathematicians it has taken them this long to figure out how to rendezvous in fewer orbits.

    Of course, just as Americans are maybe a little too enthralled with the “new” the Russians tend to keep their hardware around a little too long. The Zhiguli auto (known in the West as the Lada) was an (almost) current design (license built 1966 Fiat 124) when it was introduced in 1970 but it was seriously out of date by the time they went out of production in 2010. There are only so many band-aids you can apply to a 40 year old design.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "Proven" is an overused thing in aviation. The B-52 is now used in a role that a converted airliner airframe could do as well at a drastically lowered cost, and also, the B-52 fleet is a disaster waiting to happen in terms of metal fatigue. The fleet should have been largely retired in the 1980s, and everyone knows it. But since the B-52 has become such a symbol of American power, it has been kept on in the manner of the battleships.

    What is most needed now is a replacement for the 1940s air cooled engines still used in the vast majority of general aviation aircraft. They need to be replaced by engines that run on either aviation specific or generally available fuels, have single lever power control, and cannot be shock cooled or operated in a way drastically limiting or reducing their operational life by lack of detailed pilot interaction. The current suppliers will never do this and no one else wants to get into the market for several reasons.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  243. @O'Really
    Oliver Wendell Holmes has his name on many schools, despite being famous for his pro-eugenics decision in Buck v Bell: "Three generations of imbeciles is enough."

    Less well known is the fact that he was writing for an 8-1 majority, including Justice Brandeis.

    Oliver Wendell Holmes has his name on many schools, despite being famous for his pro-eugenics decision in Buck v Bell: “Three generations of imbeciles is enough.”

    He wrote, “Three generations of imbeciles are enough”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  244. biz says:
    @AnotherDad
    He's charitable and PC--it's the schools!

    No, India is a dysgenic disaster. While India's TFR is coming down to within shouting distance of replacement--a good thing--it's dysgenically distributed.

    The well educated upcaste smarties have well below replacement fertility. (Two is the "standard" at which you stop. But many are content with one whom they think they have the resources to deliver the appropriate lifestyle to. And of course a bunch never get hitched or never pull the trigger.) And then, of course, a fair number of the smartest leave and have their kids in the US (or other parts of the Anglosphere).

    Meanwhile the countryside peasant lower castes, untouchables, tribals and the Muslims are still breeding away. India ticks a percent more Muslim each decade, which actually hides how much more Muslim the young people are. India is getting dumber and more Muslim!

    For all the happy talk--India is a demographic dysgenic disaster.

    I definitely saw that there. Among old women, only saris. Among young women, lots of burkas and hijabs and the like. With eyes open it is obvious that India is becoming rapidly more Muslim at the young end.

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

    Said James Jesus Angleton (Mexican mother, WASP father)
     
    They left that part out in THE GOOD SHEPHERD. Goes against the narrative ("Hispanics were totally barred from elite positions in society prior to the '60s"). So, Damon's Edward Wilson is purely WASP in the film. And he also doesn't know E.E. Cummings, T.S. Eliot, and Ezra Pound. It's a rare example of a fictionalized version of a person being less interesting than the real man.

    who headed the CIA.
     
    Angleton was chief of CIA Counterintelligence; he never served as director.

    Please see my response at #218. I hit the wrong reply button.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  246. SFG says:
    @Anonym
    Given the redundancy in WASP, I immediately suspect that it has been engineered as an anti-White weapon. Let's see... WASP coined by Andrew Hacker in 1957 according to wikipedia. Google search "Andrew Hacker" Jewish... well whadaya know...

    http://mondoweiss.net/2007/07/the-implosion-o/

    I guess the pest of the so-called WASP has been if not eradicated, somewhat deinfested from power in the Anglosphere. Far be it for Anglos to be ascendent in the Anglosphere... the horror!

    There should be an equivalent term for anti-white Jews. It is important that it is not a general one for Jews, but only the Jews who push for the genocide of the Europeans. I'm pleasantly surprised at the number of married Jews voting for Trump for example, but Jewish-led anti-whiteness is definitely a thing.

    Maybe JIHAD- Jewish/Israeli Hardcore American Democrats? Or Jewish/Israeli Host Anglosphere Destroyers? I like the latter because it well encapsulates their own idiocy.

    JERKs? Jewish... uhhh Europe/Europa/Eurosphere wRecking Krew?

    How about JUDAS? Jewish Undeclared Destroyers of Anglo Society.

    Or JUNTA? Jewish Undermining Numbing Termites of the Anglosphere.

    I am not enamoured with any of them particularly, but at least those are probably the best 4-5 letter words containing J that have a similar flavor to WASP.

    Glaivester had antijaphetism, which I can get behind. Nothing wrong with being philojaphetic. ;)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  247. res says:
    @Anonymous
    It might have something to do with an overproduction of elites. It's good to not have too many people who are unintelligent and/or have poor impulse control, but having too many people of upper level intelligence could lead to an unbalanced society with not enough individuals willing to do lower level work and too many trying to run the show.

    unbalanced society with not enough individuals willing to do lower level work and too many trying to run the show.

    I wonder how much of that effect is due to absolute intelligence and how much to relative intelligence and role models while growing up? I occasionally notice I have some friction with people who are fairly smart but who grew up in an environment where they were often the “smartest one in the room.” Similarly, I think it’s easier to deal with super smart people who have spent time around those even smarter.

    Worth noting the relevance of this to selective immigration from low IQ societies. I think it explains some of the behavior of subcontinental immigrants in the US.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  248. res says:
    @Jack D
    Protip for anti-Semites - stop ranting. It makes you seem crazed. Probably you really are crazed, but there's no point in making it so crystal clear.

    WASP was NOT coined by Hacker. From his published reference (the first), it's clear that the term was already in use among sociologists by the time he wrote it down:

    They are 'WASPs'—in the cocktail party jargon of the sociologists. That is, they are wealthy, they are Anglo-Saxon in origin, and they are Protestants (and disproportionately Episcopalian).

     

    So he was merely writing down a term that was already in wide (if not yet published) use. And the original significance of the W as wealthy actually made more sense - white and Anglo-Saxon are redundant and there are plenty of Anglo-Saxon Protestants who are not wealthy (and therefore NOT WASPs).


    But it was Digby Baltzell, himself an ultra-WASP, who really popularized the term. And Baltzell (and Hacker) intended no malice toward the WASPs. Baltzell may have switched the W to white because (especially after the Depression) there were plenty of genteel WASPs who were no longer wealthy but retained their WASPish culture.

    Thanks for the history and the discussion of “wealthy” for the W. It’s especially relevant since communities of white ASPs who are not wealthy ASPs are often far from the latter culturally (e.g. evangelicals). A more nuanced reading would be people emblematic of or sympathetic with wealthy ASP culture which would include the genteel “poor.” (both the “fallen” and the aspirational) I think that is what most people actually mean when they use “WASP.” Also relevant is the tension between WASP and nouveau riche, but that’s a different conversation (and one quite relevant to our current president).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    By the way, Res, if you want to do that graph you proposed recently, please be my guest.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  249. peterike says:
    @Whiskey
    No Steve, you're not seeing the forest for the trees. What is remarkable about Jews in the United States post 1965 is how little they were present among leadership outside of Hollywood and particularly among political leadership.

    Consider the current situation, among the political and cultural life there is ... Sarah Silverman, semi-retired Jerry Seinfeld, Lena Dunham, and Chuck Schumer. There was no Jewish President or even plausible President. Democrats have been ... JFK, LBJ, Carter, Clinton, and Obama. Einstein faded from relevance as has Jewish literary figures like Philip Roth in favor of people like say, Tom Wolfe and Hunter S. Thompson. Only in various Hedge Funds are Jews leaders, and even in Hollywood an avowed Jewish supporter like Mayim Bialik faces retaliation for criticizing a Palestinian. Think on that for a moment.

    Rather, this is entirely an eternal battle between Viking descended "GoodWhites" and those of Celtic/Saxon/Latin blood, us "BadWhites." The Termans and Jordan have been deemed BadWhites and thus replaced and scrubbed out. This is consistent with GoodWhite behavior back to the Salem Witch Trials, John Brown and Harper's Ferry, Uncle Tom's Cabin, and anti-Slavery, Temperance, Suffragette, and Civil Rights movements and struggles.

    Your explanation is complex and fails Occam's Razor but meets Occam's Butterknife. Mine is superior since it is both simpler -- an ongoing inter-White ethnic struggle between two radically incompatible groups of Whites with radically different views on everything.

    Which has more powerful explanatory power, GoodWhites acting all GoodWhite since 790, and casting out those who are BadWhite, in a fury of moral virtue signaling and purity expressions, or American Urban Jews somehow engaging in passive aggressive behavior against WASPS while NEVER EVER SHOUTING TO THE SKIES about what they are doing? [American Jews have a well developed reputation for never shutting up, see Silverman, Seinfeld, Reiner, Mel Brooks, etc.]

    Indeed, given that GoodWhite status DEPENDS on casting out others, the dynamic will only increase unless/until an external enemy serious enough to stop things OR a threat to the ruling caste emerges -- the Salem Witch trials ended when the Governor's Wife was accused.

    TLDR; not the Jews. Just another McMartin Preschool hysteria.

    , this is entirely an eternal battle between Viking descended “GoodWhites” and those of Celtic/Saxon/Latin blood, us “BadWhites.

    Whiskey, Whiskey, Whiskey. You’re banging on again over your favorite hobby horse. But you are missing the key piece. Let me explain.

    Your explication of the good white/bad white war captures the dynamics well, but you miss the source. WHY do good whites take the positions they take?

    Good whites are fervent multi-culturalists. Yet they could just as easily be fervent white nationalists. It would satisfy their need for taking a doctrinaire stance just as well. And indeed, the WASP Progressives in the 1920s and 30s were precisely that: pro-white. Good whites are rabid feminists, yet they could just as easily be rabid gender traditionalists. Good whites are feverishly pro-gay/tran, yet they could just as easily be feverishly in favor of traditional gender norms.

    So who puts these ideas into their heads? It’s Jewish influence. Jews started modern feminism. WASPs followed. Jews started the pro-gay movement. WASPs followed. Jews started multi-culturalism. WASPs followed.

    When you control the news megaphone, the entertainment world, the high culture world (especially), then you set the agenda. You determine what’s considered acceptable opinion. This is molded largely by Jews. Elite WASPs are suckers for “acceptable opinion” and always have been. Whoever controls that, controls the elite WASPs. And Jews have had total control of the agenda since the 1970s (and strong influence since the 1920s).

    You are so busy watching the tail wag that you are completely missing the dog.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  250. HA says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Also, Julian Huxley was at Rice a century ago with Sides, the teenage chemistry professor, who was a notorious at the time example of the problems of overly-intelligent children that Terman's Termites study was intended to refute.

    “Also, Julian Huxley was at Rice a century ago with Sides, the teenage chemistry professor.”

    His name was Sidis, and the subject he briefly taught was math (specifically, higher geometry). His story — i.e., cautionary tale — should be required reading for anyone who takes an interest in IQ. Hollywood covered similar ground with “A Beautiful Mind” and “Shine”, but his story didn’t have a feelgood ending.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    The problem with Sidis was not that he did not serve as a cautionary tale but that he served TOO much as a cautionary tale - his sad story was overgeneralized to mean that being really smart was a really bad thing that you shouldn't hope for for your kids and that the schools should not encourage. That having a high IQ was a double edged sword like being an idiot savant. Terman countered that story by showing, through rigorous study and not just meaningless anecdote, that most high IQ kids went on to be very healthy, happy and successful adults whose life outcomes were measurably better than dumber people.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  251. Jack D says:
    @HA
    "Also, Julian Huxley was at Rice a century ago with Sides, the teenage chemistry professor."

    His name was Sidis, and the subject he briefly taught was math (specifically, higher geometry). His story -- i.e., cautionary tale -- should be required reading for anyone who takes an interest in IQ. Hollywood covered similar ground with "A Beautiful Mind" and "Shine", but his story didn't have a feelgood ending.

    The problem with Sidis was not that he did not serve as a cautionary tale but that he served TOO much as a cautionary tale – his sad story was overgeneralized to mean that being really smart was a really bad thing that you shouldn’t hope for for your kids and that the schools should not encourage. That having a high IQ was a double edged sword like being an idiot savant. Terman countered that story by showing, through rigorous study and not just meaningless anecdote, that most high IQ kids went on to be very healthy, happy and successful adults whose life outcomes were measurably better than dumber people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HA
    "> that most high IQ kids went on to be very healthy, happy and successful adults whose life outcomes were measurably better than dumber people.

    Way to set up a straw man. Are "dumb people" really the only alternative to the Sidises of the world? Is the only alternative for Sidis' upbringing a school that does "not encourage" bright people at all?

    To the extent that others of his ilk are "measurably better" (and I don't even want to go there, since if this is your starting point, your credibility on the matter is shot), perhaps it is because their parents saw the value of seeking a middle ground, i.e., of encouraging brilliance without making a fetish out of it, and even of recognizing the dangers and isolation therein. To the extent that such an approach would allow you to get beyond your own binary worldview, I would suggest to you that you, too, ought to look into it.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  252. @Anonymous
    It might have something to do with an overproduction of elites. It's good to not have too many people who are unintelligent and/or have poor impulse control, but having too many people of upper level intelligence could lead to an unbalanced society with not enough individuals willing to do lower level work and too many trying to run the show.

    Let’s hope this robot thing turns out to actually work, and then we can fearlessly free the world of stupidity.
    I would add that it is not intelligence which makes some people want to run the show, but a character flaw. Intelligence makes the flaw more dangerous, that’s all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  253. Gabriel M says:
    @Thomas
    How big a deal are Jews on the Palo Alto school board? I don't see any Jewish names mentioned in this article. When I lived in the Bay Area after having lived in LA, I was struck by how many fewer obvious Jews there seemed to be, and how much less prominent Jewish identity was there (granted, this is compared to LA). There was a joke that what Jews there were in the Bay Area were more likely to be Buddhist than particularly Jewish. This Palo Alto story seems pretty much to be a story of goodwhites doing their best to be goodwhitey, in other words, more likely the descendants of Anglo-Saxons/Anglo-Normans than Jews.

    Why bring pedantic considerations like “is this actually true?” into a convoluted theory about Jews?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  254. HA says:
    @Jack D
    The problem with Sidis was not that he did not serve as a cautionary tale but that he served TOO much as a cautionary tale - his sad story was overgeneralized to mean that being really smart was a really bad thing that you shouldn't hope for for your kids and that the schools should not encourage. That having a high IQ was a double edged sword like being an idiot savant. Terman countered that story by showing, through rigorous study and not just meaningless anecdote, that most high IQ kids went on to be very healthy, happy and successful adults whose life outcomes were measurably better than dumber people.

    “> that most high IQ kids went on to be very healthy, happy and successful adults whose life outcomes were measurably better than dumber people.

    Way to set up a straw man. Are “dumb people” really the only alternative to the Sidises of the world? Is the only alternative for Sidis’ upbringing a school that does “not encourage” bright people at all?

    To the extent that others of his ilk are “measurably better” (and I don’t even want to go there, since if this is your starting point, your credibility on the matter is shot), perhaps it is because their parents saw the value of seeking a middle ground, i.e., of encouraging brilliance without making a fetish out of it, and even of recognizing the dangers and isolation therein. To the extent that such an approach would allow you to get beyond your own binary worldview, I would suggest to you that you, too, ought to look into it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HA
    Sorry, "dumb people" should have been "dumber people".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  255. Gabriel M says:
    @gda
    Hindsight is wonderful, is it not? Who knew that the erstwhile greatest hero of the 20th Century is now, according to the revisionists, the most evil man of the 20th Century?

    What utter claptrap.

    Perhaps those revisionists might turn their attention to the fact that Churchill was prescient about many things other than Hitler’s evil. Maybe a few hundred million lives could have been saved and the entire world history altered had the powers that be listened to his admonitions for the need to overthrow the Bolsheviks in Russia at an early date. Wasn't it FDR who was so enamoured of Stalin? Why not put the blame on him?

    After World War I it was Churchill who urged the Cabinet to send boatloads of food to the blockaded Germans—a proposal greeted with derision by colleagues such as Prime Minister Lloyd George, who preferred to “squeeze the German lemon until the pips squeak.” Their policy prevailed—and we all know what it led to twenty years later.

    Yes, lots of bad policy in Britain in those years, but shameful to lay the blame on Churchill for the War. He was the one who summed up the Treaty of Versailles as "monstrous" and "malignant".

    As the blurb in the link comments:
    “The weakness in Buchanan’s line of thinking, of course, is that by 1939, Hitler’s international word was worthless; yet Buchanan hinges his case on what might have happened had Britain let Hitler go after Poland in 1939 as it had Czechoslovakia”

    Sorry mates, one book by a paleo-conservative loon, no matter how erudite, will not convince those who have actually done real research to change their mind on the great Winston Churchill.

    His complete writings are out there for all to see. Why not make the effort instead of this cheap and worthless sniping. Or perhaps it’s the popular agenda now to denigrate our heroes.

    The great tragedy is that Churchill’s views became accepted at precisely the time when confronting Germany was a bad idea. Appeasement was a popular policy when it was a stupid policy, and war became a popular policy when it was a stupid policy. Churchill was a stopped clock, but people only listened to him at the wrong time. It’s an object lesson in what a crummy system democracy is.

    Read More
    • Agree: dfordoom
    • Replies: @SFG
    Except, as Churchill said, for all the others. Imagine if Obama were king instead of president. This is the thing that always got me about the neoreactionaries. You really think you'll get some clever neoreactionary philosopher-king? The upper classes will have the same Davos-liberal ideas they always do, except you'll have no chance of a Trump to give them indigestion.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  256. @Jack D
    Protip for anti-Semites - stop ranting. It makes you seem crazed. Probably you really are crazed, but there's no point in making it so crystal clear.

    WASP was NOT coined by Hacker. From his published reference (the first), it's clear that the term was already in use among sociologists by the time he wrote it down:

    They are 'WASPs'—in the cocktail party jargon of the sociologists. That is, they are wealthy, they are Anglo-Saxon in origin, and they are Protestants (and disproportionately Episcopalian).

     

    So he was merely writing down a term that was already in wide (if not yet published) use. And the original significance of the W as wealthy actually made more sense - white and Anglo-Saxon are redundant and there are plenty of Anglo-Saxon Protestants who are not wealthy (and therefore NOT WASPs).


    But it was Digby Baltzell, himself an ultra-WASP, who really popularized the term. And Baltzell (and Hacker) intended no malice toward the WASPs. Baltzell may have switched the W to white because (especially after the Depression) there were plenty of genteel WASPs who were no longer wealthy but retained their WASPish culture.

    Baltzell may have been a “ultra WASP” (he certainly looked like one), but his family was never particularly wealthy. So perhaps his change allowed him to feel more snugly WASPish than he knew himself truly to be?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    I'm not sure that enormous wealth was ever necessary to be accepted in WASP society so long as everything else was in order - good breeding, proper behavior, the right schools, etc . As you say, Baltzell certainly looked and acted the part and his family was not exactly poor either. I don't think he was faking it the way that, for example, John Cheever did.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  257. HA says:
    @HA
    "> that most high IQ kids went on to be very healthy, happy and successful adults whose life outcomes were measurably better than dumber people.

    Way to set up a straw man. Are "dumb people" really the only alternative to the Sidises of the world? Is the only alternative for Sidis' upbringing a school that does "not encourage" bright people at all?

    To the extent that others of his ilk are "measurably better" (and I don't even want to go there, since if this is your starting point, your credibility on the matter is shot), perhaps it is because their parents saw the value of seeking a middle ground, i.e., of encouraging brilliance without making a fetish out of it, and even of recognizing the dangers and isolation therein. To the extent that such an approach would allow you to get beyond your own binary worldview, I would suggest to you that you, too, ought to look into it.

    Sorry, “dumb people” should have been “dumber people”.

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

    “…The only reason for going is to prove that you can do it. Ultimately, going to the Moon was a stunt. It was a magnificent stunt, but a stunt none-the-less…”

    The entire Cold War can be seen as a stunt, but one which was very important and minimized the dangers of “hot war”. It was like two early-history armies marching around in front of each other or two navies sailing past each other.

    George Mueller (NASA):

    “…sought Webb’s permission to bring in skilled Air Force program managers. He proposed Minuteman program director Colonel Samuel C. Phillips as Apollo program director in OMSF. Webb agreed, and so did AFSC chief General Bernard Schriever. Phillips in turn agreed and brought with him 42 mid-grade officers and eventually 124 more junior officers. Ultimately, over 400 experienced military officers worked on Apollo and other NASA programs during the 1960s.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  259. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Anon
    A Sci-Fi Idea.

    There is a white community. It seems safe, secure, prosperous. and nice. But something is not quite right.
    It turns out it is not an autonomous white community. It is a 'farmed' white community.

    YES!! In the future, the non-white globalist masters have decided to 'farm' white communities and grow them... to eventually take from them.

    Backstory. There was this great project of spreading globalism all over the world. It pushed non-white hordes into every white nation. The problem was all this Diversity began to bring down the modern world. With demise of white societies, there loomed the demise of nice thing that only white people could make, or Stuff Only Whites Make(SOWM).
    It turned out only white folks could sustain productivity and civilization, without which non-whites can't have good stuff. So, if non-whites totally take over white societies, it will be the end of not only whiteness but nice stuff made by whiteness.

    But, non-whites didn't want let go of their power over whites.
    So, what is to be done? If non-whites totally take over white nations, then all will fail and both whites and non-whites will suffer.
    But if non-whites depart from white nations which are restored to whites, then white people will build lots of nice stuff and maybe even use their economic and military power to dominate non-whites.

    So, non-whites figure they will stay in white nations and keep the power... but 'farm' white communities where whites will do their wonderful things.. And when whites have made all the good stuff, the non-whites will harvest them.

    It's like humans allow bees to make honey and then take the honey. Humans must leave bees alone to do their thing. Only after the bees have done the work can humans move in to harvest the honey.
    Same thing with dairy cows. Humans must allow cows to live, eat, and do their own stuff. Then, cows will grow big and provide milk that can be harvested by humans.
    Same with chicken and eggs. Humans must let the chickens to eat and grow up. It is then the chicken lay the eggs and humans take them.

    The trick is how to milk the whiteys and take their eggs.

    So, this sci-fi scenario is different from CAMP OF SAINTS where non-whites just invade and attack and destroy everything.
    It is more like South Africa after apartheid when blacks figured they must keep the whites as working bees who keep making the honey. And now, Zimbabwe wants the white bees back because blacks suck at making honey. Blacks want the power but they also want nice things made by whites. Blacks on their own cannot make the nice stuff. Only whites can make nice stuff. But if whites are left alone to make nice stuff, might they not use their wealth to gain power over non-whites again? So, blacks and non-whites must find a way to keep the power but make the whites make the nice stuff so that blacks can harvest it.
    Like what the Ottoman Turks. Turks weren't good at business and wealth-creation. They were good at fighting and using brute force, like in MIDNIGHT EXPRESS. So, the Turks used Greeks and Armenians to do much of the business and create wealth for the empire. But then, the Turks took a big chunk of it.

    Now, how could white folks be 'farmed'? If whites are allowed to make the nice stuff but then the nice stuff is taken from them, wouldn't they lose the incentive to make nice stuff?

    So, this is what the fiendish non-whites do. Once they 'farm' the whites in their communities to make the nice stuff and then once they take most of the good stuff from the whites, they use some special technology to wipe out white memory of what happened. (Since non-whites aren't smart enough to have developed and maintain such technology, they rely on cuck-white collaborators who worship the Holy Person-of-Color and believe white race must be made to do penance forever to atone for their 'racist' sins.)
    So, even though whites are being farm-raised and robbed, following every calamity they are made to think that their community was hit with some terrible mysterious force and must rebuild. So, they go about recreating the wealth. (People don't lose their incentive to rebuild when the calamity seems beyond human power. It's like people rebuild hurricanes or tsunamis even though such will happen again.)
    So whi